City Council - Regular Meeting

agenda tonight. So, I will turn it over to Miles to go over the consent agenda items.

Thank you, mayor, members of council. Uh, tonight you have three items on the consent agenda. Item B, one is the acceptance of the North Carolina Amateur Sports $10,000 sports equipment grant uh for the parks and rec department. This is a non-matching grant and it is to provide um the startup equipment for flag football. Item B2 is the selection of on call rightaway acquisition firms. Um staff issued a RFQ um in March with qualifications due in April. Uh we had five responses. You had Telix, Collier's Engineering and Design, THC Incorporated, Bowman Realy Consultants LLC, and Ocon Associates LLC. uh they all have a a local office in the Charlotte metro area. They're all qualified to serve the city of Belmont. So, uh public works is requesting that all five of these be uh moved forward. Um and uh moving to a master services agreement with the city. Um really this is for uh temporary construction and permanent easement acquisitions for the Morgan's branch force main and uh pump station improvement. But if we have any other acquisitions needed, we'll use these firms to get quotes. B3 is the recommendation of consultant for land development code update um the $50. Uh based on state statutes, um local governments are set forth um zoning regulations in accordance with adopted comprehensive uh plans and of course you all adopted uh the comprehensive land use plan in September 2025. So this process moved forward to hire a consultant to rewrite our land development code. Um the plan department

put out an RFP and we had uh five firms to respond. Those being Frieza Nickels, DPZ, Bordeaux, Opticost, and Inspire Placemaking. They shortlisted three of those firms and moved forward with Frieza Nickels as the uh firm that they would like to contract with. Um, and so the next steps in the process is a contract execution um that they're working on right now, a contract. Uh, I do want to note that the full amount that $173,450 would not be expended in this fiscal year given that we're already in close to the end of April. And so the amount that's not expended this fiscal year, we plan to uh move into the unassigned fund balance and then place that amount inside the budget coming up. And you'll and those are the three items. So I'll turn it back over to you, Mayor.

Just a point. Yes. Did we I I know we don't often have a consent agenda in the workshop. Did we actually make a motion to set the agenda? We haven't yet. So not happen after the consent agile goes over the consent agenda. Okay. Okay. Are there any questions on any of the items in the consent agenda?

I had one question on the LBC update. So, there was a section in there about updating our code to reflect the changes in the law related to the downzoning issue. Um, it's my understanding that's still a live issue in Raleigh and that may or may not change. So, what I don't want to have happen is we change our code to reflect what the law is today and then they go and change the law again and then we have to go back and rewrite it. You see where I'm going with that? I don't know if it's possible to stage or what we need to do within that process to account for that um uncertainty.

Yes. And I don't know really either what we need to do. I don't know if Tiffany has an answer for that, but I know the process is going to take probably 12 to 18 months to get through the rewrite of the code. So, if there's any changes at that time, it may be appropriate, but will it answer that question? So, I understand it. They they track of these types of things and monitoring. So, I'd assume that they monitor the developments while they're working on the code and

they will. So, one of the reasons we wanted to um intentionally ask for the selected consultant to have a North Carolina says drill uh uh sorry attorney as part of the team is to make sure that not only are we keeping track of any updates legislatively to that but that any drafted code would be fully reviewed by that attorney as a part of the team and then certainly by um council and our own attorney as well to vet that. But codes are always very detail oriented and we do want to make sure that we're writing it in line with the codes and that we can recommend adoption based on what's in place at the date of adoption. Um we are fully aware that there might be some things that we are withheld from doing based on the current um state laws in place. And so what we're also going to ask the recommends that are not currently possible based on the state statutes that those are noted so that in the event that legislation does change we can have that short list and know where to go to revise our codes as needed to further carry out the vision.

Okay. Thank you Tiffany. You're welcome. Any other questions on that item or any of the other items on the consent agenda? All right. If there are no other questions, I'll take a motion to set the agenda. Motion to set the agenda. Motion by Jason. Second. Second by Alex. All in favor? Any opposed? All right. With the agenda set, I will now entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda. Motion to approve the consent agenda. Mo motion made by Alex. Second. Second by Charlie. All in favor?

Any opposed? All right. The consent agenda is approved. All right. All right. So, that will take us into agenda item C1 and I the fiscal uh year 2026 27 budget presentation and discussion and I will turn it over to Miles.

Thank you, mayor. Um, and we'll have Jared Piles. He'll be presenting the uh the budget highlights and we also have uh Chazo uh with first try advisors in attendance so that we can work through the model if that is needed towards the end. Uh I want to thank all of the um uh department heads and and staff to help that helped uh prepare their budgets. Um all the items came in uh and me and and Jared and Kevin kind of worked through all the line items and then met with u the department heads and it turned out to be a good process. Uh and so what you'll see tonight is really like a high level overview and then we'll turn it over to you all to go through and ask any questions that uh that's needed per the line items and also if there's any specific questions I've asked department heads to come to the mic and answer those questions as well. So I'll turn over to Jared at this time.

All right, good evening everyone. Good evening.

We'll we'll jump right in if I can figure out how to use this thing. All right. So, uh, general fund budget highlights. Total budget of 29.6 million based on the current tax rate of 45 and a half cents. No increase there. Uh, this budget includes a 2% cost of living adjustment and up to 3% merit for all full-time employees. Um, approximately 1.2 million dedicated to fund the general fund CIP. Proposed fee increase to solid waste from 974 to 1125. of our benchmark for that is trying to uh subsidize half of the contract with waste pro which we're still negotiating. So that fee is subject to change. Um but that's that's what is included in the budget currently. Uh health insurance increases of 358,000. Uh that is also subject to change based on conversations that we've had with the hub and that dual stream approach of doing self-funded and a renewal. And this budget also funds that includes salaries and uh employee benefits associated with that. And there are no new positions included in the general fund budget. Here is a snapshot of the percent of the budget by department. Um roughly 45% is public safety. um 18% streets, 7% administration, 8% debt service, 9% capital, and then varying percentages for the remaining departments. This is a change over prior year uh expenses. So you'll see the change as a percentage of the budget uh for each associated department.

Was that the adopted or amended? that's adopted, ever adopted. Uh this is a snapshot of uh the three different categories between personnel, operations and capital by percentage for each department. So you'll see uh varying operations expenses. You'll see streets is more heavily uh operating whereas uh planning, zoning, police, fire, recreation is more personnel heavy and there is little The general fund capital improvement plan is funded as at 2.5 million. That includes street resurfacing and the CIP projects that we discussed in the February workshop. And those items include city hall renovations, Ford Center renovations, project tundra, land purchase for two fire stations, two fire engines, the street resurfacing, IT upgrades, savings for I 85 betterments, uh, police patrol vehicle equipment, police storage building, and police radios. Any questions on general fund before we move into water sewer? Uh, the water sewer is presented a balanced budget of $13.3 million that includes an 8% fee rate increase across the board between water sewer uh the service 2.3 million in capital projects. Similar to the general fund, here is a breakdown of water sewer funds uh departments between personnel operations and capital. This is a snapshot of the change by department over prior year of the adopted for each water sewer fund department.

And this is a snapshot of our overall picture of revenue to expenses. As you can see, in fiscal year 2324, prior to adoption of our rate study, we had to use a little bit of fund balance to balance our budget. and we implemented the rate study in fiscal year 2425 so that we would not be operating at a loss or having to dip into our coffers to balance our budget. Um 2425 is our audited numbers. 2526 is where we project to land this year and then 26 27 you'll see that's balance revenues matching expenditures. I guess high level J we can go into the details but just from an executive summary what's driving the the massive increase in expense for the enterprise fund we had made the comment or to the general effect that maybe it might look to rate reduction potentially we overshot so what's driving the expense there

I I wouldn't say a rate reduction it could have possibly been a lower increase remember back in when we adopted the rate study it was projected 8% across the board for the next 5 to 10 years. Uh we we've since last year we needed a 10 and a half% bump uh for this current year to meet

our expectations. Uh I will say that on the revenue side, my billing team has done a tremendous job of combing through our billing registers, ensuring everyone is being charged the appropriate rate codes, um tracking inactive consumption, so users that were using water um without an active account. we've really honed in on that and making sure that we're capturing all of our revenue sources. Um, as far as the expenditure side, I can go back to the this slide here uh where you're looking at personnel. Personnel is at is approximately 50% across the board on most of our departments and then operating expenditures. We have not spent a lot on capital but the rate study emphasis is on funding future capital. rate increases are increasing our fund balance to be able to afford payo projects as well as be able to afford debt service on projects that are going to be coming down the pipe.

And then additionally, remind me the timeline on the stove facility. When are we anticipating connection and all of that for wastewater treatment perspective? I would defer to I think Jonathan said um when we turn the valve it'd be 2030 2030 2030. I think they're at 60% design right now. And so that means they'd have to complete design and then completely construct the project. So 2030 to be their customer. Does the proposed capital does that include anything at the treatment facility or are we just trying to do get by until 2030? Future C like band-aid I think approach is until we turn over to Charlotte Water.

Yeah. One of the uh one of the line items is that u sludge press and hall. You can see that it significantly went up from what it was last year to the $1.2 million. And that's due to us trying to remove solids out of the uh plant and haul it off. And so that's going to be a recurring item given that Yeah. Is that going to be recurring at 1.2 million or is the bump this year kind of

It would probably be occurring until we switch over. So 1.2 until 2030. That's what I would what I expect. I see another thumbs up. So that's what we were thinking that we're having so much solid enter the plant. Um we're getting dinged on the DEQ side at the discharge effluent limits. And so uh to reduce that is to get some of the solids out. And so that's that's what we plan to do next year is just do more of it. And are we selling less water historically than ever? Selling less water.

Yeah. I mean providing less water to people overall. because I know as some of our industry has gone away, there's been less demand for water. So, we at a low point or we still trending up as far as water demand output. I wouldn't say we're trending down. I I don't think it's an exponential increase. Uh we service about 8,000 accounts. That stayed pretty steady year-over-year. You know, you had some lose some depending on uh movement, but it's it's been pretty flat as far as demand is concerned. Yeah. Well, you're projecting a 25% increase in revenue on water sales, 19% on sewer and then if rates are going up 8%. I mean, correctly, the difference on that is growth, right?

As hard as our I don't want to say as hard, but we we apply a search charge onto our non-residential accounts that we don't apply on our residential users. Um, it varies on the pipe size as to what those fees are. So, that that drives a lot of that increase. Mayor, if you're talking about like a historical look back, then yes, probably in the 80s and 90s, we probably had more water consumption because all the plants were still in operation. But once the textile industry went away, the sales of water went down, too. And I say we're pulling $849,000 transfer cash from that position on the revenue side for water and sewer. That would be to fund capital,

right? Yeah, that was is that I think the capital program was like $2 million or something. Yeah. So, part of it is, you know, operating revenue plus uh fund balance appropriation. Okay. Do you know I kind of throw a curveball at you, but do you know what our the fund balance for the water and sewer side? Sure. Let me let me go grab that. I think it's about 4.2. just over 4 million. Okay. 4,68,000.

Okay. So, take out the 850 that be about 32ish. Do we have the same sort of I know there's like requirements on the general fund side as far as like minimums you have to have in It's not It's not the same.

Yeah. Um, I guess the other question I have as far as like because I know we did the rate study as far as like figuring out like where rates need to go as far as funding operating and capital. I think we've largely taken care of the operating side. Um, and I know we haven't really invested much on the capital side in a couple years because of the revenue pressures. Um, like are we like how close are we to the point where the money coming in is enough to pay for what fixed like pipes in the ground and that sort of thing?

Based on what we've seen with the uh calls with Withers, our our consultant with the rate study, um these rate projections over the next five years are going to fund capital operating expenditures and add to net position to be able to pay for new capital coming down the pipe. And that would include PGO capital as well as debt service capital. Okay. Okay. Because I do notice there's there's a lot what is it 45 million or something in in projects that um we need to do for water and sewer. Um Oh, no. 134 million. Yeah. But that's over the next couple years. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. So, the the CIP in general is the 130. Um, so it's going to be a blended approach and obviously a lot of things can change if things pop up, but that that is, you know, that's what we've given our consultants and said what rates do we need based on our uh rate code trends. What do we need to charge to be able to fund either debt service or payo on each of these capital as well as assuming growth in operating expenditures? I guess maybe while we're kind of talking about debt um like as far as the the amount of debt that we have on this fund like what is our it seems kind of low

it is currently okay I just I um I think it's about 4%.

Okay. So maybe is there I don't know what the financing environment looks like as far as like because I know we have projects that need to get done. Um you know and kind of like what you were talking about is the budgeted approach with the payo and and the debt. Um, I'm just wondering if maybe we need to look at being more aggressive on that to kind of fix some of the because like you've got we've got a lot of deferred maintenance on the system. Um, and my I guess my concern is that like the longer we kind of put some of this stuff off, the more expensive it gets and the harder it gets.

Yeah. So, I know that uh and I sat on a call with Jonathan and the engineer with Withers on prioritization of projects. Uh, based on need and based on how we could group those together for either installment financing, revenue bonds, um PIO h, however we saw fit, uh with obviously the consultant. Um so there is a hefty emphasis on capital over the next 5 to 10 years. Um the projections for like our debt service ratio that's going to go north of 20% probably within the next several years uh based on these capital needs. this is an aggressive approach on addressing capital.

Okay. Okay. No, that that's good because that's I think what we need to do. Um so yeah, I guess that's the uh extent of my question on water and sewer anyway. Yeah, for the debt packages and the CIP for the watered sewer, you got you know this year in 27 you've got $6.7 million for debt and then next year in 2028 4.6 next year in year 2029 9 million next year's 8.2 So they're, you know, all the way out to like, let's say, year eight to 2034. I mean, there's uh multiple debt packages like every single year we're putting together. Okay. Okay.

Only other question I have, what's driving the salary decline year over year? Uh position allocations and um there were a few positions that were in the budget last year that from this year,

correct? Yep. Uh here's a water sewer bill with the new rates. So our current minimum bill, this is both water and sewer combined. Our current minimum, which includes 2,000 gallons, is 3873. With a proposed rate change, that would be $41.83 for a total change of $310 for a average bill family. Benchmark is about 5,000 gallons for that. Uh current rate for 5,000 gallons would be this is inside city limit rates by the way 9855 proposed 10642 with a $787 change over prior year and irrigation current rate is $1099 proposed rate would be $1.87 for an increase of 88 cents for 2,000 gallons.

Can you go back real quick when we're formulating this? Does this does this uh include like potential development that's coming on online to try to offset like from an absorption piece or is this just a snapshot of where we are today in regards to where we need to be for the rate? Yeah. So this is this is just looking at what the consumer is going to see on their bill. So no I get I get that. But when we're determining the new rate is what I'm trying to got to be just what's online now I would think. Right. Yeah. That's like a growth growth rate, right? You could look at and that tapers off. What was the rate that we used on the front end?

Yeah. And then after several years, we taper that back down assuming growth early and then I remember that from the retreat. Yeah. Do our um sorry do our non-residential do we have a difference between residential and non-residential rates? Yes. Okay. We do. Okay. This would just be for an in in city resident. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I was just I couldn't remember. Where does this benchmark have we looked at other municipalities who provide water? I know infrastructure differs and needs of capital, but like where do we stand when we're talking about like some of our similar size?

I did not look at the dashboard this year. I don't know. I remember that like five years ago. We were way down. It was even the case last year, too. Really? Mhm. Yep.

Yeah. you can like group it by like cityual. The only caveat to that is, you know, every municipality or agency has different capital needs, different operating expenditures. So, they're funding different things. So, it's kind of tough to look at it at an apples to apples, but you can at least get a general idea of what other municipalities are charging. Some of those systems are also like bankrupt. Yeah. Something to keep in mind. So, just a disclaimer on that.

Okay. Thanks, J. and uh stormwater fund balanced at 966,968 which is a 12% decrease every prior year and what is driving that decrease was a fund balance appropriation in fiscal year 26 to complete various capital needs and finally items to be adjusted prior to the final budget health insurance property and liability insurance workers compensation the solid waste fee as I mentioned earlier uh planning department increase to include the land development code update and uh lastly uh fund balance appropriations for uh design work for project Tundra and the North Belmont fire station.

What do we think the exposure is for our renegotiation with our waste partners? Don't we have to renegotiate the contract and we're anticipating probably quite a bit of a spike? I'll let Miles or Jonathan Yeah. You're talking about for waste product. Yeah. Does it expire specifically? Uh I think it expires July 1st. Um and so our public works department has already put out an RFP. They've already responded to it and waste pro seems to be the parent load bid. Again, that amount that we put inside the uh budget um for sanitation includes the amount of the increase.

And so right now um we're negotiating with Waste Pro because they gave us a bid. We're negotiating to see if we can uh get anything less than what they bid and that project is going to be uh at the May regular meeting for approval. So you'll see like the bids and how they fall out. But what we did as far as like the budget's concerned, just like I said, we we just plugged the it's already baked in. Yes, it's baked into these numbers here. Is that for the same program with trash recycling and bulk? Yes. Does that include recycling? It does. Do we see a big because I know the last time I knew this that was a hot thing was recycling.

It went up um but it was not so far out of whack that uh we didn't feel like we needed to to exclude it. I mean we'll share those numbers with you all and you can make that decision but we included keep and recycle. caveat. It might be interesting to see what municipalities in Gaston County still have recycling recycling because I know a lot have exited due to some of the rising costs associated with it. Probably a hard sell to the public, but just curious to know. Well, it depends on how much it is because I know last time they told us that because our contamination rate was significantly lower than average that was what helped us on the price there.

Like the cost down. Yeah, because they can sell it for more than good recycling. Yeah, basically. Um because I know that the ESB had done like a specific campaign around that a couple years ago. Apparently, it worked. Um but yeah, I think got rid of their program. I'd just be curious to see there seems to be I mean what would also be helpful and I don't know how quantifiable this is at this point how recent the numbers are there seems to always be a conversation too around you know could waste provide that information I'm sure they could um if you want it they're supposed to take recycling to the recycling places

um so I don't really once it leaves our hands but how much of it is actually producing an environmental benefit I think that's a conversation that gets had quite a bit lately Not as much as what you might think. Yeah, it's not a lot. I mean, I could we could ask Waste Pro. Yeah, maybe just those two things. Sorry to derail, but for the May conversation, that might be helpful. Are you talking about uh like the tonnage that get is recycled? Maybe percentage. I don't know what percentage did they collect actually makes it to the recyclable process. Because if it's 20% and we're the x% of the cost of the total program is that like

way beyond that it doesn't make sense to proceed right because trash is cheaper right I would think so start sending I think those rates have gone up too at the landfill from what I hear yeah we we collect like the numbers themselves are less than but we only collect recycling every two weeks so you're probably higher overall. I've got the numbers here.

If you're interested right now or keep going in the meantime, go ahead. Um, so you mentioned the solid waste fee earlier. I think historically we've kind of tried to budget that so it covers half the cost. Is that what the increase. Yes, based on the contract amount that we have in there. Okay. And so the rate that was presented at the front of the general fund, which I can go back to that, that would cover 50% of the new contract amount that we have baked into the current budget. Okay. Yeah. So that's an increase.

I have some other questions related. Well, that's the end of this slide deck. So, I will turn it over to you all for discussion questions. We also have first try on here with the capital model in case you wanted to play with that. Yeah, Mark, go ahead. Um, where's yours? Can you walk me through how you got at the sales tax number? Yes. So, pull that out.

So, currently we have seven months worth of data of sales tax collections. To date, we've collected almost $4 million in sales tax, which is an average of $570,000 per month. The projected 12 month on that is approximately 6.8 million. And uh we have a memo from the league um where we can anticipate an additional 3% over current year collections. So that brings us to 6.9 million conservatively. Okay.

Uh, just for reference, we budgeted for 5.25 million in this current fiscal year, and we're already at four, averaging over half a million per per month. Okay. So, we should meet those budget projections. Was the 5.2 was that? Do we use a similar process to get it that last year? So, last year we it was a 6% over prior adopted versus collections. So this year we're driving towards what we're actually going to realize to basically account for every nickel of sales tax that we're going to get in the door. Okay. Yeah. So you're grounding in the actual number versus the budget. Correct. Okay. That makes sense.

Okay. Yeah. Because I know we've kind of under budgeted that historic which is not necessarily a problem. It's about the same cushion if you if you look at the graphs and trends year-over-year. It's around the same cushion year to year. Obviously, sales tax has been increasing over the last 5 years, but that buffer has remained about the same. This year, we're trying to close the gap on that buffer to realize actual revenue coming in the door.

Okay. Um, zoning, this is just more of an observation. Uh, it looks like we're forecasting a decrease in zoning permit revenue. So, I do know I'll let Tiffany speak more to that, but I I even in current year trends per permitting is down this year. Um the I I'll let Tiffany kind of talk if you'd like her to the specifics on that. Know what's going on there. Y

Sure. So, there's a few different things when it comes to zoning permits that make it a little bit challenging to forecast. One is that we issue zoning permits for folks that just want a shed in their backyard, a new pool, houses that are already standing. Um, and so those things, you know, year-over-year depends on the season. And it also depends on the household income and the level of the economy as to whether or not folks want to do and invest in those extras for their own personal residents. on the new home construction side. Um while we had historically seen some major and large subdivisions and those do still have some lots that are continuing to build out. So it's not like we are at a um zero level of new lots that are still going to continue to have permits. Um as you may have noticed over the past few years, we have seen a decline in the number of large major subdivisions that have even come before council for approval. Um again some of that is um anticipated to be market driven and land cost driven um interest rate driven. There's a lot of different factors from a financial perspective. Um so it also goes to land availability. So it becomes a little bit challenging to forecast. We do know that there are in the works several um subdivisions that are under planning's review, but those things are going to take years to realize from a permitting perspective. So it's anticipated that we would see a gap. we would see the subdivisions that have already been approved um continue to get permitted out until all those lots are permitted. Um and then you may find a couple years of a gap between um when those end and when any possible new subdivisions could begin permitting.

Does that help? Yeah, I know. Yeah, I just I was it's interesting is less interesting to me on this than the fact that the permit applications.

Yep. It doesn't um it's kind of often hard to track to one single source, but generally um we and in planning we anticipate this. You'll have waves of development that come all at once and then there are several factors that talk about overall buildout. You know, when it comes before you guys, you often see subdivisions at one time, right? It's this master plan of a development, but oftent times when those are actually going to permitting, they could be phased and each development could have its own year buildout plan, right? Some might be aggressive and say, "Well, we're going to build out this whole neighborhood in three." Some could be more on the fiveyear and it just depends on the infrastructure necessary to get those actually um to vertical construction. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. um prior year adalorum taxes looks like there's a fairly significant drop in the revenue projecting from that. Are we just getting better at collecting past? So our collection rate that we baked in this year was 99%. In previous years we've used used 98. Um historically we have collected over 99% of our revenue. So we adjusted that this year to reflect that.

Okay. Okay. Another question. Oh, this is slightly off topic, but um so there's this talk about like the levy and potential limit, constitutional limits on what the levy can be. Uh just for my own interest, would that be that the $15.8 million figure in the budget? Is that like when we're talking about the levy, is that what we're referring to? state legislation on property taxes and stuff like that.

To I guess to answer your question, the 15.8 is what we anticipate the the levy is that's what we anticipate to collect net of the levy. So there's a 1% buffer there based on the 99% collection rate and 100% levy. Okay. It does not take into consideration property tax caps. No, no, no. Yeah, I understand that. I'm just like when we're kind of talking about this idea of like what a cap on the levy would potentially look like. I'm just trying to understand like

I think we all are because we were at the town and state or excuse me the uh chamber event the other night and John Torbert got up there and spoke. They don't even have a calculation that they can show you to what the impact would be like they're talking about at such high level right now. Um which is kind of scary that no one has coming up or devising showing us what the impact is going to be. like they've thought it all the way through yet. Okay. Okay. No. Yeah, that wasn't really a was more of a question. But if they capped it, that would be the line that would that would be effective. Go down. Okay. Okay.

If if they cap it below where we are today, right? I guess it depends. It's whatever the calculation shows, right? Yeah. Yeah. Well, because like we're showing a 7% growth in that number. Um, so that's what I was trying to figure like, well, okay, they had a cap you can't inflation plus population growth that's probably closer to like four or 5%. So um potentially creates some um issues further down in the budget if that number is is the one that is is capped. Um, so that's not necessarily gerine to this sure

conversation though just um if anybody else has any other questions I'm notending I I do I just maybe a high level one I know it's not crazy material but what's the plan around recreation and some of the additional income coming from that are we planning to do like uh lease out programs and stuff like that or naming rights or anything like that this year.

I know that there was a drive for recreation donations. I know that there's been a plan and Jason and Kevin has sat down to discuss that. I don't know if Jason or Kevin want to discuss those plans. We have rolled out a sponsorship package. Um, and we're currently we have some interest in that. It's just started. Uh, we have a platinum sponsor that's donated $10,000. We have some more interest in that. Uh, but because we just formalized it, uh, it's early on in it stages.

So, we probably don't necessarily have that baked into from a revenue perspective in the budget. Then say that one more time. We probably don't have the revenue booked in here potentially from that type of program. We do have recreation donations in there but not related to the program.

Okay, got you. Well, I can keep going. Um, as far as the the gas and fuel line items, it looks like most of those were flat year over year. Um, I know a lot's kind of changed in the last month in that area. Um, like is there enough give in the budget if we need to you know, spend more on gas.

Yeah. So, uh, some of our, I guess, heavier vehicle use departments, we've met one-on-one with departments. Uh, looking at trends for the expense line in current year, it looks like we're going to be coming in under budget. We did adjust some of the gas and fuel uh, based on those conversations, and we all landed at those numbers together in agreement. What about the raw? Obviously, we don't have a crystal ball. We don't know what those are going to look like, but what about like chemical spend at the plant? because I think you guys kept that flat and that's like 300k of spent expense or something like that. Yeah. So, kind of similarly, um I'll let I'll let Jonathan speak to actual chemical costs. I'm not that's not really my scope. Uh but again, that was all about it.

Yeah. But that that was uh that was part of their budget request and so we flowed that into the into our operating budget. So over this year, thankfully we haven't seen a large increase in any chemicals. Um they're holding, at least right now, seem to be fairly steady. Um and we felt like going into next year, we would be okay with the current numbers.

Were you guys under spent? I can't remember from a little bit. What's our course of action for that? Because I'm curious because it's not even just me and Miles were talking about that. It's not just vehicles. It's not just chemicals. Pretty much everything on the budget is going to probably be impacted to an extent of what we're seeing come out of the Iranian crisis. And you're still like we started this situation at third or excuse me 60 something dollars a barrel and it's still like 90 something 88 like it's going to go into next month more than like what is are we just going to continue to do budget amendment budget amendment to appropriate overspend or do we have an action plan to try to mitigate that

at this point based on the balanced budget you know we try to project the best that we can but we can't predict everything so if costs obviously continue to rise dramatically because of the conflict then certainly we would need to address that in some fashion likely if with a budget amendment. Um but again we don't we don't know how long this is going to last the the ramifications. We just do the best that we can at this point in time to project what we're going to see and then for lack of better words fix it as as we move along. And where would that come out of capital? I guess if it did need to be a budget appropriations it would be out of your unrestricted net position or fund balance. Yeah.

Or possibly at the end of the year like u re-evaluate the line item budgets and then appropriate other lines to that line that's going over. That's the case. Yeah. We have flexibility budget trans Yeah. budget transfers, budget amendments. Um as long as it's within the same fund. Okay. And Lord forbid if it gets any worse, you know, if we see that it continues to go next throughout next year, there's always the spending freeze option and other things that we possibly can do to just as long as we're having those conversations, which I'm sure we are, but I mean, I think it could be probably pretty impactful, right?

Miles, um, I saw that there were no new positions. uh recommended although six were were proposed. Uh can you just sort of walk through the thinking of of uh that aspect of the budget and why you didn't feel any of the uh proposed new positions were justified at this time?

Well, I I feel that the positions are justified. It's a numbers game for the budget really. Um the way that it was first uh the budget was first drafted, we included all positions and then included all the other line items in there, then went through and and adjusted the operational lines, keeping the uh positions inside of it. And we were still in a negative $368,000, I believe, uh with the positions u still included. So I instructed Jared and Kevin to to run me a a budget with no positions so that have an easier chance to to balance the budget um without of course, you know, ask asking for a a tax increase or uh affecting other line items that could affect employees benefits or salaries or anything else. So, I wanted to preserve that category, you know, existing employees and said, you know, um tough decision. I think they're all needed. They're all recommended from department head. So, who might have say you don't need a police officer, you don't need a fire inspector, but it was just the the balance of the actual budget itself was the reason I decided not to include those.

And quick question too on the we talked about it at the retreat for the property that was just acquired property. We had talked about potentially putting some funds allocated towards envisioning and master planning. Is that somewhere in the line items for planning and zoning or

No, I don't think we included that at all in any budget. Um, we wanted to get through the budget cycle first and then u bring that to your attention whether we we move forward with like a visioning exercise or or something else. And I really have no idea how much that would be. So instead of um you know throwing a number out there and me not hitting the right number, I thought we'd go through the process of um letting you all discuss what you want to see next and then if it is a consultant third party at that point bring it to you with the with the cost and it would be a budget amendment. Then um

can we add that to an upcoming council workshop? That one's scheduled I believe at the either the June or the July or you may have that when that one's uh kind of pencled in on our but it it's upcoming this summer. We wanted to get through this process first. Yeah, June. Okay, cool. Thank you. Um, this is just a not necessarily a budget question, but um, in the police department budget, it's got sign on slashreloation. I'm assuming those are funds that are used to like entice people to join the police department.

Yeah. Do we like is there any kind of like employment agreement associated with those? Like you've got to work for the city for There is. Yeah. So, uh, when they first sign on, it's a $3,000 sign on bonus for a new officer. And then they complete their training, which is usually about six months. Then they would receive their second $3,000 installment. And I believe it's a year corky that they have to be employed. Otherwise, they would have to repay us pr-rated amount based on how much time that they've actually worked for us, but they would pay pay back uh anything prior to that 12-month employment. Okay. Um, what is separation allowance?

That is for uh law enforcement retirement. Okay. Okay. Um, another one. Oh, the body cameras. There's a big increase on that. I was just wondering what that was. This is probably best for Corki Chief Paul to or Captain Cla to come up and explain um Yeah. Yeah. We had we had a big discussion about uh body cam um and the company that's now going to supply body cams if this budget's approved. And so they have all the details. I'd rather the police department explain it.

Yeah. So the uh the company we were or currently have body cameras with now um was bought out several years ago. We have been with that company for eight years. When we started with them, they were kind of a startup company for body cameras, which is why the rate we got was so good. Uh, Chief Falls was actually able to renew that contract four years ago. And then in that meantime, they got sorry, they got bought out. Um, so we began looking for um other vendors. Uh, and pretty much all of them are in the roundabout price range. Um, this is the way companies, that's just their price now for body cameras for police agencies. They know they got agencies got to have body cameras no matter what. And it is a uh very high cost.

Would this get us with that what what's being recommended? Would this get us to the point that we have most all officers who need those body cams with sort of the latest and greatest technology?

Yes. So right now, um, my lieutenants are kind of struggling sending the cameras back to the company to get parts replaced. So that's kind of what we're dealing with now. I'm operating on about one or two spares right now with the agency of 55 officers that need body cameras. It's kind of a challenge right now. Um, so this this Axon contract would definitely um negate that. it wouldn't be a problem anymore because after two and a half years, they actually come in and replace every single body cameras under that contract. So, our our equipment will always stay up to date. Uh it wouldn't be in the range it is right.

So, do you anticipate this being a recurring at the same level um annually or is this more of a one time up charge that the contract is for five years? So, it would be under a five-year contract but is the one or is 196 196 that would be an annual that would be an annual yes for five years. There's a lot of software and data storage associated with

there is it's a some AI technology some um translation technology it's it's a lot lot of it um is kind of up to date with the technology which actually speed up our officers time on traffic stops their report writing um some of the the things that they're having to manually enter. So right now when they capture if they go on a call they capture um the call on their body camera. When they get done with that call they have to manually go in and enter the call notes and tag the reporting number. This new software actually that is an intensive process. I ride along but and it takes twothirds of the time they takes some time to document. Um yeah

with this this company it actually integrates with our CAD system. So when an officer uh records that body camera, it it correlates with the call in the CAD system. So it automatically tags the right report number and all the call notes that were entered in by the dispatcher, by the uh caller, and then by the officer. So it kind of speeds up that process. Curiosity, I know one of the uh sergeants was explaining to me that I guess one of the latest models actually activates whenever their their sidearm is pulled.

Yes. Or when the blue lights get cut on. So, it's another step that the officers don't have to do. So, if they deploy their taser, they deploy their firearm, and they cut on their blue lights to go to a call, they don't have to worry about during responding to that call, oh, I got to cut my body camera and, you know, driving uh, you know, at at increased speeds to get to the call. That's one less thing they have to do. It automatically cuts off. So, there are some operational efficiencies with Oh, a ton with this new program. It is, it is night and day difference between what we have and then what is out there right now. So, So there's no inflation on drug buy money. Well, you know,

$5,000 even. Do you have some information? I want a cola. So in that deal, Chief, thank you. In that deal, um, our tasers is built in that price for the 196 as well. So it's not just it's not just body cameras, it's body cameras and tasers. Um, our tasers that we're using now are they came out about in 2008. So, those two are um fixing to be obsolete. Um, they're no longer making those tasers anymore. So, we'd have to go to a new one anyway with the next several years. So, this package deal is tasers and body cameras combined. And does this get you everything you need like enough for the existing workforce you have for the

Yes, it would give us plenty of spares. um actually built in with, you know, if we added uh a few officers in the next several years, we would still be okay. Um and get us up to date on the equipment. And this contract covers like software upgrades, storage upgrades, storage fees, software upgrades, um all that is included in the contract. It's five years, you said.

There's also seem to be some larger increases in like travel and training, user fees and licensing agreements and vehicle equipment leases. Is that something Go ahead, Jim. Uh, increases in the budget for travel and training, uh, user fees and licensing agreements, and vehicle and equipment leases.

So, for travel and training, I've been utilizing asset forfeite money to, um, kind of keep us get us through. So, just based on what we've been spending versus what um, we need to be at, that's where your uh, increase was for that. For uh, vehicle equipment, that's just like with inflation, everything goes up. Um, and what was the other one? user fees and licensing agreements. We took some things that were in other places in the budget and line items and put them all in one spot so we could so it'd be more efficient. And so taking those things and put them in there, but we've also had some new contracts um with some uh software and stuff like that. That's part of that increase.

For user fees, uh we I think the city of Gastonia was paying our Microsoft 365 subscription and they stopped doing that. And so we had to take over our our own Microsoft 365 subscription and that's in the tune of like $17,000 out of that one line item that's 27,000 for user fees.

Fortunately, we've been getting it for free for quite some time. is not to get too technical, but we we're going from a E1 account to a E3 account, which we should have had an E3 account all along, but the with the build of the computers at Gastonia, they've been putting the Microsoft stuff package on our computers. Um, so we have the Microsoft, you know, Outlook for our email, but we didn't actually have under contract. It was basically given to us for free um by the city of Gastonia for many years. So they were going through their stuff doing what they do on their audit stuff and found that that was the case and they cut us off. So then we couldn't do a work we couldn't do a word document. You think about that and Excel for our higher level people um it was affecting mainly the admin and people worked in the office more than anybody else and so we had to uh handle that. So they graciously have allowed us to in July for a few accounts to uh continue that. So that's part of that.

They're not charging us back. No, not I'm not going to make any other comments on that. Nothing's for free is all I'm going to say. Just for clarification, back to the uh vehicle lease. Um we've replaced some surplus vehicles too, I think. Right. Are we Is this adding to the fleet at all or is this primarily upgrading and replacing vehicles that were

Okay, thanks. Are these cars or what are we leasing? Police cars. Police cars.

Okay. So, we got a new motorcycle added to the fleet. It's going to help two years in the making. I actually put in for two and we scaled it back to one. Um, so we've got that and we've got another surprise coming. I'm not sure when it'll be finished. So, uh, I look forward to that. It's going to be a surprise. I'm not going to give y'all much more than that, but but yes. Um, we normally with credit or debit. Debit. I was hoping at Gabaldi Fest, but I don't know that's going to be done. Um, so it's we get an armored vehicle. No, demilitarization of the police obviously. Um, social worker. Um, you got a tank. We got a tank.

Servant mindset, not warrior. So, um, anyway, so we're hoping to unveil that soon. Uh we did get the motorcycle, but uh to go back to what you said, uh Mark, if it's anything other than a police vehicle with the leases, we always get any of the specialy vehicles approved through Miles and Kevin. Okay. So, so that 40% year-over-year bump is that's all just contractual increases and the cost to lease these things. Yes. Is there an opportunity to look for a new agency to go through or is this like with the lease holders and all that stuff or is it pretty much cut and dry for I'd say we're pretty uh far into the process and to go with someone else would cost us a lot more money than what it's costing every year for for what we're getting.

Um and we're almost at the point where we'll know where it levels off based on a few more cars we have to replace that we do every year. So there's not many more cars to where we're actually completely in the program. So we can understand how much money we're going to get back because through that leasing program, you know, instead of say the car uh you replace a car at 120,000 miles. Well, through that enterprise leasing, they actually have a certain vehicle like a Ford Explorer might, you know, say 80,000 miles, what the market is for resale. So they know to go ahead and resell that car to get more money back for us versus getting at 120 and not getting much. So we don't know exactly where that is yet because we we're not completely leased. like all of our cars are not under the lease yet. So when we get to there, we'll have a better understanding of that.

So are we trying to get to the point where all of our vehicles, all the police vehicles, police vehicles? We used to own them and then it was just Yeah, yeah, cuz we used to do like the surplusation. It was $256,000 a year for cars and equipment every year. So do you have any more questions on specific line items? Um I had a question on this is more of a general for the the property and liability and workers comp like the spreading between departments. Is that like is there anything about a particular department that makes that bigger or smaller or is it just kind of a comp based on payroll? Right.

For for Yeah. For workers comp. Yes. But for property and liability it's based on assets. Uh okay. And because I just know some are like a lot bigger than others. Yeah. So, um, my accountant Susan's done a really good job of nailing down which departments have which assets. And so that I, if you recall on this last slide, there's property and liability insurance that we're still number one waiting to get the numbers back. And secondly, making sure that the cost allocations are divided amongst the departments correctly. As far as general fund to water sewer fund spend, it's accurate, but we want to make sure that we're cleaning up the actual interdep departmental activity correctly. So, those numbers will be moving. Are we still doing the property and casualty through the league?

Yes. Have we talked to hub maybe about other options? We have not yet because I know they're a they're a huge Yeah. broker. Um, and maybe there might be some opportunities to move the program. Yeah, possibly through next year we could talk to them and see what that might look like. Um, given that we're uh talking about health insurance and the self-unded health insurance, so they do like a bundle to throw this into it, it might be uh too complicated right now, but for for next fiscal year, I think it would probably make sense to do that. Yeah. You said that workers comp even through the league is selfinsured, right? Just like the health insurance, the property liability. I don't think you can sh You can't self-insure the property liability. So, I guess they're going out. Yeah.

Can you? Yeah. Well, it basically just functions like a policy with a really big deductible. Okay. Like you could have like a policy with like a million dollar deductible on Yeah. to cover whatever. I assume that would uh be contingent on your appetite for Well, yeah. I mean the mayor or how much you want to restrict your cap. That's a good point. Renewals are still being negotiated is that the plugs that are in here now is that kind of based on worst case from what you're hearing. So we assumed we assumed a 10% increase on property and liability. I believe I baked the same in for workers comp, but Miles, you had shared with me that the if you wanted to share that with council about uh workers comp specifically.

Yeah. Going going back to property liability, he owes a 10% increase and that's what we're projecting for workers comp. I think you plugged in like an eight maybe an 8.8% but we've heard that there could be a decrease in that. So I think that we funded to the max right now which means we have some cost savings. The league should be getting that our numbers back next this week or early next week so we can bake those in to the uh to the May meeting. You said we are selfinsured on the workers comp. No, no, through the leak. It's through the league. Oh, okay. Okay. Well, that I know you could definitely selfinsure on. Yeah. I don't know. I mean, a hub would probably be able to tell you whether it makes sense or not, but

I don't know what size you have to be to um where that makes sense from a financial perspective, but that's definitely an option on the workers comp. Um but yeah, well, it's just something to maybe look at. Okay. Um on the fire department vehicle maintenance, there was a pretty big delta between the department requests and then the manager suggestion for capital outlay or uh no the vehicle maintenance line item.

So um 134 I think was or no 200 was the department. we kept it flat from this year. Um, I just kind of wanted to see what the the thinking was there because I I just anecdotally, it seems like the fire trucks have quite a bit of work done on them. They do. They have a they have a lot of work. Um, but I'm trying to balance the budget the best I can.

No. Yeah. And so, I mean, we went through every line item with the fire department, and it was one of those give and takes. Hey, I I don't know if I could afford $200,000 in that line item. Can we go with 134 and hope and pray that our trucks don't break down or anything else? So, u we you never can tell. So, I just said, let's just keep it flat over the past year. Do do you know where we're at with that? I can pull that for you. Yeah. Just a kind of curious year to date. Um it would be interesting

if we feel like we're getting, you know, close to that line item, uh going over budget, similar to like the gas discussion, you know, we could always look at another line item potentially that has not been funded or either bring a budget amendment if you if we're maxing out already at the 134 and the the next U repairs $40,000 would be a budget amendment that time. Yeah. Yeah. Well, it's just what kind of caught my attention on this in particular was because I know asking for two new trucks. I assume that's because the existing trucks are old.

My experience with old vehicles is they don't get cheaper to fix. So, um, of course, I've never owned a fire truck, so uh, that would definitely make my son's life. Um, but, uh, yeah. So, just kind of curious to see where we're at with that, um, current year. Um, but I'm sure there's enough fluff in the or flex in the budget to make the number work. Lifetime on a typical engine is only about what is it 8 to 10 years maybe. Chief, you want to I think you have some input on this.

So So through March 31st, um we've spent 85,000 out of 134. So that leaves about 49,000 remaining. About three quarters of the year through action. And and that line item, it really just depends on what's going on. It could be up, it could be down. Um and we met with chief and he felt comfortable with that number. So one of the things that we were looking at there is the tower comes some of its warranty start running out this year. So some of those repairs we've made this year have been covered under warranty that won't be next year. Okay. So that's kind of what we're facing into that. Some of the warranty dropping off on some of our trucks. We had that some body repair work done too, right? On the tower

which are obviously not covered by warranty. But if if it's not our fault, then there's a insurance company that possibly could could pay that down and that's not captured inside that line item. Okay. Um on the South Point VFD contract is that I thought that was done. So those are shared use costs that you're seeing on there. Okay. We we still share the cost of any use of household items down there. Okay. Okay. Um, and then I think I saw something on the slide about a new professional development program. Yes.

I just kind of interested very high level what that is professional development. So that's giving them some kind of incentive to go out and get further education and certifications and it take it would take two years for anyone to back to get into that program. So what that 112 is is to get those that have currently been here for years. So, the most they would see in in a two-year period, a new hire would be two and a half percent. And that's for certifications to send them out to get to for them to go out and get extra certifications and and improve their delivery. Okay. Okay. Do we like when somebody gets certified, is it an issue like somebody gets certified and then they go work for another fire department that maybe pays them more?

Absolutely. If we lost seven in a year. Oh, wow. So, absolutely. They go to make more money. Do we like when they go through a program like this, is there any way to charge them back? Yeah. Like b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b basically like at least make sure that we're recouping our investment in the program similar to what we do with police you mentioned a moment ago like Yeah. But it could be it could be tied to a training bonus too, right? I assume you could structure a program that way. You could, but we're always going to lose people. We live Charlotte and Gastonia, two of the biggest departments in the state. We're always going to lose to them regardless of how many people we send the certifications, send the classes,

they can go over there and make start out at $56,000 a year where they're starting out here at 45. Why why would they not go over there? So that's why we're losing and to get that incentive for that certification. We we use that professional development as more of a retention program than anything. because we are losing people. Okay. I say we would like to use that program as a retention tool. Correct. Power positive thinking.

Okay. Um the ones we're losing on average, is it more like a like a rookie, you know, first year, maybe two years in and then they're jumping ship or is it your seasoned guys there? It's across the board. Okay. Um, in the last year, we've lost some that have been here 13, 14 years and some that have been here two years. Is it just the pay that's driving that? I think that's a huge driving factor. Pay and some benefits. Okay. How does that compare? And I know you somewhat new on the in the job here, but how does that compare with the last couple of years? Would you say that about attrition? Uh,

it's probably about consistent. Yeah, I would say consistent. I think the last couple years it's more of the we've seen more of I hate to speak because I wasn't here three or four years ago, but I think it's more you're starting to see more of the longer tenure guys see more pay elsewhere and they're you know we're battling with Mount Holly back and forth every time they raise pay we're losing people to them. So if we raise pay we're going to lose them to us. So it's it's a it's a trend across the country. People are struggling for pay. I think we're always going to see that. I mean, I hate to lose to people, but is that level of churn manageable? It seems like a lot. The level, excuse me, the level of churn with people.

We're in uncharted territory. It's the last couple years it's been, it's been nationwide. That level's been like that. It's people, you know, firemen shopping all over the country trying to find somewhere to go. Well, that raises a question in my mind. Are we being realistic in our salary expense, you know, projection for 26 27? Are we going to be in a situation where we're looking at doing a big budget amendment to, you know, for salary increases or is this we've got another pay study? We just Yeah, but we just completed the pay study last year, right? No, it's been uh it's been two years. Two years ago.

Based on the personnel policy, it's every three years. And so we've got uh a consultant Yeah, for this year that we're approaching and so we'll study everybody's salaries again and then next July 1st 2027 will be the at that time will be the effective date the effective date or the changes or you know whatever whatever it needs to be for salaries

which to your point mayor what we did was before that just to give you a little historical context it was more ad hoc right I would say so the council at the time we decided let's set up a routine of what's the average of pay cycle studies so that you know each year you don't have like a major fluctuation or then or if you have a major gap right and then you have to do a big payout at once so we did I think we land on every three years

and dependent upon whoever's in the pay study cycle it could be that you know Mount Holly was in one last year therefore their their pay increased and that's for any employees not just fire but you know they increase pay for that one and then we move into our pay study next year. Maybe our salaries catch up and then the next one would be LOL, whoever else in the county. So, it's uh I don't know, it's just cyclical it seems like for pay studies and then salary increases and then people jumping ship and then um I wish I wish it was not that way, but do you have any ideas on how to retain your guys better than what's going on?

I think pay is one of the biggest things. Um, when you got a new guy, you know, you can look at the benefits, they get the benefits, they get the state retirement, but when a guy comes in here making $17 an hour when he can go to Alexis Volunteer Fire Department making $20 an hour, why would he come here? He's not looking at that in that end benefit. So, that we're struggling. We're competing with those those that dollar figure at the end of the week, you know, so they see paycheck on Friday, but they're not taking into account retirement's coming out of that, health insurance is coming out of that. So, that's that's one of the struggles is the pain. And these certifications, most of them are mandatory or optional.

No, there there's two mandatory certifications that they have to have to be to to ride the firetruck. That's firefighter and EMT certifications. These certifications for this program is way above and beyond. Yeah. So, the first tier, you've got things like driver operator and some of those other things that they have they can go get. Most of them are going to get those anyway because we need them to, but it's just a way to kind of give back to them a little bit to reward them for their time. Do any of the other I imagine Charlotte and Gastonia probably offer something like this, but like do the other department

A lot of departments do. Yes, sir. I know for instance Charlotte um you get a a huge educational incentive, you get a prior military incentive, you get um you know your education split up into two plus you get um longevity incentives. There's a bunch of incentives you get some of those. I know Charlotte for well because I came from there but Gastonia I believe is doing some of the same stuff and uh wanting to say those m non-mun municipal departments that are also full-time since they're not paying into elders they have increased added benefit paying additional 401k more than more than most, but that's to offset that retirement. Okay. How many total personnel do we have in the department?

41. We're losing seven on the average.

Probably this is probably a conversation we're going to be having again. So, I'm back up on that. 41 of the eight the council approved last year's budget. We've still not been able to fill those because we've had a couple offers turned down. So, we have 41 positions. We have 41 positions. 38 39 of them. 38 38 38 filled at the moment. But as we lose those, if we get a new person in, we're starting back at ground zero that person. Are most of our new hires, they tend to be more at like the rookie level or we Oh, yeah.

Captains are the hardest positions to get right now. We're struggling with those. for the tower. That's where we struggle the most is captains and drivers. The new hire the the new guy, the rookies, we can get those, but then most of those we have to see the training. So, we're six months from seeing them on fire. Okay. So, there's a lag there. There is a lag. Is it unheard of to require a certain number of years of service for the new guys when they come in to try to offset some of that attrition to require? You mean for them? like a like you got to do three years before you can go anywhere else to be a firefighter or something like that.

It depends on where you are. I mean I I think you you could probably do something like that but then I think you would have a hard time getting people to commit to it. You know there have to be financial justification for it. Do we do a sign on bonus or anything? Okay. Could we do one? That's how you do it. That's what I'm saying. Do do like the sign on and take a little off the salary to then put them on the hook for Yeah.

I think we be open suggestions. Uh maintaining fire is important. Correct. Yes, sir. Um, so definitely we want to be an open line of communication. If you're seeing something we're not, yeah, please let us know. It sounds like you're having the same issues that we were seeing in the military where your senior guys are leaving and you're just left with a lot of the the newer guys that don't have the knowledge, don't

the place we get into is as we adding the tower staffing is hard because we're adding three captains. So that's historically we've worked people up through the ranks and we people ready to go, but we're adding positions and losing the lower position. So, we're not getting people, we're not getting the younger folks up to the position where they're ready to be a captain, ready to be a driver. How much your past experience? How much experience have you had? So, I've, you know, we've got a couple that I I would love to see be a captain, but they themselves, and I respect their their their thoughts on this, they say they're not ready, and I respect that because I mean, they have their guys on the back, you know, they're they have their life in their hands. So, if they Tell me they're not ready. They're not ready. I'm not going to force anybody in the position they're not ready for. So,

right. Chief, did you say you had to have three captains on the tower? One for each shift. Yes. One for each shift. One for each shift. Okay. And so, not having sufficient captains in the rank or on on board that might uh restrict you from being able to have full usage of the tower at times or does that the tower? We have a driver assigned to the tower all the time. So, the tower is always staffed with a driver. Um,

and we're getting really close. We've got interviews scheduled. We've interview scheduled within the next two weeks for two captains. And I think we'll be up to speed on our captains. And I say all that to say it's taken us a year to get here, but we're getting really close to be able to staff the tower 100% full staffing 247. Now, it is staffed 247 with at least one person now. Okay. Any other questions for Chief? Hey, Chief. Don't get too far. We might need you again. I won't. Um I did have a question on the since we're not adding any new positions. What's the big driver to the street salary? Oh, yeah. The same

like 25% increase position position allocations. There's also a large increase in the parks maintenance budget for the streets. Yeah, that one is for uh Miles. I know you had a note on that for the specifically parks maintenance. Yeah, hang on just one second. Or the fields. They've done a lot of work on the field. Oh, I see. So, okay. For some reason, I thought we said some of the positions that we filled or we had opened last year, we didn't fil cost allocation of a position. Some's hitting general funds, some's hitting water, sewer, some are hitting all three funds, storm water, water, sewer, and general fund. And I can share a breakdown of those positions if you'd like, Alex.

Okay. So you just change like what part of the budget some of these positions hit. Yes. So and it's justifiable based on um you know what what they're actually doing. Uh so I'll use myself as an example. I'm I'm 5050 between general fund and water sewer. Um that's the same with our city managers. Um, just thinking off the top of my head, we've got our city engineer that's cost allocated, public works director, deputy public works director, city clerk, HR director, uh, lead inspector, um, those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head, but I have a spreadsheet that alsocates all those positions. That would be helpful just to probably look at just so we know. I think there's about 15

positions, but that's what's driving the 25% coming out of somewhere or part of it's coming out of somewhere and going into there. Yeah. So, there was a I believe there was a drop in water sewer. Um, so you're seeing some of that shift back to general fund. Gotcha. Which is actually what we wanted to do, right? Get that out of the enterprise fund and push it. Yeah. And and it's allowable and justified. Our auditors ask that. They'll review that every year. Look at the positions. look at the job descriptions, give it their thumbs up, move on with their payroll testing. It's actually recommended. Yeah, the LGC recommendation. We talked about that. Okay, that that's kind of come up every year, but

it has I think there a couple other smaller contributors that I think Miles, you mentioned this in your summary. One was new employees being hired at a different rate than previous employees and then professional development certifications. Yep, that's right. Yeah. For parks and recck, that seems to be the, you know, folks hired at different rates than what was budgeted last year, like placeholders. Some of them are vacant. hired somebody who was uh at a different rate. And then for the the parks maintenance I believe was uh the ball fields emphasis on the the turf and maintenance there in miles I believe. Yeah. Uh what line item was that parks and recck? No, it would be streets park park maintenance.

All the park maintenance correct. It's going from 150 to 260. Yeah, that's that's due to um they do currently. So they look good now that they look like that. all cost. We have to pay. It wasn't said nothing's free. Hey, when we're getting positive Facebook commentary on kids appreciate it. I know that much. Yeah, it's a big thing right there. It's worth a quart million dollars. So, Mark, not to like rush you on this. Do you did you have any other line because I want to look at the spreadsheet that they've got because I've got a few questions. Uh I had I think two more things. Um sidewalk improvements. Is that building sidewalks or is that just fixing them maintenance? I believe

like when we go out and grind a sidewalk or um the other thing that there's a big jump on the contract service knowing is that a what is that? Yeah, that that contract was uh rebid last year and so we we had that 250 budget last year. We've got a new contractor. Uh even the RFP that we put out, we broke down like the classifications of just uh you know, some properties need to be uh mowed and weed eated and and like blown. Some of them need like uh turf management. And so there's like different classifications for like some of the more high-profile properties.

And so yeah, the budgets uh reflects the the new bid plus the cemetery. We moved 50,000 from the cemetery line item to the one below it. Correct. Because their new contractor is also handling the cemetery now, right? Correct. Okay. So that's 50 of I mean that's half the increase. Okay. Um they must be not they must be doing a pretty good job because that hurting. I think they're doing a great job all the time because remember it was kind of getting to a boiling point over the cemetery. They're doing a great job. Yeah, they're doing they're doing a great job. I think they're doing good and I think Jonathan I don't know that's he manages that. just a thumbs up. Okay.

Um and then one I I don't know if I'm reading this right or not, but uh on street resurfacing, there's no value for the current year budget. That's correct. Somewhere else. Yes, it's in capital. Um and so the reason that we did that is so that your capital outlay number matches cash on your CIP table. So that's usually reserved for PAL bill funding or funding for street resurfacing. We took that half a million dollars and moved that down into capital and it's broken out into street resurfacing. So street resurfacing and capital projects. You'll see 1.3 million in your street resurfacing. Part of that is the pal bill funding that would normally be in the streets department and the rest is cash.

Okay. I think that was it for me. There were a couple uh departments where the telephone expenses went up significantly. I know there was an explanation with respect to that in the water and sewer fund I think but I wasn't sure what the explanation was say for like community development or recreation. I know that uh it's not just telephone it's telephone and internet. I know Miles you may have had a note on that as well

right? Yeah. Yeah. So, we uh actually through the budget process, Jared was looking at all the line items for telephone with all the department heads just to see what we've been the actual payments to date uh versus like uh what we budgeted last year. And it includes um the Verizon, Verizon, and Spectrum bill. So, you got telephone and internet. So, I think we're just doing a better job of like allocating what the actual costs are.

Yeah. The big drivers are the Verizon, Spectrum, and then Nexttiva, which is our um office phones. Will the cameras be lumped into that too? Would the cameras be like the newly installed cameras at the

Does that all fall into that telephone line item? Okay. And this might be a segue into Alex's uh what Alex wants to talk about next, but I noticed that looking at the CIP, there's like nothing for parks and wreck this in this year's budget. Is that correct? Because there's a list of uh looking at the list and there are a number in in in parks and wreck and none of them were funded for this upcoming budget year.

Yeah, that's correct. I'll do what I can. Jared, sorry. I I did before we move on to that, John. Sorry. Um the parking lot lease line item under streets. Does that $145,000 figure is is that sort of a plug for the negotiator rate with the three lots that we were told about the renegotiation there? Yes, that's correct. And I know Miles met with them directly if you wanted to speak to that. miles. I was looking at the parks and see are you talking about the uh

street parking lot leot you guys negotiated that to like 121 and we're I guess that's kind of a placeholder at 145 is what we're projecting in the budget. Yeah, the 121 is what uh uh city attorney and I met with uh the company about the difference between what you see in the budget and that 121 is the remaining lot right there on Glenway where the old bank teller is. We lease that property and the uh Northol Southern uh gravel lot as you're going up Main Street uh to the left from Glenware where ties in. All right, that's all I need. So, none of that is Dwight Freddy Field parking in that number.

That's included in the original. It is included. Dwight Freddy uh field abant u gravel lot and then the imperial lot behind elevation church where Sam is living. So, if Freddy ultimately became city property that we would expect that number to come down to 121. Well, that's well that number, but I'm assuming there'd be some other number somewhere for for the price of acquiring it. Sure.

So, you done? All right. No other questions on that.

I do have a question. So, can we talk about Project Tundra and the fiscal impact of $2.1 million in fiscal year 26 27? Because maybe it's good just to discuss at high level. Do we keep it in there or where do we go from here? Because it from what I understand it sounds like we may be at a potential stalemate with moving forward. And my concern is is if we have this in the budget because it's so significant that could be cost reduction or a tax reduction or it could potentially be I know everyone's hearts just stopped or it could be improving other capital outlays that we have or prioritizing other capital projects. So

So that was one of the items that was not included in this draft budget. So So 2.1 million is not included correct even though it's here in the capital community enhancement. It's it's one of on the last slide. It's one of the items that is not it would be a simple plug. The intent with that would be to cash flow the design and then reimburse ourselves with loan proceeds later. So it would be a hit to fund balance in this in this coming fiscal year and then we would reimburse ourselves with loan proceeds later in the game as that's constructed. I see. And then the same thing with the North Belmont fire station design. That's right. And

we did decide on that. But what do we do? Just a little clarification. Yeah. I don't think we're at a stalemate. I think it's Have we moved forward from when we discussed last? Yes. Um but as far as having something to look at, uh that's not there yet, but my understanding is that it is coming. I haven't heard that it is not. It's news to me. So maybe a workshop or a close session on it might be prudent for the rest of council to hear an update on.

Yeah. when I reached out to the to the company's two representatives that I've been speaking with the entire time they took uh what I told them about theou um and so they're working with their attorneys at this point drafting theou and that was right after the retreat when you all made a decision to move forward with project tundra and so you know told them what I expected there was needs to be anou so this thing could be not called project tundra anymore

um and so they took iton themselves to state that they were going to draft it for our review. Uh since that time, I've followed up probably three or four times um asking, you know, you know, where are we in the process? I need to get it. I'm getting questions by council members. So, I'd like to, you know, have an update and they said that they're still drafting it. So, it's still still in their shop.

So, I had a meeting about two week two weeks ago, three weeks ago, maybe. I'd have to go back and look exactly when. Um, but same thing they said they were drafting it. They were going to give us once they have it drafted, they would give us a copy to review so that we could make suggestions or have any input on it. Uh, and that would be the next steps. That's where we are. So, I don't want to say there's a stalemate, but there's we're waiting for that MA to be drafted. They give us a timeline.

Not hard timeline. Not my meeting. Can we give them a deadline? Because we can't just sit here the whole year anticipating this because costs are going to go up for the proposed project from the estimates we've received and that could change materially the decision of what council decides to do with the overall project. Yeah, I think it would be fair for me to do a followup with at least that and say is this something we can expect in the next week or is this something that is looking like it's going to take longer because we might need to have a different discussion if we do. I'll be happy to do that.

Yeah. So remind me again as far as like the community enhancements, we're cash flowing all of those. What were we doing with city hall res renovations 3.3? Was that to pay in cash and then go to debt service or the city hall renovation specifically is a debt funded project.

Okay, that was debt. On the last page of that CIP, there's subtotals down at the bottom for each fiscal year that breaks down cash, debt, grant, and POW bill. So those are your funding sources for each fiscal year in that column. And that that would assume net cash. So going back to the 2.1 million for project Tundra, yes, we would appropriate fund balance to do the design, but we would be receiving that cash back with loan proceeds at a later date within the same year.

No. So then what's driving the cash down to 1.2 versus 2.1? Because it's assuming that we're going to be reimburseing later. So it's net of the reimbursement. So it is in the budget then because we're going to go in debt service half of it. So the 1.2 does not consider those two items specifically. Everything else in the cash column is is totaled up correctly. Is it in the debt number? Yes. So for the project Tundra specifically, you're seeing that in the 2728

at 19,500,000. Yep. Is included in the 2728 debt total and then 206. Sorry, I'm talking about the $2.1 million, right? I was just answering uh Mark's question, but I can I can update that to include 2.1. And if we want to fund it, I'll have this CIP table tie directly to capital outlay in the budget and fund balance appropriation to fund capital. All three of those will match because that's the funding source. So, it's not in there, right? No, those are the two follow-up items that still could be adjusted with this budget. What does it do to budget if we put it in there? It would increase just decrease well yeah what would it do

between the two? So if you did both the fire station and uh the design for project tundra be approximately 2.8 million in cash we would appro that would increase your appropriated fund balance by 2.8 million and it would increase your capital expenditures in the general fund by 2.8 million. So it would be a plug plug. But if we don't do it, we've already determined that we'd be okay with spending that out of the general fund. And that's a lot of projects you could potentially knock out or tax, right? Just two cents there. Do we feel it appropriate as council to put a timeline on this

for project? Yeah. Why don't we follow up first and get an idea of where they are? Sounds like we've sent three with the same answer. We'll get you a uh yeah, I'd prefer to have one a followup directly with my contact that I met with uh and I can come back and in May at our meeting I'll be happy to to update everyone or I can send out an update before maybe we can take action in May. I think that would be preferable. Yeah. Yeah. If we uh I like the before because we need to plug in 2.1 to the May meeting budget. balance either with or without it. Our budget's got to get completed.

Yeah. So, I'll reach out. I'll get an update and I'll I'll get with you, Miles, and let you know then we can act appropriately in May. Okay.

Any other questions for me before we move into the model for Alex's direction? All right, I think we're ready for the model. Okay, thank you all. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Has there been an update on the 85 widening? If there was ever a moving target, all I can say is when I go to the NO meetings, they'll it gets pushed back. But they're saying May, I think. So,

guess I'll believe it when I see it. And there hasn't been much change since the retreat when we looked at this, right?

I think they made a few updates on like decisions throughout the budget process. I think that's what Chaz is going to review.

Okay. Mayor, do you want to wait on Alex to come back or you want to go ahead?

I think I mean I'm sure it'll be right. Go ahead.

Good evening and thank you all for having me out. Um, so I wanted to uh walk through the updated model here. I know we spent a good bit of time with it back in February. um related to the capital side of the equation. Not much has changed since what we looked at um a couple months back on the operating budget side. This reflects uh what was just discussed uh by Jared and team with regards to operating revenues and operating expenses. Just to preview for you uh back in February, we had been assuming um anywhere from three to four and a half% growth and other operating maintenance expenses based on budgetary requests that have come in. um some of the the salary reallocation back from the water and sewer fund that shook out to close to closer to about 9%. So, you know, all else equal, the model doesn't look as great as where we landed in February. That being said, the model still works. Um, but you know, we were showing a little bit healthier fund balance, excuse me, back in February compared to what I'll pre preview for you here today. But just wanted to give you that that data point kind of variation between what we were projecting versus what's coming with regards to budget requests. So, we've got loaded up all of the the CIP um that has been that has been presented uh for this year's budget and future budgets. And then with regards to some of these major capital projects, we have the the fund balance funding component to it, the debt funding component, and then to the extent any of those um capital projects have expenditures that are being paid for out of fund balance we want to recoup with our borrowing later on, we're capturing that reimbursement um in the appropriate year when we're issuing debt for that project. So to kind of get to the punchline, scroll out here. You might recall that we always vote policy minimum that we want to make sure that we're hitting um which in this projection here we are meeting that out until fiscal 2020 2033 uh which is a little bit beyond our typical horizon

period. So I would say on a projection basis we're still hitting our targets. Um as I mentioned fund balance is a little bit lower than where we settled on back in February because of that that budget variance compared to forecast. Um, but this tells us that, you know, at the current tax rate, at current revenue and expenditure projections, we could still fund all the capital needs through a combination of pay as you go funding and debt funding with some grant funding or third-party funding sprinkled in there and not, you know, violate any of our our policy targets and maintain the same property tax rate. So, that's the the general takeaway. So, kind of good news, but maybe not as great of news as what we're looking at in February. But um happy to take questions, happy to take or show you all variations of any assumptions with regards to project amount, timing, funding sources. Uh and then ask you to repeat because I was getting situated when I'm sorry, but um the reason why it's not quite as rosy as as we went through back in February is what again?

So we were back in February, we were basing our fiscal 2027 projections off of your fiscal 26 budget. And

so within those projections, we had assumed that salaries and benefits grew at four and a half%. All the other operating expenditures grew at 3%. Translating it now to budget requests that have come in, salaries that have moved back from the utility fund into the general fund, some cost increases like health insurance that weren't um fully factored into the model at that time. The overall operating budget is growing at about 9% compared to that 3 to four and a half percent. So those are just ongoing expenses that will continue to perpetuate in the model which is what is showing a lower fund balance all else equal but again still hitting our 30% target over the the five-year forecast period that we'd like to focus on and we're still maintaining the funding source for all the projects that we identified at the retreat. Nothing's changed there.

That's correct. So um projects that we had identified as being funded 100% with debt are still 100% debt. Projects that had you know a cash out then a few minor projects assuming just to be funded purely with fund balance. I know we just batted this back and forth but the design for project tundra um is initially fund balance and then I think it converts to debt right? That's correct. Is that factored?

Yes. So, we're assuming that um we're we would pay for your $2.1 million in this fiscal year out of fund balance. Then, fast forward to fiscal year 2028, you're borrowing for the entirety of the project cost 21.5 or so million dollars. But within that borrowing, we're assuming that you are paying yourselves back the $2.1 million that you spent this fiscal year.

Okay? So you you see a one-year blip in your fund balance just purely based on the timing of the cash outlay fund design versus the timing of the borrowing. But ultimately fast forward a year you're you're back into the same spot from a fund balance perspective. Then you just repay that torch with the North Fire Station as well.

Okay. a strategic question. It's kind of your forte. Uh we have a lot of like installment financing in here. Um a lot of this seems like stuff that is potentially like bondable. Does any of like do you see anything in here where maybe that might make sense? So all of this is bondable. Um, now there's there's pros and cons to putting something like any of these projects on the referendum ballot.

Um, so one major pro is a general obligation bond is going to be your lowest cost of borrowing. So if you get authorization from voters to issue general obligation bonds for any of all of these projects, your interest rate will be lower than an installment financing just because you're pledging your taxing power as security to the ultimate borrowers versus excuse me, the ultimate um lenders versus pledging the asset. Now, the the trade-off is if you put it on the ballot and it's a project that you absolutely want to get done and then voters vote it down, now you're in an awkward position where the voters have said, "Hey, we don't want the I don't know if you ultimately end up funding the project. Does it rub voters the wrong way?" Maybe, maybe not. Um, but that's that's one of the main trade-offs. Typically, for bond referendum projects, we limit those more so to what we kind of call quality of life. So like you know parks and recreations or roads or things of that nature where um one there isn't necessarily good hard tangible asset that you could pledge to a lender but also you know if voters don't want nice parks or new parks or they don't want you know increased uh or um better quality roads then that's their decision and they're telling you yay or no nay. But for projects that maybe more so lend themselves to, hey, we really need to get these done, like a fire station for example. Yes, you could put it on the ballot, but it does run the risk of if it gets voted down, now you're in this awkward in in between position. What do we do now?

Yeah. Yeah. Um I guess that happened or did it not? No. But then the council just was like, "Yeah, that's for your opinion. Thanks for your opinion. Why were you thinking of a specific project? Well, I was just like I mean like I was just thinking I was like who's going to vote against a fire station? But um I mean to your point of Yeah. Well, because you also don't need to raise taxes to do it. But here's the deal. The model shows that we're going to be okay until when was that? 2030 or something like that. 2033. I mean that's outside the norm at the same tax rate, right?

Yeah. Yeah, for this level of capital, but it's it's a testament to all the fund balance because what usually kills a bond is like we need the bond, but we also need more taxes. But this is saying we don't even have to raise taxes in order to accomplish our most aggressive projects. Well, I'm just trying I was just thinking is like if you can save on the interest expense mainly. I see. But you're going to be raising taxes to the taxpayer. Well, you don't have to like you don't have to raise taxes to pay for a bond. It's just that tends to happen. But then try explaining that, right? Wasn't that I know we're getting into the weeds here, but like in the language on the bond doesn't usually say like you have we're going to raise your tax by two cents or whatever.

It says effectively we're asking you for $10 million of authorization as an example. If you approve that, then we could potentially raise your taxes up to two cents, whatever the the right math is. does not obligate you to raise taxes by that amount,

but it just has to be a a point of information that voters are able to digest when they're making their decision. And so, you know, if you get the authorization and you issue the debt and the model or your your budget says we don't need to raise taxes, absolutely no obligation to do so. The one scenario where you would be obligated to to raise taxes is if you ever find yourself in a year where you are have insufficient revenue to make debt service payments, then behind a general obligation bond pledge as you are legally obligated to raise your taxes to a level sufficient to make that payment in the following year. So again does not obligate you to do it at all. The model is showing you don't need a tax increase to do it. So you could put on the ballot and you know with a clear conscious say if you authorize maybe that helps the process or helps the likelihood that the bonds get passed.

But again no guarant. How much do you usually save? like what's the like versus doing like an installment financing versus a bond. So, it's um for someone of y'all's credit quality, it probably be anywhere from um 10 basis points to 25 basis points. So, 0.1% to 0.25% on your your interest rate. Okay. Which, you know, for larger projects, that means pretty meaningful dollars. Yeah. Okay. I'll just ch to put it on the ballot. Is there a cost for a municipality to register a bond?

There's not a cost to put a bond on the ballot, but there's professional costs involved. So, hiring a law firm to create the documents to to get that in place. I almost think the cost would probably outweigh the benefit and then you're going to have to go through the hassle of trying to do if it was anything like the transportation bond and some of our biggest pinch points that you would have thought would have been passed, it was very unsuccessful. Yeah. Well, I think what killed that was that people didn't want to pay more taxes. Yeah, but you still have to put the disclosure that we serve the right to raise taxes in the instance that it needs. So, convince people that they won't go in and raise taxes that way.

Oh, so so you have to declare like the amount of tax that you Yeah, you have to give them a reasonable estimate as to what the property tax rate increase could be if the bonds are passed. Yeah. Okay. And you have to disclose like the existing like uh interest rates for Yeah. Basically disclose your underlying assumptions as to how you arrived at that that ultimate potential tax rate. Yeah. On the last bond, if you remember on about it was like that long. It was a nasty disclaimer. It was it did not sound It did not. I'm sure that didn't help people feel good about made Charlie vote against it.

I did vote against it. Don't want to give you guys any more money. Water under the bridge.

It's a fun thought exercise. Well, I think it always makes sense to look at those different avenues that are available. If you take out Project Tundra, can we just look and see what it does to this projection? Actually, that's probably accurate. Yeah. Hot or cold?

Yeah, that's like a significant which obviously we would anticipate, but Joe, again, this is why I'm pushing like we need an answer because we're tying up a lot of potential funds that we could be trying to do in other projects that are very self- serving to the people. Yeah, I think it's fair request. Absolutely. Yes. Multiple projects. Was the design for the city hall renovations that's already included under is it under capital projects for this for 27? Yes. This I think the design and the construction you're talking about city hall. Both of them in this fiscal year. Yes. 2027 3.3 million.

Oh, so that 3.3 there includes that includes design as well. We're just lumping it all together for that project instead of breaking it out. Okay. How does that work? Once the budget is approved, will you guys make the motions, I guess, to get with design or whatever the appropriate actions are to get city hall completed? We've already asked uh them for Alex, any numbers you want to play with? Well, like half the budget. It is a big piece. I'm not against it. I just want clarity. Sure. Because we cannot we can't plan for

Yeah. It's an albatross when you look at this. And so we definitely need to to get clarity on what direction I guess the only other thing that I'd maybe like throw out to the council is of course like I guess under the appropriate times Miles you mentioned once the budget is approved we could potentially look down avenues of and you said we had the workshop but of visioning of what we do with the stove property in downtown. That's correct. And what the next steps would be. Yeah. uh city attorney and I have already talked through like the next steps as far as like looking at the general statutes and what we need to do next. Okay.

To be a transparent process and so we're working on that June June. We pencled it in on our spreadsheet. We have a spreadsheet of items that are coming up. So I plugged it in there. I'm hoping for it. I've already written it down. Yeah. That's why I say it's just a spreadsheet right now. Turn it off on the machine, but we can move it around if we need to. Anyone want look at any other numbers? I'm good. Good. Nice job on the budget. Yes. Thank you. Thank you everyone. Thank you. Um Miles. Yes, Miles. I just wanted to you go ahead and I'll

Yeah, I've got one more item because the the final page there said health insurance. Um that's the one item that we did not discuss and so I just wanted to give you all like a fair opportunity to hear this. And so we budgeted um a 25% increase. Um but then we recently got the United Healthc Care bid that came in at 39.3% increase and then Blue Cross Blue Shield uh gave us a 50% increase. And so we're back to the point of the initial discussion that we had with Hub International about what do we do at this point if we got like a 40 to 50% increase. And so we're looking at probably self-funded. Um Hub International is still in the process of uh gathering the full quote from parentto. And then once we get that um that's when we plan probably to to fund self-funded in this budget. Um and we're looking at uh and Jared ran some numbers that if we use the numbers um that was presented by uh Hub International have to uh have a fund balance unassigned fund balance uh in the tune of 360,000 uh for water and sewer 150,000 and then storm water 5,000. So we're still in the processes. We're real early right now. We we've got the numbers. So we just want to give that to you all too to say hey these numbers are out there now we've got the actual quotes and so now we got to make the decision to

are all municipalities in a similar situation of just getting destroyed by these increases by us having to move to this type of like because this is this affects everyone right I'm assuming Gaston Mount Holly well but as I recall from the presentation we had we had higher claims yes but still if the league is backing out and we're now going into these privateurers Right. I'm assuming they're using this as an opportunity to be pretty high. I mean, have you talked to any of your city manager buddies?

Yeah, Gastonia, they're already self um the other folks were in the similar situation that we were in with the league and so at the manager meetings that we attend uh on a monthly basis. It seems like health insurance is a big ticket for everybody. There's there's huge increases that are taking place. And so, uh, I think it's pretty standard right now that we're all experiencing that kind of increase

and we know for a fact our numbers what our numbers are. Um, and that's the the quote that we got from United. And then the when Hub International was here, we were anticipating like 25 to 40% increase what we were guessing it was going to go up. Is that right? Somewhere in there. And then if we went selfunded, we weren't really going to save in year one. it would be like year three we were going to be looking like a 13.7% savings or something right. So we're still hitting I mean we still got the increase regardless of which direction there's still an increase for this year coming it's more stability going forward but it's more stability going forward right ultimately gets it to a more manageable

yeah I think they said over the next 10 years if we stuck with we'd be uh at a cost savings in the tune of was it 8 million is what I recall seeing like a cost savings you could you can like you know fund that back into the fund where every year plus I mean that's already from the from the draft budget of plugging a a 20% or 25% increase in there. Is it advantageous to the employees though? I can't remember when we were discussing through all that. Is this going to cause costs I guess to skyrocket? It was similar to the employee, wasn't it?

I I believe what I recall is that it was um help me out. I think it was a very similar approach to what we would be impacting now which we were talking about how we would where we would uh potentially uh fund additional amounts so that uh we don't pass that cost to the employees. I think that we hadn't got there yet as far as like running numbers as far as like you know if you know we don't want to pass up a 40% increase over the employees. So can we pass up a 5% increase to them? Can we pass a 10%? That's right. We asked for the the tiers to see. Yeah, I think it gives us much more flexibility just for the ones paying bills, right? So,

no, I agree. But, you know, you'd got to offset. You can't just pass a massive burden to the employees because I think we asked for now I'm recalling we asked for the tiered because I think we do it standard to an extent. We want to see it done by certain pay grades where it's more relatable to let's say if you're making less you're not getting you're not absorbing a major burden right versus what someone at the top of the scale would be. That's the only way I think you can do it in this scheme. Yeah, I think that's one option is the tier. Another option is like we're saying this, you know, how much can we afford to to take um a certain amount from employees and just have the city pay for it.

Okay. that's in or that's potentially a liab risk to what we're approving. So again, so in the budget, we're talking about these these these line items. When would this go into effect? I guess like is it in the numbers we've just reviewed as far as the insurance and everything? 25% is right. 25% increase is and the number that I just rattled off that 360%. Yeah, that's the that's the increase to be self-funded. We'd have to add another $360,000 in the general fund on top of what's already budgeted at the $1,000 amount that we would have to probably take from unassigned fund balance to plug that in for year one.

So if it's of course this will come up before council, but the peer selfunded may be the more favorable way to go. Will we be do you know roughly when we'll be hearing from Hub International again? We've asked them to get the number as quickly as possible so that we can plug it in for the May meetings and uh human resources director has reached out to them. I don't know where they stand as far as like giving us the exact figure, but we have, you know, week and a half. Okay. And then once we have that number, we can analyze further about a tier program like Alex mentioned um and figure out different options on how we fund it and how we place it down to the employees.

Doesn't have to be that. I just mitigate as much of the risk as possible because that's substantial, right? You don't want to pass on all that cost. The selfunded will cost a little bit more than the renewal in the short term, right? Understood. Well, there any other questions for Jared?

All right. I just wanted to say real quick how um impressed I am to it. uh the attempt to educate us all as to everything that happens in the background with the numbers. Uh it's important obviously that we understand what's going on, but it's important that that we have people that we can lean on that know what's going on. So my hats off, Miles, thank you Jared. Thank you. All the department heads that have put a lot of time in getting this together uh in a format that we can look at and make it a decision based on. I appreciate all the time and effort put into it. I know that's no small feat. I think this might be the quickest one. We're getting faster and faster each year,

but it's paid tribute to y'all's efficiencies and everything you guys are doing. I honestly can't pick through this anymore. Mr. If I may, just a point of discretion. I know we don't normally do other business at work sessions, but I didn't I'm going to be out at the May regular meeting. I didn't want to miss this opportunity to commend some of our staff. I got to do my ride along with the police the other night till the wee hours of Saturday morning and uh things got a little slow about 5 so we decided to knock off so they can spend the next hour doing all that paperwork you were talking about earlier. I got to each 11 hours. Um so what's the current record?

I think it was like 12. We'd have to ask Corky. They got it somewhere. But I got home around 6 something a.m. morning. But I just I know we all appreciate the job that you guys do and and having that inside bird's eye view with just seeing the level of professionalism u skill, restraint uh and compassion that that you the guys and gals in our police force have is is was really tremendous. Appreciate that opportunity. And also to parks and wreck and to public works. I know we've all gotten a lot of positive comments lately about the condition of our field and how good the lights look. And um Jason, I've gotten a lot of feedback on you recently from our athletic directors and school staff about how you've reached out and working with with them and and getting more engagement from the kids in our schools and we really appreciate that. I think that's a welcome addition. Um and then lastly, as you said, just many thanks to Miles and staff for the job you all did with with the budget. Very well done.

Yeah. Well, Jason, we will miss you in May. Um, however, anyone else have anything they'd like to add or do you want to hold your other business for me? We can do that. All right. All right. Thank you. Yeah, absolutely. Project. I will. There will be an update. Post haste. Um, so that'll complete our agenda. So, I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Motion made by second by Charlie. All in favor? All right. We'll stand adjourned.