City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Good evening. This is the Coeur d'Alene City Council meeting, and I seem to have lost my agenda. Thank you. It is July 7th, 2026, and it's a beautiful day in Coeur d'Alene, but we would like to call this meeting to order. Clerk will take the roll.

English.

Here.

Sheckler.

Here.

Wood. Evans. Here. Miller. Here. Gabriel.

Here. Very good. We will do our invocation from David Gortner, St. Luke's Episcopal Church. Will everyone please rise?

Before we pray, thank you all for the work you do and for the commitments of your hearts for the good of this place for which we're stewards and for the people who live and work and learn and visit here. Tonight, following this great weekend celebration of 250 years of our independence as a nation, and looking toward this high energy season here in Coeur d'Alene, let's open our minds and hearts to God. These are prayers which we prayed for our nation on Sunday, and I invite you to pray these prayers for this city council and for all our leaders and citizens. Help us, O gracious God, to finish the good work here begun. Strengthen our efforts to blot out ignorance and prejudice and to abolish poverty and crime and hasten the day when all our people with many voices in one united chorus will glorify your holy name. O judge of the nations, we remember before you with grateful hearts the people of our country who in the day of decision ventured much for the liberties we now enjoy. Grant that we may not rest until all the people of this land share the benefits of true freedom and gladly accept its disciplines. We ask this in your name. Lord God Almighty, the founders of this country won liberty for themselves and for us and lit the torch of freedom for nations then unborn. Grant that we and all the people of this land from so many different languages and peoples and nations may have grace to maintain our liberties and our care for one another in righteousness and peace. With all in this room and all gathered online and from all our diverse faiths, I pray these things through Jesus Christ, who with the Father and the Holy Spirit lives and reigns one God forever and ever. Amen.

Thank you, David. Kiki, could you lead us in the pledge?

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

Thank you. Item D, are there any amendments to the agenda? Moving on, we have a presentation on item E. This is our fiscal year 2024-25 audit. And I know Terry is here. There you are. So Terry Hackwith, managing member of Alpine Summit CPA, will be doing our presentation. Tony, I'm sorry. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. I am going to go over the results of your audit. And then I have a few financial highlights to go over and then some graphs, historical graphs, to go over in my presentation. Go ahead and stop me at any time if you have questions. And if I can't answer them tonight, I will get back with you. And OK. We'll see how I do with this. OK. As the mayor indicated, this was your financial statement audit for your year end September 30, 2025. you have an audit done because state statutes require it. And the primary purpose that they require it is so that they can assure that your financial statements are materially correct and that they're in accordance with GAAP, Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, and governmental GAAP. As a result of our audit procedures, we issue three separate reports. One is the independent auditor's report and this is over whether or not your financial statements are materially correct at that time period and during that time period. We've issued an unmodified opinion which is the best opinion you can have. Kind of sounds contradictory, but it basically means throughout procedures that we feel that your financial statements are materially correct. As a governmental entity, we also have to do some work over your internal controls and compliance with laws and regulations for financial reporting. This report that we issued, we did have one item, that we found where a correction needed to be made for the prior year. And your finance director has put in place some additional procedures to minimize that this would happen in future years. And then the last report is the report on your federal funds that you've spent during the year. And again, that we didn't have any findings in internal controls or compliance related to your federal funds. You don't have that report each year. It depends on if you spend more than a million dollars in federal funds.

Okay.

We'll go through a few financial highlights of your general fund. The general fund is the chief operating fund of the city. At the end of September 2025, the fund balance was 17.6 million. And of that amount, unassigned fund balance was 13.8, which represents about 26% of your general revenues. The unassigned fund balance is for discretionary purposes and to have in case of emergencies and things of that nature. Your operating revenues in the general fund decreased by 968,000 overall. Part of that was property taxes actually increased 1.5 million and then your intergovernmental revenues decreased by 2.4 million and those were federal funds that you don't receive those every year so you had them in 2024 and not 2020. Your general fund operating expenses increased by a net of 1.37 million or 2%. Majority of that increase was in public safety, which increased $2.5 million in expenses. Your general fund and culture and rec both had increases of $285,000 and $100,000 respectively. And then public works and capital outlay decreased by $275,000 and $790,000 respectively. This chart shows you your revenues and expenditures in the general fund over the last five years. As you can see, this year you had 54 million in revenues and 60 million in expenses. The expenses are going to fluctuate due to capital projects that you have and other anticipated or even anticipated expenses. So very important in the general fund to have a healthy fund balance for years that you need to do additional improvements and things of that sort.

And I just wanted to stop on this slide, if I could, Toni, which is I believe 2023 was when they passed that House Bill 389. So you can see the effect that it's had on our budget. Thank you. Yes.

And this graph shows your fund balance in the separate classifications. The unassigned fund balance is represented there, and that was most of your fund balance. The assigned, the red part, are assignments by council for certain specific items or projects. The green represents restricted fund balance, and this is from outside sources, so state grants, federal grants, things that you receive. And then the blue are actually committed funds where the council has specifically committed the funds for specific purposes. And those items, I'm not gonna go through this whole financial package and bore you to death, but items that show you what those amounts are are in the footnotes. Okay, so fund balance, I keep saying it's important and there are a lot of reasons. One, for the government entities in Idaho, you receive your property taxes in two lump sums. You receive some over the months, but too big. lump sums after everybody pays their June and December taxes. And then your state revenues that you receive, you get quarterly. So in between those revenue streams, you have to have money to pay your expenses that are consistent month to month. Again, if you have unexpected emergencies, that's what a healthy fund balance is good for. Certain state and federal funding, they require you to have a certain amount in your fund balance. It can protect you from unnecessary borrowing, and when you do borrow, like you did this last year for the fire department, you can get a lower credit rating. Okay. So the Government Finance Officers Association recommends that a government have no less than 60 days in either 60 days in your fund balance of general operating expenses or general revenue expenses. For your operating revenues, at the end of this year, you had 90 days in your unassigned fund balance. You can see the past several years as well. So again, 60 days is the minimum that the GFOA recommends. And as far as operating expenses, you had 84 days of operating expenses in your unassigned fund balance. Okay, so two of your main proprietary funds, your water fund and your wastewater fund. These are called proprietary funds and they should be self-sustaining, like an operating business. Your water fund had operating revenue increase by 1.2 million this last year and much of that is due to usage and also there were rate increases. The expenses decreased by $150,000, so you actually had net income or operations from the Water Fund of $1.2 million this last year. And the Wastewater Fund revenue increased by $1.2 million as well, and again, for rate increases in the usage. And the expenses only increased by 10,000, so you had 5.3 million of net income. Last year was 4.1. It's very important to have the rate increases because the fees have to cover all the operating costs and if you need infrastructure built in either of those systems. So very important to manage that and to increase when you need to. And these are the water fund operating revenues and expenses over the last five years. Again, water had 9.16 in operating revenue and $7,927,000 in expenses. Wastewater had $16 million in revenue and $11 million in expenses. And you can see the historical of that graph. And at this time, I would entertain any questions.

Does Council have any questions for Tony? I know that we just got this, like on Monday, the hard copies, so maybe not everyone's had time to review it. Does anyone have any questions? Okay, I did go over a couple of things with you, and there's some things I'll touch on with Katie later, but I think it looked good.

Okay.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

and and we get a round of applause for the audit always a first oh thank you so much so now we move on to item G which is public comments so we'll start off with Christine Zara Dawa Oh, Zarandawa. Can you say that again, please? Zarandawa. Zarandawa. Very good. Thank you, Christine.

You're welcome. First, I'd like to wish everyone a happy 250th Independence Day, especially to all the red-blooded American patriots here in Coeur d'Alene and throughout Idaho. I came to the last meeting to speak out against the new unpatriotic firework ordinance that you all wanted to pass and will possibly amend this evening. Today, I would like to share some American history with the community in hopes to invite the affiliation and cooperation of the men of all parties, however differing from us in other respects, in support of the principles herein declared, and believing that the spirit of our institutions, as well as the constitution of our country, guarantees liberty of conscience and equality of rights among citizens. We oppose all legislation impairing their security, as outlined in the original Republican Party platform. I also urge every citizen to pick up some history books and read about everything I'm saying for themselves. The Constitution needs to be re-read. There is a reason we are not taught American history very well in our public indoctrination camps known as schools. In 1854, the first proto-Republican party meeting took place in Ripon, Wisconsin. On July 6, 1854, after an appeal to independent Democrats, thousands of patriots gathered under oak trees on the outskirts of Jackson, Michigan, with one core idea, to stop the spread of slavery. Around 10,000 Americans who were fed up with the two existing parties showed up, requiring the meeting to be held outdoors. It turned out to be an unstoppable movement because on June 17, 1856, the Republican Party was formed. Their resolutions were focused on the defense and preservation of our God-given and constitutional rights. Today, we forget that we don't ask permission from the government, and instead, they should be protecting our liberties like they swore to do in their oaths. They work for us. Unfortunately, it seems the party has long been infiltrated by snakes who seek to erode our freedoms little by little, this council included. I was shocked to see you all pass the hate speech law last year in clear violation of our First Amendment right. The SPLC was indicted in April by the feds for staging racist incidents. The commies in both parties used these paid optics as propaganda to achieve their agendas. And I believe they did that here as well. I was disgusted to see Mayor Gookin screaming at local citizens about them being white supremacists. His behavior is appalling and mirrors the Democrats in Congress back in the 1850s. Who are you to decide what speeches hate? I also have to wonder about Governor Little, who was caught on video refusing to deport illegal immigrants because the agriculture industry in Idaho requires them to work on their farms. These people will do everything they can to keep their slaves. I have to wonder who has paid these people and had them installed into these positions, as they are clearly not Republicans. America has been infiltrated from within and sold out by politicians for decades.

Please continue.

OK. Once again, America finds itself fed up with the two-party swamp or deep state. Both the Democrat and Republican parties are on their dying breaths. We the people will prevail and build something better on their ashes. The people will no longer allow our God-given and constitutional rights to be trampled. You are the people our forefathers warned us about, and you need to be voted out. Our ancestors came from all around the world and birthed a new breed of people called Americans. It's time for us to remember we do not descend from fearful men. We owe it to all the brave men and women who came before us to protect our constitutional republic. I know I'm not alone when I say this is in my blood and that I carry a torch in my heart that will never be put out. God put us here on this earth for such a time as this. So I'm here to call upon all patriotic American citizens to stand up and use your voices in order to preserve our great nation and this unbelievably beautiful city and state. My goal is to inspire and spread courage. Now is the time to get involved and be vigilant for the wolves in sheep clothing who lurk among us now more than ever. In the immortal words of Charlie Kirk, this is our turning point. Thank you.

Thank you, Christine. Next up, we have Lee Wayman.

Hello. My name's Lee Wayman. I live at 801 East St. Mary's. And I've participated with the Urban Forester for a while, just so that I could understand what was happening. And am I an expert? Nope. Never will be. But I have a tree on, well, next to our property. It's on the public right of way. And it's leaning toward a chimney. It's an old brick chimney because it's an old house. And if that tree fails and hits that chimney, all these bricks are going to fall down. And right at the base of that chimney is the main gas line.

and the odds of it causing damage to it, which... Could I ask you to speak directly into the microphone looking at us?

Okay, I'm sorry. I don't do this much. Sure. But if the tree falls, well, when the tree falls and it hits that chimney, It's an old brick chimney. All of the bricks will fall down. And at the base of where the chimney is is my main gas valve for the whole house. And if that gets damaged, then the potential for fire is very high, which may destroy the house completely. And I've been trying to get permission to remove that tree and actually I was told by the urban forester that he did not wish to give me permission to remove that tree because it would set a bad precedent. And I just was baffled by that, but there was nothing I could do about it. But that was his opinion. He said to me that whatever, well, if I was allowed to get rid of that tree, take that tree down, remove it, then everybody could and would. And that I didn't understand his reasoning, but this tree that I'm trying to get permission to remove is leaning right toward that chimney, and it's very apparent if you just go there and look. And... Keep going.

Please keep going.

I'm done, huh?

No, you can continue.

Okay. I brought the... a copy of the basic tree assessment form. And it says right on there that there is a load defect and it's significant. But it also checks the box that says likelihood of failure improbable. Well, I don't know how you can predict the weather because that's going to be what causes the failure. We have another windstorm like we had, what was it, in 2021? then that tree may go. And I brought some pictures since the majority of you haven't been by there and haven't seen it. If you would like, I can pass them around and you can take a peek. And I don't know, that's about all I've got to say.

Lee, you went to the Urban Forestry Commission, right? Where they heard your appeal. You showed up to the committee and asked them to make a ruling on the tree. Was that what you read to us? That they said that the tree was not going to fall over?

They said, yeah. They took a core sample and said that the tree was healthy. And when they said that, I said, well, can you predict the weather? Because that's going to decide it.

Did they tell you that you could appeal the decision to the city council?

The way they explained it to me, it was a very, very... It was something that I've never done. You can tell I'm not a public speaker. And this was going to be, yeah, this would be something that I'm not going to probably be able to successfully do.

Do you want to try?

I can try.

Okay.

I would need some coaching on it because I don't know.

Unfortunately, we can't coach you if we're going to make the decision. Yeah, but Would you be willing to meet with a staff and discuss the process for applying for an appeal if that's what you would like? Is it you are not the only one who's appealed a decision from the urban forestry Commission I remember at least two of them and one of them was a situation where there was a tree that was leaning and The City Council voted to have the tree removed So I it would be worth a shot. I think I

Okay, well, I appreciate your advice.

Okay, well, I think I still have your email, so we'll try to set something up to see what we can do about that. Okay. Hopefully we haven't run out of time, but we'll see.

Yeah.

Okay.

Can I comment? Please go ahead. Just to say that, you know, you said you didn't think you could come up and present and do that, but actually you already did. I mean, you made a good first... This was a great dress rehearsal, and people... You know, we're not looking for smooth, slick presentation stuff. I mean, you know, I feel a lot like I am, you know, just kind of an ordinary Joe with that kind of a thing, and I think, again, you know, you describe what you did, and, you know, at that point, if there were some pictures or something, and, you know, and then that's what we take a look at and make a decision, and we don't always... You know, most of the time, you know, we support, you know, recommendations from our different groups, but not always. And that's why, you know, we're up here and get the heat and whatever. So, but anyway, I would encourage you, yeah, to just take your best shot.

Well, okay. And I appreciate your advice and I will give it my best shot. I don't know what else to do.

Great. Thank you, Lee. Next up, we have Max.

What's up, Randy? How's it going, Council? Christy Wood was here last time and stated that I filed a public records request. I never heard back. It's been four weeks. You said it was a massive public records request, yet it wasn't. We filed a public records request on the pay of good Randy Adams here that stated that you guys believe that you have sovereign immunity when it comes to my building, even though you've passed it several times. You also stated... Hold on, let's go right here. What was said here? This is...

The city has... My goal, I hope is your goal, to see what we can do.

So then you guys approved my building and then given me a hard time this entire time. And when I filed public records request on a neighboring property that is violating the codes, Todd of the streets and engineering department that wasn't included within the actual process of the building permit says he has no teeth. Do you guys want me to play that for you? I'm happy to. He says he has no teeth. The council can't do anything. The city can't do anything. Randy will sit here and tell you that you guys have sovereign immunity. So honestly, I'm tired of it. I've done my part. I've tried to file public records requests. I contacted you, Dan, but unfortunately I couldn't get you because apparently you were getting on council or whatever. I've gone through a lot, and I'm over it. So I'm going to sue you guys. Have a nice day.

I think, Max, you might have left something there.

Did I? What did I leave?

Is that yours, that other thing there?

Yeah. Yeah, absolutely.

So I'll see you in court. Thank you, Max.

Why don't you take me to court? Please, take me to court. But you guys don't have any teeth. It's a joke. This entire process is a joke. Lies. Deceit. Nothing has worked. I've done everything I can. A public records request. And not only that, when I filed that public records request, you know what's funny, is I'm the one who provided them the numbers of how much they were charging as an estimate. So when Rhonda sat here last time and said, we calculate that by statute, I don't believe Rhonda's a lawyer. And certainly, counsel's had problems with your lawyer. You guys have had problems with this guy. You guys asked him to resign. Why didn't you guys ask him? He's the profound lawyer. How come you guys didn't ask him for his advice? You asked Rhonda, or whatever the hell her name is, her opinion on the statute. It's a joke. It's embarrassing. 120 bucks an hour? It's a joke.

Thank you, Max. Is there anyone else who would like to make public comment? Very good. We'll move on to item G, which is council announcements. Does city council have anything? Yes, Amy.

I have a couple of announcements from the Arts Commission. First, we have applications due on July 10th for the Art Spotlight Coeur d'Alene Visual Arts Grant Program. The Coeur d'Alene Arts Commission is reminding artists, nonprofit organizations, schools, and community groups that the application deadline for the Art Spotlight CDA Visual Arts Grant Program is July 10th. And you can find the application on the city's website, cdaid.org. And one more, also from the Arts Commission. We are now accepting nominations for the 30th Annual Coeur d'Alene Arts Awards, recognizing individuals, organizations, and businesses that have made a significant contribution to the arts and cultural life of the community. So community members are encouraged to nominate artists, educators, volunteers, patrons, organizations, or businesses whose work has enriched the arts in Coeur d'Alene. Nominations must be received by August 28, and award recipients will be recognized at the 30th Annual Coeur d'Alene Arts Awards celebration in October. You can download a nomination form at our website, cdaid.org, or you can contact us at 208-769-2300 to request a form.

Thank you. Down there, anyone? Anyone?

Okay.

I have a few things to go over. It's been three weeks since our last meeting and quite a bit has happened. On Friday, June 26, the City held an STR short-term rental workshop. It was really well attended. As you know, effective the first of this month, the City can no longer regulate or I forget what all the legal terms are, short-term rentals, even though it's been a very popular or unpopular issue, controversial, we should say, in the city for about 10 years now. But I think staff, Hillary and Renata, have done a great job getting people to maybe go into a voluntary system where you can get an acknowledgment from the city that you are a city inspected or whatever... We cannot say regulated or any of those words, but if you want to volunteer to be a part of our program, which is what we were doing before, then you can go ahead and do that. And I think that's wonderful. Thank you for keeping that up, Renata. I appreciate it. We had a downtown noise workshop on Monday, June 29th. It was very well attended. The takeaway from that was that it always comes down to enforcement. And there's really not a lot we can do unless we get someone to get a ticket. The good news is Chief Yeager said that he would be willing to dedicate a few people, maybe an hour a day or so, to go after and target some of these loud noises that happen downtown, specifically the people who do it deliberately. We heard about a group of kids, I guess, or young people who like to drive their cars around. They come over from Spokane, and they like revving their engines just because. We also can work on some signage, which will really help. There was a lot of criticism on social media regarding this. And I know that we love to make fun of all the rich people who live downtown, but this is more than just about disturbing someone's peace and quiet where they live. We are a tourist economy and downtown has character and charm. And we cannot let that be destroyed. We need to do whatever we can to help preserve it. And I think we're going to take great steps to do it. If there is anything that needs to come to council, it will come to council. But I thought it was a good first step. We will be having a follow-up meeting, a review of that later on in the fall. I also had the privilege of speaking at the dedication of the new time capsule at the county courthouse. Kiki was there. And I wanted to thank our city historical commission as well as the county historical commission for putting that on. It was a great event. It was really fun. It was really patriotic and well attended. About 250 people, I would guess, were there for the new dedication, for the new time capsule, which will be buried somewhere. They're not going to say where because people would dig it up. I also wanted to thank the Chamber for the 4th of July parade and to Dan English and to Amy for being in the parade. That was really fun to see you guys. And then I'd also like to thank the Hagedorn Corporation for the fireworks show, including that one big firework. I hope everyone saw that. That was really spectacular, quite impressive. And I need to acknowledge a couple of employees. First, I'm going to acknowledge Ron. Because this is Ron's last meeting, Ron Jacobson, former mayor of Post Falls, who shows that we're in a habit here of taking mayors from Post Falls and making them city administrators in Coeur d'Alene. We did it with Mr. Hammond. We've done it with Ron. We'll probably do it with Randy Westland in the future. But anyway, I wanted to thank you so much for your leadership and your advice and just being a great guy and being there for us for the past few months. And would you like to say a few things?

You bet.

Thank you, Mayor.

Not quite four and a half years ago, I retired from my real job. And I love retirement. And so when I got a call, I lost my election last November. And so January was the first time in 27 years that I didn't have to spend the first and third Tuesdays at city council meetings. And that lasted for about a month. Then I received a call and asked if I would consider filling in as the interim city administrator in Coeur d'Alene. I wasn't looking for a job, really didn't want a job, didn't need a job. And all I can say is I'm glad I took it. It's been an honor. It's been a pleasure. I appreciate the opportunity to work with all of you. I wasn't immediately welcomed by everyone. And I think hopefully what I have done and what I've contributed has been positive. The five months I've been here have not been without kerfuffles. Not all of my recommendations have been appreciated by it all, but I want everyone to know that those recommendations were made with the best interests of the city in mind. I've visited with the mayor. One of the reasons I came was I transitioned from council to mayor, and I had some experience and was hoping to... share that with Mayor. And we've talked about some of the things I see that Coeur d'Alene could use. We've talked fleet manager, a facility master plan, a capital replacement master plan. It's easy to say it's more difficult to do when budgets are tight, which they are right now. But it's been an absolute honor. The staff of the city of Coeur d'Alene is wonderful. And I was spoiled for 27 years as an elected official in Pulse Falls. We had wonderful staff in all areas. And Coeur d'Alene's staff is second to none. It's been a joy and a pleasure to work with them. And I'll embarrass her. But you've got a gem in Joanne. I told her the other day that I thought she should be in the circus because I've never seen anybody juggle so much at one time. And Joanne does that. So she's a true gem. And the city of Coeur d'Alene is lucky to not only have her, but to have the rest of the city employees as well. So I thank you for the opportunity.

And thank you again, Ron. And you still have three more days. So, okay. And Ron and I did go today to see the swearing in of Chief Yeager up at the police department. That was nice. There was cake. I would also like to mention that this week we have retirement of longtime fire department chief, now our deputy chief, Bill DeRider. He's been with us 25 years, 20 years. Long time. Long time employee. And he's going to be finally... finally retiring, but I think he's still going to be teaching. So he's got some more to give to the community ahead of him. And that's the end of my comments. Now we'll move on to item H, which is the consent calendar.

Mr. Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve the consent calendar as presented. Second.

Motion and a second. Any discussion on the consent calendar? Roll call, please.

Nish.

Yes.

Evans. Yes. Miller. Aye. Gabriel.

Yes.

Sheckler.

Yes. Okay, the motion is carried. I'm going to move on to other business. Item I, 1. The city administrator is going to request for council to confirm the appointment of Adam Rouse to the position of Parks and Recreation Director. Ron?

Thank you, Your Honor. When I joined the city five months ago, we knew Bill Greenwood would be retiring, and Adam Rouse had been chosen as the interim Park and Recreation Director. Shortly after Bill's retirement, immediately after Bill's retirement, I met with Adam. I've worked with them off and on for the last three months. I can think of three different instances in which Adam was put in a position that could have been a bit contentious or uncomfortable. In all three times, I said, I'm happy to step in, and I'm happy to be the one to have the conversation, or I'm happy to be the one to carry it forward from here. And he, without fail, said, no, that's his job. He would do it. And he did it in a professional, courteous way. And it was a real easy decision for me to bring forth the recommendation and ask for council confirmation of Adam Rouse as Coeur d'Alene's Park and Recreation Director.

Thank you, Ron. I agree 100%. Are there any comments?

No. Mr. Mayor, I would make a motion to approve the City Administrator's appointment of Adam Rouse to the position of Parks and Recreation Director.

Second. Motion to second. Any discussion?

I would just mention that I had some good conversations with Adam as short time ago as about two hours. And I like the way this guy thinks, and I think he's going to be level-headed, study that ship, and make the park staff and the rest of the city proud. So thank you, Adam.

Any other discussion? Very good. Roll call, please.

Evans? Yes. Miller? Aye. Gabriel?

Yes.

Sheckler? Yes. English?

Yes. Motion carries. Congratulations, Adam. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Oh, yeah, a round of applause if you want. Great. Moving on to item I2, which is resolution number 2654, approval of an amendment to the classification and compensation plan to provide for two new FLSA-exempt classifications in the wastewater department, assistant project manager pay grade 14 and assistant field project manager pay grade 14, staff report by Melissa Tosi, our HR director.

Thank you. Good evening, mayor and council. I have a pretty straightforward amendment to our classification and compensation plan. The two specific positions in our wastewater department, and we are looking to add an assistant office project manager and an assistant field project manager. So currently the position that we are talking about reallocating people to is our utility project manager. We have filled this position for many years in this way. We had a retirement at the beginning of the year in January, so it has been sitting vacant since the January retirement. Our wastewater director proposed creating two new positions to split the duties of the utility project manager. So we created new positions, had those positions leveled at a pay grade 14, the current utility project manager you can see is out of 15 and we are looking at reallocating two of our current wastewater employees. The assistant office project manager would move up from our current admin assistant and then the assistant field project manager would move up from our current field inspector. So our personnel rules allows us to reallocate employees. So if we have existing employees and we have new positions and duties, we have the ability to reallocate them into a new classification. In this case, both of these new positions are at a higher salary range. The personnel rules just speaks to a reallocation. The employee would receive at least a 5% increase, which would create a new anniversary date for future increases. So just the positions are pretty straightforward. The office project manager is doing more of the admin contract. reporting responsibilities. The field project manager is doing the field work, so more of the technical inspection and field coordination. They both have significant responsibilities, which is why they were leveled at the same pay grade. So just for clarity, the positions that are involved in this, on the slides that were, I have the title wrong on those. I just want to clarify the positions that are included in this. So the utility project manager is the current vacant position. And then the bottom two positions are our current field inspector and admin position. And then we're proposing the two new, that's a typo, but it's an office manager and a field manager. So moving forward, if these are approved, that utility project position would go away. The field inspector and the admin assistant position would no longer be filled. Those two employees would be reallocated into the project manager. So just pretty simply, we are going from three positions to two, so there is some overall savings. Looking at next fiscal year, once we move those positions up, still a little over $100,000 in savings with no longer filling that capital position. And just looking for approval of the assistant office project manager and the field project manager into our current class comp plan. I'm happy to stand for any questions.

Thank you, Melissa. Any questions on this topic? Okay. Very good. Without any questions, we can look for council action.

I'd like to make a motion to approve resolution number 26-054, approving an amendment to the classification compensation plan to provide for two new FLSA-exempt classifications in the wastewater department, assistant office project manager, pay grade 14, and assistant field project manager, pay grade 14. Second.

Second.

Motion to second. Any discussion on this motion? Very well. Roll call.

Evans. Yes. Miller. Aye. Gabriel.

Yes.

Sheckler.

Yes.

English.

Yes. Motion carries on to item 3, I3, resolution number 26055, authorization of a levy, a special assessment in the amount of $29,600 against property located at 361 West Mill Avenue, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. Staff report by Keith Clemens, building inspector. Keith.

Hello, everyone, Mayor, Council. Thank you for seeing me. I was last here on June 2nd seeking funds to remove this house. That went very well. We did not have problems with that. The demo was more extensive than what we kind of anticipated. The house was very full of many, many items. But we're able to get that all down. This is a picture of how it is now. We did not take the garage. Our abatement code would not allow us to do that. There was nothing wrong with the garage. But since taking it down, we just have had no transient activity. It's really cleaned up the neighborhood. The neighbors who used to always catch me on the street and ask me, why aren't we doing something? They're now clapping and waving when I go by. Pretty cool. So we're asking for a levy of $29,600. In hindsight, I should have done this on the second and lumped this all together. But we want to make sure we get our money back. Cannon Hill charged us $29,500, which was a very, very good price. And then there's a $100 abatement fee to try to recoup some of our money that we spent on that. So I'm asking that we can impose this levy on this property so we can get our money back when the taxes are paid or it's sold.

Very good. Any questions for Keith? Yes, Kiki.

Keith, just looking at this picture, this looks like it's kind of created a safety issue with this giant pit there. Is that something that the city would be responsible for if we don't do something to remediate that? And should that be included in any fees?

So they offered us to fill that in at an additional cost. Instead, we had them slope in the sides. So it looks a little bit steep on the one edge, but everything is kind of sloped in. It's soft dirt. There's nothing protruding or rebar or rocks. We just had them slope it in.

So it's not a cliff?

No, it is not. There's a little bit of a buttress there, it looks like. But no, it's very gentle. And the soil's all this soft sand, the black sand.

OK. Any other questions? Keith, the person who was occupying the garage, were they relocated?

So yes, that lady was relocated. I saw her two weeks ago, and she's in an apartment and doing well. Excellent. We got her taken care of.

Good to hear.

So yeah.

Thank you. Look for council action.

Hello, Mr. Mayor. I'd be happy to ask Council to approve Resolution No. 26-055, authorizing the levy of a special assessment in the amount of $29,600 against property located at 361 West Mill Avenue, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho.

Second. Motion to second. Any discussion on the motion? Roll call, please.

Miller. Aye. Gabriel.

Yes.

Sheckler.

Yes.

English.

Yes.

Evans. Yes.

Motion is carried. Thank you so much, Keith. Thank you. We're going to move on to resolution number 26056, which is adaptation of a budget administration policy and revisions to procurement policies. Lots of pieces to move here. Katie Fresh back from vacation.

Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, Council. I have brought three policies forward tonight and they are related but also in some ways one policy is new and so I want to make sure I go over the big pieces of that. The first policy that is new is our budget administration reallocation and amendment policy. and this is intended to provide guidance to our departments after the annual budget is adopted on how any sort of changes within their department budget should be handled. The highlights of this policy are, is that it gives the flexibility to directors to move funds within their non-personnel costs, so for example, If there is a piece of equipment that comes up that the department really needs and they can put off a different cost, they have that flexibility to reallocate those funds. The other part of this policy is it does not allow automatic reallocation of personnel cost savings within a department. And a number of reasons. This is a pretty common practice for organizations to keep the different types of funds separate where reallocation doesn't necessarily happen. And I think it's important for the city to really formalize this practice of not reallocating personnel costs, mainly due to the deficit for the city and also because personnel costs are the largest part of our budget. beyond the fact that there are two different types of expenditure activity that shouldn't necessarily be moved within other budget categories. So those are the new pieces to that budget administration policy. The next policy that I have coming forward is the supplies and personal services policy. Just a couple of changes to that policy to help it align with the budget administration policy. Earlier that policy had a paragraph relating to budget reallocation and so now it just points to this new policy. The last policy I have coming forward is the public works construction procurement policy. Back when the supplies and Oops, I'm gonna just get it. Personal property and services policy was rewritten in February. There were still some questions as to some confusing things, not within code, but more of how we deal with public works as a state, public works construction. So those questions have been answered and this change does that rewrite much like we did with the personal property and services policy. So very broad overview. Are there any questions?

Any questions for Katie? Yes, Kenny.

So I think this is a great thing, but I wonder, Mr. Mayor, if it takes away a little bit of the ability for department heads to manage their budgets. And I'm going to prove it. I'm just kind of thinking out loud. I know I was probably guilty a couple of times with savings. I looked at that as a wonderful way to save the budget for next year. But I appreciate how you broke it up into two different categories. But that's my thing is are we taking away a little bit of our department head's ability to manage their budgets? Yes.

So this came up because it seemed like there was an inconsistency in the city regarding those savings. And I know that a lot of department heads would say, well, I saved this much money. And a lot of it's from personnel savings, vacancies, things like that. But the thing is, especially in our current budget situation, we rely upon those savings to offset what we dip into fund balance. and my observation was that it was often inconsistent it was reported to me by one department head specifically that sometimes they would ask the administrator can i go ahead and do this and they would get a yes and sometimes they would ask and they get a no so i thought why don't we just make it consistent and have the governing body make the ultimate decision. So it's not really, it's taking away the unilateral authority, but it's still allowing the request to be made. It's just that now we have a process in place where if there is savings and you want to spend, a department head would want to spend the money, say from personnel into equipment or something, the request would come to council as opposed to being like well it's a good year go ahead or well it's a bad year you can't so i think this provides some consistency and reliability for the department heads it's not really a slam the door in your face type thing and it also is something where you can't really say well you know the city administrator or the finance director or the mayor is being a bad guy and telling me no it's you guys get to be the bad guy

So I hope you understand that. Well, I do. I completely understand, and I appreciate that you may ask. Yes, absolutely. And I know how much you really like and want consistency.

Well, and transparency, too. So, I mean, case in point, it was already brought to us. That policy wasn't in place, but we bought those new police cars last time, basically following this policy. And normally it would have been the process that – The police chief could just ask the city administrator, can I buy these cars? And it could be a yes or no. But it comes to us. So we can do that. And with the knowledge of understanding that a lot of this stuff from personnel, that's budget savings right there, right off the top. So we've got to be really careful. And as we are the ones who ultimately approve the budget, that is our big responsibility. I hope you understand. Did I do a good job explaining that, Katie?

Yeah, I think one thing I hope to hear from Council Member Sheckler, the goal is to help our department directors recognize the change in how we can deal with reallocation of savings when we're in a budget deficit. So the city, this is a new situation for the city, relatively new, and I think it's important that If we're going to council and asking to reallocate something that is savings within a department, we do need to be transparent about the fact that when we talk about savings, it doesn't mean the budget is okay, the deficit is gone. It's important to know that the department didn't spend all of their money, but they are reallocating some of that and the budget deficit still exists.

Dan, did you want to?

Yeah, I just had a question. So if it's being for non-personnel budget flexibility, if say we've budgeted so much for supplies in a given department and they spend less money on supplies, they might increase spending then on equipment or training and travel or some other category to compensate or reallocate it. What would be the purpose from, if they can do that without coming back to council, what would be the purpose for us to budget an amount for supplies and an amount for all of those other things, rather than just say the streets budget is X dollars, the parks department is X dollars. Why would we even get into the granularness of it?

That's a great question. I think the important part of it is we always start out with an itemized detail of what we're budgeting. And then once we have our best made plans and then we have to operate, we may need to move some items around there. So doing an overall bottom line budget is fair. I think that the way that we present our annual budget is helpful not only for department directors but also me in finance and then transparency to the public Supplies and services is a relatively small part of the city's budget, so typically organizations will view that as, okay, we understand that directors need flexibility, so let's look to this portion of your budget that is lower overall, isn't going to have as great of an impact if we don't achieve large savings much like personnel services if we can do some some good things with our personnel services we can potentially save up to a million dollars so that's why it makes me nervous to have the flexibility in that category that is such a large part of the budget does that answer the question?

I think so, yes.

Thank you.

In the example I was using was from the county. And in the county they have three silos. Well, Dan would know this. They have three silos for their budget. They have a personnel budget, they have a supplies budget, and a capital budget. And generally they do that to keep these things from crossing over and mixing. I don't know, maybe you want to say something since you ran the county budget for so long.

Yeah, and of course the whole budget stuff, it depends on... There are different kind of presentations of budget and financial information that make more sense depending on what you're doing, so sometimes the big overview is good. From my experience from a whole lot of this stuff is we don't have a ton of expense categories, but the ones that are there, I think, are there over time because we really, it does make sense. And frankly, even though, yeah, we don't spend a whole lot, you know, some of them on supplies or something, but at the same time, it's like, yeah, but then we can also predict, well, this is a, for this size of department, this is a normal, reasonable kind of supply budget or something if somebody was way over. I mean, it's just, it's something for kind of a little, yellow flag to take a deeper look. Again, a budget is a tool, and as we've said, it's a point in time. You know, you shoot for things, but there's also, I have no problem. As you know, if it's like, oh, well, we need to go over that one or something, with a process, we do that. But again, it's a balance. And I also really want to support giving our department heads, enabling them to do what we hire them to do. And so, yeah.

Thank you, Dan. Any other comments or questions for Katie? We'll look for council action then.

Mr. Mayor, I'll keep rolling here. I'll make a motion to approve Resolution 26-056, approving the budget amendment policy and revisions to procurement policies.

Second. Motion to second. Any discussion on these new policies? Roll call, please.

Gabriel?

Yes.

Sheckler?

Yes.

English?

Yes.

Evans? Yes. Miller? Aye.

MOTION HAS CARRIED. WE'RE OFF TO RESOLUTION NUMBER 26057, WHICH IS APPROVAL OF THE SECOND YEAR FUNDING FOR THE ARTS SPOTLIGHT CDA PERFORMING ARTS GRANT RECIPIENTS. WE HAVE OUR BRAND NEW, IT SAYS INTERIM HERE, BUT I GUESS THEY PRINTED THAT UP BEFORE. SO WE'LL JUST SAY OUR PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR, ADAM.

Thank you. Well, if you don't mind, I'd just take a quick second and say thank you. I appreciate the confirmation. It's been 21 years in the making, and I'll strive to continue to learn until I walk out the door. Yeah, we've been doing some good things so far and some good culture shifts, and I wanted to thank Ron. I appreciate the vote of confidence and all the advice and leadership you've offered even in just a short time, so I appreciate that. But yeah, as we're here for the Arts Commission stuff, so this is very similar to the art spotlight for visual art that we brought forward last month, I think it was. This is just seeking approval for the second year of the grant program for the performing arts. So already dedicated, Arts Commission funds in the amount of $15,000, so $5,000 apiece to Lake City Playhouse, Coeur d'Alene Summer Theater, and the Music Conservatory. They've all met the original requirements that we set forth in the original contract that was approved. So this is just a very basic approval of the second year of that original grant that we brought forward.

Okay, any questions for Adam? So you guys are tough tonight. That's a tough one, isn't it?

Mr. Mayor, I make a motion to approve resolution number 26-057, the approval of the option for a second year of Art Spotlight CDA Performing Arts Program grants to the Lake City Playhouse, the Coeur d'Alene Summer Theater, and the Music Conservatory of Coeur d'Alene in the amount of $5,000 each for a total of $15,000 using dedicated art funds and authorizing contracts for each recipient. Second. Second.

Motion and a second. Any discussion? Roll call.

Sheckler?

Yes.

English?

Yes.

Evans? Yes. Miller?

Aye.

Gabriel?

Yes. Motion is carried. Thank you so much. Parks and Rec Director Adam. We're moving on to item I6, which is discussion regarding potential amendments to our municipal code, section 812.020, which is regarding enforcement of chapter 812 fireworks, as you heard earlier during public comment. This is a new code that we adopted, and as we were attempting to adopt it last time, there were lots of questions about some language in the code. Sausage was tried to be made, but it was not made, and now we have a chance to Thanks to Dan for bringing this forward. To make any changes that you might want to see in the code, these would be a discussion in any direction you give to Randy, as he would be the one who would craft the new code, unless you just really want to hammer it out up here. So discuss. Discuss. You have a copy of the code in your packets.

Mr. Mayor, if I can start. Please, Dan. Councilmember Gabriel commented that there were discharge mortars on his property following the 4th of July. Certainly, when fireworks other than non-common fireworks, whether used or unused, are found within the public right of way or on a person's property, it shall be evidence that the owner of the abutting private property or any person in possession of that property knowingly allowed the possession or use of said illegal fireworks. And here, poor council member Kenny Gabriel is almost victimized by some unknown hooligans who shot off fireworks and then the resulting mortars land on his property.

Did you get a ticket? I did not get a ticket.

The question is, if that violates this ordinance, then if someone were to allege that Council Member English had this mortar shell on his property, would he be getting favoritism from the police if they just declined to prosecute it? Or would he be getting favoritism from the prosecutor if they declined to prosecute it? And my concern is that I think we should draft this ordinance so that we distinguish the guilty from the innocent. and that we direct staff to perhaps consider language that's more specific so that there's a knowing element, or a knowing intent, that it's not just that it shall be evidence. And that may be simply changing it to a may, as Chief Hagar said. It may be changing the language so that it's, The circumstances such as finding the illegal fireworks on your property or them being discharged in the adjoining right of way shall be considered evidence or may be considered evidence of that attempt together with all of the other surrounding circumstances. But I think quite clearly, Mr. Gabriel had no intent to allow this, and certainly I wouldn't knowingly allow another person to do that. So I think we might need to be cautious of how this was broadly worded and maybe rein this in so that we protect people's rights to due process.

Any other thoughts? How would... I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor.

Please. And that would be, is it as simple as a brush of may from shall? Or how do you... You're much better at this than I.

You know, I would defer to the city staff. And maybe, you know, I think the word was shall to may was one that Chief Hagar suggested, I think, at our last council meeting. And the deputy city attorney, Mr. Hunter, said that to change that one word would violate the open meeting law. And so we needed to come back here. We couldn't just amend it. So we followed legal advice and came back here to make that amendment. And so perhaps it might just be as simple as maybe evidence that the owner of the providing abutting private property in any tenant in possession of said property not only allowed the possession or use of said fireworks, together with all of the other surrounding circumstances, just to prove that that knowing, that the person knowingly intended to allow another to possess or use any illegal firework.

Do you mind if I ask Randy what his thoughts are about this? Randy, what are your thoughts about this?

Well, the way the ordinance is currently written, it says that it shall be evidence, does not say it shall be conclusive evidence, does not say that it's the only evidence. My concern about changing the word to may, gives a lot of discretion, the discretion you were concerned about with the prosecutor or the police showing favoritism to a council member or somebody else because it's only a May. And it gives them essentially unbridled discretion as to whether to consider that evidence or not. Simply saying that it shall be evidence is simply that it is now a piece of evidence, one piece. And my other concern about the knowingly issue is everybody whose property has debris on it will say, I didn't know. It will be almost impossible to prove that an owner knowingly did that. We're back in the same position we were in before this ordinance was passed, and we basically would not be able to enforce it. But of course, that is up to council whether they want to have this tool in their belt.

To follow up on one of Mr. Sheckler's questions, how would this affect due process?

There are a great number of statutes in the state of Idaho that create a prima facie state that certain things are prima facie evidence of intent, of knowing. Some of the statutes that we just came across in just a few minutes, theft by a lessee, there's a prima facie evidence if they are in possession, that they knowingly were in possession. Stealing electric current has the same type of thing. Drawing a check without sufficient funds. So there are a lot of statutes that create a prima facie case against somebody just by the fact that they are in possession or have that in their control.

Does that answer your concern?

So if there's a prima facie case against Council Member Gabriel, if he finds or other people find mortar shells on his property, why wouldn't he be prosecuted if there's a prima facie case against him?

Well, the current ordinance doesn't use the term prima facie, which is, I think, a stronger statement other than the one that's in there now that says it shall be evidence of that. But certainly it... As in any citation that a police officer may issue, they will talk to the suspect and get their story. And if Mr. Gabriel says, no, it was my neighbors. I didn't do this. I have witnesses, my wife, my grandkids, will say that we only put off the non-aerial fireworks. The police officer is going to have discretion not to issue the ticket. If a ticket is issued, the prosecutor will have discretion to look at all the evidence and decide whether to proceed with charges.

Any other discussion, Dan?

I think that this is a work in progress, but I think Randy has given good... you know, rationale and everything of the language that's in there. And, you know, we've got, you know, we'll have some time the next, I guess, my, you know, we've got a year for the next major I mean, fireworks and six months till the next minor one on New Year's Eve, although I'm always asleep by then anyway. But yeah, I think it's, I mean, I would still support, I think the language that's in there, it was thought about, drafted. We can always amend down the road, but I'm comfortable where it is for now.

So what direction, if any, would council like to give on this ordinance, since it is an action item and you have the opportunity to give directions? Kiki.

So, Randy, what I'm hearing you say is that the word knowingly may not need to be there and it may not be helpful, but the word shall should stay there and it's helpful?

That's my opinion, yes. Okay.

So I'm... I'm good with directing those changes to be made. The other thing that I'd like to do, though, is I was hoping we don't have much time, but we have the ability to go back to law enforcement and find out what happened during the course of this new ordinance being in here before we finalize anything that moves forward and see if it really is being an effective tool for them.

Okay. Would you like to hear from... Captain Walter, he is here.

Well, I feel like that's putting him on the spot to give an off-the-cuff staff report without real data. So, I mean, if you have stuff you could share, I'd love to hear it.

Yeah.

Captain Walter, thanks for being here.

Absolutely. Good evening. What exactly would you like to know? I did bring some stats.

If you did bring stats, I mean, were there calls that were... Actual citations issued that wouldn't have been without this ordinance in place during this last holiday No Okay, well that was a very good staff report.

Thank you for being so Every year we deploy Unmark plainclothes officers to try to enforce fireworks. We do recognize it as a problem the aerial the dangers of the aerial the fires and The new ordinance has some of the same limitations in enforcement that the old ordinance did in regards to the evidentiary piece where a lot of times we show up and there's a firework in the middle of the road. It's not really adjacent to any property. And we need the corroborating evidence to be able to charge somebody. So this year, and we were a little late to the party. Usually we deploy that team a little bit earlier than the ordinance was put in place. So we didn't have a lot of time to use it. We were operating on the old ordinance, but there were no citations written this year under that new ordinance.

And is there an intent that you would, between now and the next fireworks holiday event, have some recommendations come forward? Should there need to be language changed in the ordinance?

Absolutely. We would love that. We would love the opportunity to share that. And I would imagine that during the next firework event, we would have more time to put that in place, educate our people, and learn how to use that ordinance as a better tool.

And so the next firework event is New Year's?

We do get some on New Year's, but nothing like the 4th of July and the week leading up to and after the 4th.

So you might be able to use, not putting words in your mouth, but you might be able to use New Year's for just kind of like a little beta test and then really put some teeth into what should happen before next 4th of July.

Potentially. And in the coming weeks we have some debriefs about the events, which I would imagine will yield some input as well.

Okay.

Mr. Mayor, can we... I don't want to say table this, but can we ask for input from legal and law enforcement to come back with their thoughts on what this could look like in the next three months?

That would be direction, yes.

Are you comfortable with that, sir?

Yeah, I'd second that. if you're making a motion. Let's make an official motion then.

That would be an official motion that we direct staff, specific law enforcement and legal, to sit down and draft an ordinance that we can review within the next four months.

Second. Motion and a second. Any discussion on this motion? Yes, Kiki.

Do you believe that would give your department enough time to do a debrief on this year's 4th of July and put forward some substantial recommendations for that ordinance change?

When was the next council meeting?

Within the next four months.

Oh, the next four months? Yes, I believe we would have absolutely enough time.

All right, great.

We're good? Okay, roll call.

Sheckler?

Yes.

English? Yes. Evans? Yes. Miller? Aye. Gabriel?

Yes. Motion carries. Moving on to item 7, I-7, which is council bill number 26-1013. Proving amendments to the city's wastewater code 1320 as required by IDEQ, the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality.

Quality, that's them.

That's it. Audit. This is for Mike Anderson, our wastewater director.

Thank you for having me. Thank you for spending your time with me tonight. It's just a few items to clean up our sewer use ordinance for the wastewater. The city does have a sewer use ordinance which is used to regulate some of the sewer discharges, especially as it relates to industrial discharges that discharge something different than basically everybody else. And during an audit by the Department of Environmental Quality in 2024, there were a couple items that arose, this being one of them, and this was listed as an area of concern. And I would just like to go through them real quick so you're comfortable with what it is that I'm asking you to do. At least for me, it's on the back side of the staff report. You should have a copy of section 13.20.2.1, the one that's all red and crossed out. That's the one we're going to delete. That is, we found duplicative. A lot of that is covered and more. in section 13.20.4.6, the one on the bottom. So we deleted the duplicative language and added a little bit in there that says if one of these industrial dischargers have a spill or a slug discharge that they must test it within five days and get those test reports that shows they're in compliance and get those test reports back to us within 30 days. And the other big item that we're changing is in section 13.20.3.7 . You guys know that one, of course. We changed it from requirement for immediate notification, because that means something different, to requiring to notify us within 24 hours if there's any sort of noncompliance. So this is different than a spill or something, but specific noncompliance. That's it.

Very good. Thank you, Mike. Any questions for Mike? No, no question. Too easy. We'll look for council action. This is a council bill, so it's an ordinance update.

Mr. Mayor, I would make a motion to dispense with the rules and read council bill number 26-1013 once by title only. Second.

Motion and a second. Any discussion on suspending the rule? Roll call, please.

Evans? Yes. Sheckler?

Yes.

Miller? Aye. Gabriel? Yes. English?

Yes. Motion carries. Clerk will read the title.

Council Bill 26-10-13, an ordinance amending the Municipal Code of the City of Coeur d'Alene, Kootenai County, Idaho, amending Sections 13-22-11, 13-23-7, and 13-24-6, regarding uniform wastewater requirements, repealing all ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith, providing a severability clause, providing for the publication of a summary of this ordinance, and an effective date hereof.

Very good.

Mr. Mayor, I move to adopt Council Bill 26-1013.

Second.

Motion and a second. Any discussion on this motion? Roll call, please.

Evans? Yes. Sheckler?

Yes.

Miller? Aye. Gabriel? Yes. English?

Yes. Motion carries. Now we're on to Item J, Executive Session.

Mr. Mayor, I'll make a motion to enter into Executive Session pursuant to Idaho Code 74-206A1A, to deliberate on a labor contract offer.

Second.

Motion and a second. Any discussion on this motion? I'll call, please.

Evans? Yes. Shackler? Yes. Miller? Aye. Gabriel?

Yes.

English?

Yes. Motion carries. We're in executive session. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

There's no one else who loves me like you used to Sometimes when that eye says, there's no one I can turn to There's no one

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.