City Council - Regular Meeting

Well, I'll go back to those two questions. See if I can find I think I got done with after checking those two questions. Good evening everybody. I've got six o'clock. If we can go ahead and start that'd be great. I'm going to roll call. Council member Dwillis here. Council member Da here. Council member Marks present. Council member Mosley present. Council member Wen here. Vice Mayor Coats here. And Mayor Shaw here.

We have a quorum. Okay. So, we have a couple of items for discussion. The first of which is um discussion and direction regarding possible changes to the outside agency funding program, a staff proposal to rename the program, and anticipated funding for FY2027. Good evening, Miss Lennon.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. I'm Kirsten Linen, the financial services director. Tonight we're going to discuss outside agency funding and the proposal to change the program and maybe change the name. Um, one of the things that we discussed the last time we talked about outside agency funding was changing the name to maybe more closely fit what we were trying to do with the funding. Um, I have an exciting two slides for you because I have given so much information in the past about the program that I just really wanted to summarize what it was and what we want to move it towards. My first slide is just a little history which was also in the packet and that's that this started in 2016 through 2019. It was the building communities grant program. It was a $15,000 grant program. Um I did look back on some other information and saw that at that time it was uh supposed to be funded at a percentage of the undesated reserves in council's budget if there was money in the undesated reserves in council's budget. And there were many years in 2016 through 2019 where there was no funds in the undesated reserves. So the program was not always funded and was not always awarded to applicants. Then in 2020 it was decided to um consolidate some of the other funding that we had been doing outside of this program. uh the senior center, the um OldTown Center for the Arts, and a couple other programs. And we combined

all the money that we were contributing to those or organizations and started a grant program where you had to apply, your application was evaluated, and then we awarded based on a scoring criteria. Um, and then in 22 we increased it to $150,000 and we encouraged collaboration and we were looking to um emphasize giving funds to services that helped the most vulnerable in the community. And um, again, there was no council input on the scoring. And then in 25 it went to $180,000 and it was basically the same program just a higher dollar value that was awarded. And we also pulled the senior center out um and awarded them and had they had their own line item of $110,000. than last year or this year that we're currently in. Um we it was decided before the fiscal year started to change the program once again and put the senior center back into the program and increase the funding by combining the 180 and the 110 and um continuing to emphasize vulnerable populations. And we were uh were aware that we didn't have to fund or spend the entire budget. So we did not I think uh we total was uh 226,000 that we ended up allocating. So 2027 here we are discussing this again changing the program again. Um, and my suggestion to change the name is Community Impact Grant because that's really what we're trying to do is make an impact to our community by helping

these nonprofits put on programs or services that maybe they could not do with their own funding that they currently have. So, uh, also pulling the senior center back out of the program and having its own, uh, funding source, some type of service agreement that we have in place with them. We have just started the discussions um, internally about how to do that and what we're going to work on with the senior center. And I did talk to uh Miss Mayberry about what about this program and removing the senior center from this program. Um we just had a brief discussion a few days ago about the funding and what it might look like for next year and just a casual conversation. nothing in writing, nothing serious. But she and I had kind of brainstormed on some ways that we could, you know, maybe help them in other ways besides just dollars, besides just money. Um, I really think that the program, the senior center is obviously a great program and if it were to not, if we cannot fund it enough to keep it going, the city may have to take on that responsibility, right? So you kind of want to make sure that we're keeping her program growing going and assisting her in whatever way we can. So change the funding to $125,000 which if you're removing the senior center which was a large dollar value uh this last year it was $90,000 of the 280 or 226 that we awarded. um limiting the awards, making sure that people are aware it's a 0 to $25,000 grant. Um nothing above $25,000 would be

awarded. Making sure that the requests are for programs or projects instead of operational costs and having that be part of their outline in their grant proposal. Um, as I said, the station on six for the senior center will be separate and we would like to get this out at least my hope would be to get this out um in May so that we can award in June and start funding in July with the new fiscal year. All that being said, as the finance person, I had my moments while creating the budget where I thought maybe we should just skip a year because um revenues are not coming in where we anticipated and they are quite low. Um but I know that this program is very important not only to the council but to the nonprofits that apply for these grant funds. So this is my proposal to change the program. I do have the outline of what we would put out um included in the package in the packet uh that says you know here's the criteria here's the scoring here's how much money it is this is when what we would be doing um for your review and with that I will let you ask questions and discuss and whatever whatever we need to do

can you go back to the um chronological timeline you said that the budget from 2016 to 2019 was based on a percentage of the undesated reserves. Do you know what that percentage was? Um, it's in my notes that you can't see. 15% of the undesated reserve. So, what in in fiscal year 26, what what would that number look like? It would be 240,000 or somewhere thereabout. I looked when I looked it up, made sure to calculate that before I came to the meeting.

So 15,000 in 2016 was 15% of the undesated reserves. Okay. Are there questions? Um, so you know, we were spending a lot of time speaking about the uh senior center and and you had the the meeting with Ms. Mabberry, what what $110,000. What percentage of the total fundraising does the 110 Well, it was 90,000 this year, right? Right. What what percentage of their total fundraising does that represent? Do you know? I do not know.

What do we know what other fundraising the senior set center does? What what that consists of? I don't mean to put you on the spot. You're not you're responsible for having the answer, but

um I do know that they get money from um Northern Arizona Council Governments for Meals on Wheels program. Um I think, don't quote me on this, she said it's like $9 per meal and that's what they get. Um, and they do do some other fundraising, renting the facility, uh, and other nonprofits. They also have had in the past agreements with neighboring communities like Camp Verie and Clarkdale for doing Meals on Wheels in their their area. She did state that Camp Verdie is not funding anything moving forward. So I do know that she'll be losing they'll be losing that that funding at this next year.

Do we know what the undesated reserves look like for 27? Not yet. If they're going to lose funding from Camp Verie, are they still going to provide services to Camp Verie? I do not know that. I don't have an answer to that. That that would be definitely be a question for the senior center. That I'm sure she would answer. That's my biggest because I I give back into this. I'd like to put as much of this into our community as possible. But how much of this leaves our community is my biggest thing. And that is absolutely my biggest one. And she's probably the only one that can answer that. But I have always had a problem with that

because the other communities don't contribute. And I don't think Camp Very gave much. I want it was like 5,000 or a thousand something like that. It wasn't much. But anyway,

I could probably get that answer for you. Um, they are required to submit financial statements to us quarterly. Um, I just don't know the numbers off my top of my head, but I could find their most recent financial statement and send you that information. The uh county recently kicked in a bit. It wasn't a whole lot, but they they threw something into the pile which which kind of helped supplement the the communities outside of Cottonwood who are receiving those services. Um, but yeah, the the last times that we saw Elaine Brenner, her her primary concerns were the cuts from Nikk, you know, I'm not blaming Niko. I'm just saying that, you know, their funding dropped and so did the the there was a a substantial decrease then in the funding to the senior center for meals on specifically for meals on wheels. So that was one of the things that that she was very upset about was, you know, how are how are we supposed to feed these people because the cost of, you know, what NACOG supplies in terms of meal cost is there's a difference to be made up. It's it doesn't cover the entire cost of the meals.

No, it does not. Mayor, if I can add here, I do have the the overview that Miss Mabry put together on on the program. Um the Meals on Wheel program, they they deliver 33,400 meals. Um the cost per meal is $18.24. Nikk reimbures them $10 per meal. 41% of their meals go to Cottonwood residents. Um that's 5,615. Um the unincorporated area is 16% 1971 and then Camp Verie has 20.5% or almost 2500 meals. Um Cornville at 5%, Beaver Creek at 3% and Jerome at 1%.

Okay. Well, and I would say that across the board has uh decreased their funding for all sorts of social service programs. And that's, you know, it's been a a a federal at the federal level, right? It's it's the feds. It's not Nayog and Flagstaff that's doing this. Right.

Right. And I said that at the outset. I wasn't I'm not blaming them. I'm I'm just, you know, pointing out that that the loss is there. And it also implies that these meals should not just be limited to Cottonwood residents. Th this is a federal funding coming forward. And so it's really meant for uh you know a region rather than you know just specifically within the the boundaries of Cottonwood. I would echo what some of the other council members have said in terms of desiring the senior center funding to be limited to Cottonwood residents in terms of meals on wheels andor whatever other programs the city decides to contract with with the senior center to provide because there are many other programs that the senior center provides. So I think that'll have to be part of the discussion right is what other programs and is that something that you've given some thought or discussion to just we only really briefly you know met on talked about it um by chance she stopped in and I just was chatting with her about it and you know what that might look like for next year. Um, we will definitely have to set up a meeting, you know, Mario and I and others to to sit down with her and go over what we think the funding should be. So, that would be separate though from this program. So, we are keeping it out of this program and this program would be for other nonprofits. So, just so I'm clear, service agreements going forward will be for programs or projects that the city decides it it doesn't want to take on itself like the humane society or I I guess I'm kind of

struggling with when and how are are does the city decide to do a service agreement? Well, we already have a service agreement with the Humane Society and I want to say it is like a 20year Yeah. agreement where they get a funding and it they can ask for a 6% increase every year and right

it's set that way. This past year alone, we've had to to transition a lot of the payments that have occurred in the past over to service agreements because of an attorney general ruling down in the valley. Um that said, you know, any funding to nonprofits must come at the council direction and generally through an agreement that outlines what's going to the city's going to receive in return. That started with a local and then ultimately has transitioned into others. We're currently the city attorney's office drafting agreements for VV Rio, for Verie Front, for there's one other one in there that's eluding me right now, but the Oldtown Association.

Oldtown Association. Thank you. And then those agreements will have to be approved by council because that's that's kind of the the hook of all of it is even if the money's appropriated, the attorney general um did not want sta staff making staff level decisions to provide funding directly to nonprofits. So the the total pool of money may actually still be the same as what we've been discussing. It's just it's being split into service agreements versus community impact fund.

Yes. Basically, because if we're splitting out the money for the senior center, if you said we were taking 90,000 out, add it to 125, that gets you 100 215. And then there are several other agreements that we are working on that could take the remaining funds that aren't allocated to this program. Um again I'm asking you to go into the wayback machine. Um 2016 to 2019 was the senior center a line item? Yes, it was. Yes.

And so was was that part of the 15% undesated reserve? Oh, so that was a separate line item. Okay.

And that funding uh until we went to the outside agency funding program in 2020, uh the senior center was typically getting around $45 to $50,000 annually from the city. And we had an agreement that was in place that they requested every year an amount and then they provided reporting back to us on what those funds were used for. Miss Lennon, can you share with me like what do you see as the pros and cons of the approach taken in that 2016 to 2019 period where there was a percent of the undes undesated reserves um allocated to the grant program um versus what we're prop what we're talking about today which is kind of a flat nonvariable annual fund. I mean, to me, in some ways, I like the idea of a percent because if like when things are good,

they also benefit. When things are bad, we're all in the same boat and we all have to cut back. Right. Right.

Well, I mean, those would be the pros and cons, right? Like that that if you're going off of percentage of undesated reserve, if we have a higher reserve, then obviously we're going to fund more in the program. Um, the only thing that I see is that it's very subjective that undesated reserve because that's not real money, right? That's not like we have that money. It's based on projections that we make on what revenues we're going to get for the next fiscal year. So if those revenues don't come in and we've said we're going to give 15% of a revenue that is not available, we've already given it away. Being able to do and say we're just going to do a flat amount. We know exactly how much that is. And it's so it's, you know, again, six of one half dozen of another because if the revenue isn't there, we still don't have that revenue. But those numbers that are in the budget are based on projections and allocating money towards projects and other expenses. That's where you get that number. It's not a finite number that is said this is how much money we have.

Yeah. But it's still they're both they're both projected. Correct. They're both projected. Right. Which is what you do a lot in the budget. Yep. That's all the budget is. Budget planning and any kind of budget planning. Yep. So, it it really I mean either way would be fine. Um it's easier on the finance department to have a flat dollar amount and not have to calculate what that projection is before we make this program and put it out towards to people because that means that I have to have a budget done and have everything lined up to get that percentage. um saying it's a flat dollar amount, you can just throw that number in the budget and then you're moving forward from there.

And it can still be very very I mean we don't have to make any awards at the end of it all. Y

but to have a set amount is kind of a classic grant situation. It's much easier to say here's what we've got and here's what you can do here. Here's what you can apply for. you know, get the rules out there. Um, and whatever incentives you want to include and see what what you get back because we don't we don't know if if we're going to have applicants enough to apply for things that are within the parameters of of what we're proposing now because we're trying to limit the scope of what this money can do. It's not just outside agency funding that we're handing away. It's a grant proposal. And if if you know the if what you're asking for doesn't fit what what we're willing to do, then you don't get the funding. Just like last year, I mean, not everybody who asked for money got it. Um there were a lot of zeros on the list there um because the the committee chose to um allocate the funds differently appropriately. And at the b at the end of it all, we didn't spend everything that had been allocated last year anyway. So there's no great harm in in setting a a specific amount for the current year and if it needs to be adjusted, we can do it at we can do it later when it's time to make awards.

Is it in is it in the agreement andor the our program where it says if we don't have the money, you don't get it. It is Yes, it does say that in the um plan document for the for the program. U most everything we do says that if we if we don't have the the funding that we we have the right to back to not award. I like the name community impact grant. Say that. Nobody said anything. I do like that. Um it's a lot better than some of the names I came up with. Um and

thank you. Um, I I know that the committee for this, they they do a fantastic job and and and I I I don't uh I don't envy them in any way, shape, or form. But I do think that we need to look a little bit deeper into some of these applicants for this money. Um, a lot of the applicants are actually churchbacked. Some of these applicants are not. And I think we need to prioritize, feeding our community, housing our community, and helping our community. Um, there's a couple that come to mind right off the top, but the ones that are I'm sorry I I I know it sounds really of me, but if you're backed by a church or you're backed by the heart of wine country, I don't think you should be applying for this grant. Um, I I think you should go to the bottom of the list. I I I don't think we need to help with with trails. Um, I I don't think, you know, there's got to be a better way of prioritizing how this money is allocated to these nonprofits. Um, I I just I always have to sit on my hands when this comes up because of of where I I I I work and it it just this is the only time I get a chance to

speak. So, yeah, there's there's a lot that I would slash that are applying that just I don't I just in my heart of hearts, I don't think they should be because they're funded in so many different ways. But again, I do like the the name. That's why I think refining the the parameters is really helpful, you know, because we can really kind of pair down and say, you know, these are the things that we're willing to to throw support toward and we're not doing it here. You know, it's not going over here. It's it's for these things. Um, I though do not care for the name. I don't know what impact exactly means and it it it sort of bothers me and it it it doesn't really help me understand. I think it's I think it's okay to just call call this what it is. Um we've used the word agency. We could call it community agency grant or something project or program or whatever you know whatever it is that sort of simplifies and calls attention to it as being what it is impact I'm not sure I you know if I saw if I was looking for help I wouldn't know what that meant

it means no no you Please, please, please don't do that. I'm going to anyway. Um, just what I read in here, which makes sense. Uh, it's just a powerful, effective influence, which is what it is. That's that's where I read out of it.

Yeah. I I like the name, the community impact program. I like how you've um refined and revised the criteria. I think that's u sharpened it. Um, I like capping the individual awards at $25,000 per entity and limiting the total program funding to $125,000. And I'm in agreement with um moving the senior center back to a separate agreement. Um, and I think those were the main topics. So that's my two cents. I agree.

Yeah, me too. I I I really think that that it makes sense to um to bring it back uh bring some of the the funding back into focus, take the senior center out and um and yeah uh limit the the dollar amount that people can apply for and and maybe also add to that that the funding can't be more than X amount ount of their total fundraising. Okay? Like I don't want somebody getting a 25,000 grant and finding out that it's 90% of their fundraising for the year. Okay.

I I I think that that's a good criteria as well. Okay. So, we got this figured out. Can I just ask Council Member Dillis, is there anything in the criteria that you would amend based on your concerns? because the criteria were let's see um I I can read them if you read them serve Cottonwood residents nonoperational in nature have clear immediate community impact address demonstrated community needs prioritize vulnerable or underserved populations

I like that

we just like I said we just need to give it more of a priority. I I like I said, there's there's a lot that I can remember that that applied over the last, you know, two years, and I just don't see the city putting that as a priority. I I think because of the current federal administration, some of these 501 entities have lost a lot of funding and they're scrambling. They're doing what they can to to apply for for what grants are out there, but there's x amount of dollars and and there's z amount of of entities that can apply that are eligible and the federal government is saying, "Okay, well, we're just going to give it to everybody. So, here's a dollar. Here's a dollar. Here's a dollar." And that is literally what is happening. We as a as a as a community need to kind of pay attention to that and these 501s that are there need our attention and we need to to localize that attention. not not go out to all of these outlying towns and cities that are asking for our for our handout.

We need to stay here. I think we did a pretty good job though. I think we have a pretty good handle on, you know, whose whose needs are prioritized. And I think first of all the committee did a very good job of selecting out some of the the the agencies the groups that that wanted money from the city. Um they not everybody the prior year everybody got funding because the senior center had been a line item but this last year that's not how that happened. And there were a lot of applicants that did not get any money at all. they were. I understand, but I disagree with

a lot of the the the funding allocations from last year, but like I said, this is something that I cannot I cannot talk at at a regular meeting because of the applications and and it it just

one of the things that uh Council Member Dwillis just brought up is something that we discussed last year when we were discussing this is if an agency has lost their federal funding um that I'm not saying it should be a criterion but maybe just have a place on the application where they can note that that you know the funding that they've used to sustain themselves has vanished and so I think that should just be part of the application process and I think that could help a little bit and I think what m uh council member for Mark's comment about, you know, organizations that are already getting 90% of their funding from whatever institution, they they should not get as much, right? Or or be considered at all. It just depends. Well, and also note um in the past some of the the the criteria for the application was to meet the strategic plan as well. And we're kind of taking that out a little bit. It's kind of going on the back burner. It's not as much about meeting the strate the city's strategic plan as it is providing assistance to the nonprofits and the underserved. So, I mean, it's part of the program. you know, we'd like you to say that, but it's not as high a priority in your grant application. And so, that was why some of those trails and other items got funded was because they were meeting the strategic plan because that's what it said in the strategic plan. And so, we were trying to allocate the funds equally to all the programs that met the strategic plan. I think it's important also to note that I understand, you know, there's a a challenge with federal funding and grants and state funding. You we're seeing the same challenges within the municipality. So, we're it's it's we're no exception. And

I'm going to make a generalization here, but I'm doing this based on my observation of of nonprofits is, you know, you have folks who are passionate about their mission and it's awesome and I respect them for that and I don't question the importance of their mission, but they're not great at fundraising and you know they they honestly need to do better at pri you know private donations and other sort look at other sources of income rather than municipalities because we've got we're feeling the strain also um and I'm just you know putting that out there philosophically no I I agree with you but there are possibly other ways we can help them so that may be one one way whatever That means

whatever that is. Right. Exactly. And and as far as the budgets go, when you look at the budgets, you'll know what income uh they've got, where it's coming from. So if it's all from one entity or whatever. Right. That's why I think, you know, that's why I'm saying we need to cap what Yeah. So maybe we need to hire a fundraising firm and just have that firm raise funds for all of these people. Or they need to. Yeah. Well, but they can't because they don't have the money to do it. It's very expensive. Well, Well, I'm going to put my two cents in while I have a chance here. Yeah, go ahead, Joy. I I I've been waiting to hear from you.

All right. Well, I I like the name Community Impact um grant, and I find that your application packet would meet the criteria that I would want these um agencies to provide. Um and again, you know, I just felt like the last time I had said a clear specific project or program, right? That's our understanding in this, right? Yes.

Okay. Very good. And I want to ask why why has there not been a council representative on the committee? Well, uh, originally there was and then it was decided that there wouldn't be and then it has every year we have brought this program back every year to council before we put it out. And every year we ask if council would like to have someone on the committee and in the past it has been no, we're going to let the committee me members make those decisions. So, it is a possibility if someone wanted to be on the committee that would be fine. It does kind of, you know, um having it be staff or some other others on the committee makes it easier for council to be able to make a final decision not having been involved because then you really can't that council member wouldn't be able to vote because they would have been involved in the in the process. Okay.

Right. and and you know number 10 of the criteria for them to fully understand that uh that unless you know there's um unless the reserves exceed one year I think that needs to be very clear. Okay. Okay. Yeah. I will make sure to highlight that one. Thank you. Excellent job. I thank you.

Okay. Well, thank you for your direction and your feedback. Yeah, we actually need a baton. Would be more appropriate to hand the baton over. Okay. So,

oh, okay. That's what I have to do.

There we go. Okay. Council, uh, Madame Mayor, members of council, tonight I'm bringing forth the overview of council salaries as requested um, last year. Sorry it's taken me so long, but this is one of those things that fell in line with um as long as we had it done prior to the election that it was kind of no harm, no foul. Um so I appreciate your patience as we work through that. Um council salaries are governed by the Cottonwood Municipal Code and it's very simple in there that there's simply language that says council has the right to establish salaries for themselves. um adoption of a new resolution, which is how it's done here in Cottonwood, would set the new salaries effective upon the commencement of the new terms following the next general election. So, generally whenever the new council members are seated, um which would be this fall, December likely. Um that's when any new salaries would go into effect. Um and tonight, we're seeking direction from council on the preferred compensation amount and process if there's to be changes to that. Um, I won't read all of these to you, but these are the guiding statutes that exist in Arizona that guide and they in short say what I've said is council has the authority um to fix salaries for the officers, employees, the mayor and council members um and prescribe daily compensation to be paid rather than a fixed salary if that's something the council wants to do. This is a comparison study that had been done previously in 24 um but I don't find any where it was actually presented to council at the time. So I've gone through and updated it. Um the uh last DOA is not dead on arrival but date of adjustment. So that was in there and I didn't even think about it until one of the council members brought it up and I probably should have changed the title on that one. Um, but this shows where Cottonwood stands along with the other

towns in not only in northern Arizona of similar size, but the others in Yavapai County. Um, I do know that Sedona, um, while they are slightly higher than us, they currently have a committee that's formed that's taking a look at their compensation and what that might be. Um, typical council expenditure. So, one of the things that that's come up in, you know, as you research council stipens, um the origin of stipens was simply to reimburse council members for expenses that they had on uh you know, in the service of their community both on at the council level um and also at the the board of supervisors level. Um you then had some agencies going to full-time council members or members that aren't allowed to work. Um, Prescuit, for instance, um, they pay more, but they actually have their meetings on Tuesday during the day, and they tend to run from about 9:00 a.m. till sometimes 6:00 or 7:00 p.m. Um, but they do work sessions, executive session, and regular meetings all in the same day. Um, we the typical expenditures for council members, conferences and meetings. We do the league annual conference, policy committee meetings of which some of you are part of, travel to league meetings. Um in addition there would be travel to variety of meetings in and about Yavapai County and sometimes down in the valley. Um and then the city county regional meetings that are had on a regular basis. Um local civic events promoting community programs and then individual meetings with constituents are some of those typical expenditures. Options for reimbursement conferences and meetings um pursuant to our travel policy. Um and we recognize that that needs to be updated and it's it's in the queue. Um and then additional expenses eligible for reimbursement if related to

such meetings such as mileage to and from those um any meals in in accordance with the travel policy and whatnot. Um then there's also local civic events um the change um reimbursement for expenses, tickets, entry fee table at events. Um but specifically those programs have to provide support to the majority of city residents. Um that's one of those things that John and I have talked about is coming up with an actual policy. Um he thinks that would be great. Um so we can outline specifically what type of events can be um reimbursed for just because you get into some issues on on the policy side and the political sides of things. Um and then reimbursement for actual cost of meals when meeting with constituents. if council so desired. So options before you tonight is to have some discussion amongst yourself, provide some direction back to staff um to bring an ordinance or resolution in this case um to set council salaries higher and or direct staff to bring back a policy governing council expenditures or to direct staff to table further action because council compensation is appropriately as said currently. Um, so with that said, those were some of the things that we had talked about. I know I had talked with Kirsten and Amanda. I've not heard back from Amanda because some of the ideas that previously been thrown about to me with regards to this was access to um city health care. As it stands now, council members have access to the city healthcare at the same cost that the employees do if you choose to do that. Um, what council members don't have access to currently is life insurance, but Amanda is looking into what that might look like and if so, what that cost might be because there's been some inquiries about that. Um, the other type of of compensation that sometimes you will see out there is is

not necessarily through the stipend or the salary, but more um related to a fund per person. Um, I think here in the budget would be a little difficult. We could figure out a way to do it. Um, where I came from, council members were elected by district. So, for instance, in my in my last city, we had $2,500 per year per district that council members could use for events that they wanted so long as the that event was consistent with the policy that I previously talked about. Um, they could also donate some to nonprofit organizations. Um if if someone came up and said, "Hey, you know, our Cal Cal Ripken team is going to the World Series. We need $500 in travel funds." Council member could say, you know, I direct staff to to write a check for $500 out of my discretionary fund for the team to go to the World Series. Um you know, I think I I've said this numerous times, probably ad nauseium, is you folks set the policy, you folks govern the budget and uh and how it's distributed. And so with that, I think, you know, I'll open it up to have some conversation back and forth on what you folks think an appropriate limit would be and and if there's any thoughts on opening.

My thought is option three. Same with me.

Well, let me oppose. Uh it has been 27 years now. My concern would which is a lot. Uh I mean if you took uh cola for 27 years, it's astronomical. It's just out of question, out of the question. Uh I know and I'm probably saying this more for everybody else at this table because I work uh and they kill themselves going to all the meetings. They spend a ton of time. One item on the agenda I think was on the radios, the Motorola radios. Was that 173 pages or some ungodly thing? Um there's a lot of reading is my point. Um my my problem is I don't want to overstep the budget if it's going to be a negative, you know, effect on the budget. That's my biggest problem. Uh but in my opinion, we're the best community in Vie Valley, period. the staff, the executive committee, everybody is. And these guys, I say these guys work a lot.

Can I'm sorry, Brad. Can you go back to the um where you did the comparison study? Yes. I So I get it about 2005, which is only 21 years ago. I That's when the stipen first came about. I don't want When the stipen first came about, it was literally over 20 years ago. It has never been readressed since its origin. I understand. I brought this up to Scotty Douglas back in 2024. And that that's that's kind of where this started.

Well, I did all the research on this and then I had to turn it over to his executive assistant. It has never been addressed in 20 plus years. 20 plus years ago, the stipen that we're getting was astronomical. I mean, right? Think about it. To me, that I'm not to me that's just telling

I'm not trying to bring this back up to to, you know, bring it to to thousands of dollars per month per council member. I I'm just saying let let's bring it up a little bit so that it's it's a little bit more acceptable. A lot of uh the the residents that I came across when I was trying to get signatures to for for reelection, they all thought that we were compensated in the 12 to $15,000 range. And I I don't I don't want that because that'll definitely put the budget into helter skelter. All I'm asking for is a little bit across the board and that that that's it. You don't want to do it. I totally understand. But our time is worth a little bit of money and we do our our own research. We do going to events. We do talking to to residents and so on and so forth. And that's worth something. Your time is worth something. My time is worth something. And and I I understand that, you know, you may not want to do this. I'm not in this to to to make money, but a little bit of compensation in my book goes a long way. But in over 20 years, I I I think council is deservant of a

little bit. I I won't argue any of those points. I think they're valid. The problem I have is looking at constituents and saying, "Oh, here's what everybody else does and we we should I mean to that we're in line." I I mean I again I'm not a financial person, but I I I can look at constituents and be like, "No, I get paid what everybody else gets paid." Right. And if it was way lower, I would be like, "Okay, yeah, we should bring it up to standard." But right,

that that's just my thought. I don't want to look at constituents and say, "Hey, by the way, we get paid more than, you know, somebody else who has a, you know, a city of our size." I just don't think that that is appropriate.

And in the terms of the amount of work done, um, I'm sure people in Chino Valley and Camp Verie will will say that they do a tremendous amount of work. also. Um, and you know, I understand it's been 21 years, not 27. Don't age me six years. Um, I'm aged enough. Um, but to me, what that means is 21 years ago, we were way out of alignment. Um, you know, that just now our peer cities are are in alignment with us. So, You know, I think compensation is a funny thing for me. I I'll be honest with you. Um I and I'm not the only one and I know I'm not the only one who thinks this, but when I originally pulled papers, I didn't know council members got paid at all. I thought, you know, they you know, we we filed an expense report for any expenses we have. um you know that's not so you know to me this is really like it's really hazy on what you know what compensation is supposed to be for us. I don't believe I don't think the you know like like Mario said the you know it's not really based on the amount of work um that is done um because we're doing this stuff in service to our city. It's really to offset, you know, originally it was meant to offset, you know, some of the expenses we took on. Um, so that's why, you know, I see us in line with our peer cities. I you know, I I really did think it was 27 years. I thought I got it that last year, so I apologize for that, but I did. So, uh, but the probably the other thing that I

mean, and I don't know that I'm going to persuade anybody. I I'm just saying it. But I I think it maybe and you guys can talk about it. Would it help get younger people on the council? Do you think? Would it have any impact? Do you think? I don't know. Younger people are probably working other jobs, I would imagine.

I thought this was a part-time job, but it seems to me that it's a bit more than that. Um I I have things to do every day. I don't know how I would do a full I know some of you do, but I don't know how I would do a full-time job and and be the mayor at the same time. And um that means that, you know, I the the money that I receive as mayor is is not really the the thing that's, you know, floating me through the year here, but it doesn't hurt anything. And um you know, as I've thought about it, I I've tried to think about the budget very hard. I don't, you know, I don't want to impinge drastically on the budget, but I think each of these positions should be raised about $3,000 annually, which would add 21,000 to the budget. Right now, the total cost is $47,000. And so, um, you know, at that point, we're we're talking about $68,000 total for mayor and council to to have a bit of an increase um as uh as a stipen, a compensation for for the work that we do, which has, I think, perhaps increased. I'm not sure. I can't really compare it. I haven't been mayor very long, but you know, when I was t when I've talked to other mayors, as much as they did and as much as they participated in the community, it seems to me there's there's more weight on what we do now than there has been in the past and is, you know, the question that council member Dwillis is raising is, is that worth something? And I'm I'm agreeing with him that it is. I think three sales that's a 50% increase for us. That's huge. That's way out of line, I think.

Yeah. I I would have a hard time. I don't know how the rest of the staff steady staff would feel about that. I'm I I was when I brought this up to Scotty, I I I literally

I was only thinking like maybe $100 a month. That's that's a heck of a lot more reasonable, I think. But that there's there's one thing that's that's not on there that that was in my research and that's Paradise Valley. Paradise Valley is a very rich community. Their city council doesn't get a dime. They get a free meal. That's it. They get fed for the council meeting. Well, I I want something a little more than that, but I I think $100 was my original idea for the stipen increase and that's it. I I I can't I can't see I'm sorry, mayor, but I I just I there's no way in the world I could see that much of an increase. I I think that's

if it's a $100, the city can go ahead and keep it. I'm okay with that. I don't need $100. It's It would only be an honorarium at that point. And I I don't require that of the city. It It's not necessary. Well, I I I I understand Councilman Dow's uh number three saying. I I I understand that and I get that. This was just an idea. You don't want it, don't take it. No, I I think it I think it was important for us to look at it, right? And I think that it's important for us to review this, but when they put the study in front of me now, I'm like,

uh, okay, I'm done. No, that was just my thought. I I understand or I I do. And and yeah, I was when I did the research, I was really kind of blown away by it. Um, yeah, this isn't a full-time job and it's not a part-time job, but there's no threequarter time job out there. But like I said, a little bit of compensation in my book goes a long way. I It may know in Paradise Valley, I bet you that's one hell of a meal.

I can confirm it's pretty good. Again, I get about I get about, you know, the amount of work that's being done and the impact, but that's what we, you know, signed up to do. I um and again our our peer cities I would I guarant I can't guarantee you but I I would bet you that they would say that they they have an equal amount of passion about their city and I'm just I'm just it's not a competition.

It it I'm I'm not taking anything away Bob. Well, I'm just like you. When I signed up for this, I don't know if Kirsten remembers, but when I walked into her office to fill out all the paperwork after I got elected and she said, "Yeah, this is your you're where you want your stipen to go to." I looked at her like right

a deer in the headlights. I was like, "What are you talking about?" I never knew. And I I've lived here for many many many too many years. I didn't know. And a lot of the residents of this community think we're making like, you know, Prescat Valley Mayor money. And when I tell them we're nowhere near that, they're actually kind of of astounded.

And I'm not asking for that kind of money. I'm just saying, you know, a little bit can go a long ways. Well, I'm sure I'm not the only one saying this, but I do volunteer work and I do more work for my volunteer work, you know, because it it it is truly required. Um, I don't have a choice in it. Um, and you know, I I don't know how I don't know how to weigh, you know, I don't know what goes into weighing how much of a this is a stipen. It's not a salary. So I don't know how you you weigh the amount of work into a stipend. Does that make sense?

I do know that in other m when you look at municipalities across the state, you know, some of them do handle council jobs more like positions more like jobs. So I was looking online and Flagstaff council members get about $63,000 Yeah, it's shocking. I don't I don't vote for

um on the other hand, you got Paradise Valley and and to me it's not surprising because it's a community full of rich people and so that's why I think we don't want to go to that model. You know, I think there should be some small remuneration for the time that we spend and you know, we prepare for meetings, we attend meetings, we do a lot of public outreach. Um, there's a lot that we do. And so I mean I did the math in terms of the average number of hours I spend a month and and based on you know the compensation that council members are are allocated it comes out to about minimum wage the Arizona min minimum wage per hour which I think is a fair compensation. Now if if the desire is to increase by $100 that's a pretty small amount. It won't break our piggy bank. I'm I would be fine with that.

One thing that I have learned in the past 3 years is that the city council is literally it's it's more aimed at a retired individual,

not not a younger person. I myself, Councilwoman Wen, we work full-time jobs and yet we still do everything that we can to go to every meeting, every grand opening, every whatever just so the city can see that as council members we care about them. that that it's it's it's not Yeah, it's a volunteer. You don't have to pull a packet. You don't have to do this. But if you do do it, a little bit of compensation is nice. I I agree. But the problem is is coming from the working thing too and trying to squeeze off hours to get in here, right? I I think to myself the same as all of you do is I don't know how I do it with 40 hours plus this. But there's no other way to get people on council who don't work unless you rate or who work unless you raise that to be like Flagstaff level. You know, 100 bucks isn't going to entice anybody to do it. So I think where there's just too big of a gap to get people, you know, oh, I'm going to quit my job and become a council member. It just,

you know, there's no easy way to do it. There just isn't. There is time.

So, you either work a full-time job and do this or you you're retired. And I I'm kind of digging the retired part right now, but life's become a little bit easier. Well, I have no particular direction from this how to proceed. I um the the disparity in in the discussion seems to to lead to um the possible tableabling of of the topic unless we want to pursue this so that we can get something done um prior to the election.

Joy, what are your thoughts if you don't mind? Right. Well, I mean I'm um I'm content with Okay. I'm I'm content, but um you know I'm understanding you know I'm listening. I'm also wondering what the city employees are going to think you know when they have have fam many of them have families to raise and the same kind of bills that we have to pay um if we get a major increase and maybe yes but

we also give them a raise. Kristen, how often? City employees, do they get a raise every year or every two years? Because this hasn't been done in 20 plus years. Typically every year, but it is based on whether there is funding available to to you appropriate towards those raises. Okay. Is is that included in cola the cola or do they always get cola?

Uh no, we don't always get a cola. Sometimes we get a cola. Sometimes there is a merit or wage increase um upon a performance evaluation. It just depends on um actually I'm gonna say this. It depends upon the city manager, current city manager because it has changed 10 times in the time that I've been here city manager.

No, in the 25 years I've been here, it every city manager has a different, you know, has a different idea of how that should be handled. And so it has either been a cola and a wage increase or just a cola or just a wage increase. Um but there has typically been some sort of increase every year in the 25 years that I have worked for the city. This is probably not a fair question. I'm going to ask both of you guys. What are your thoughts? I mean is that a fair question? Are you guys okay with that? You don't ever ask the finance person because I think it's fine just fine where it is. Yeah, I know that. But I mean Yeah. I think we need guidance somehow. I don't know.

Yeah. I mean, I think I I've heard 100 a month. I think that's what what Mr. Doul is saying was 1,200 a year. Mayor, I think you said 3,000 a year. Yes. Um I haven't heard anything in between. I I guess those that's the low and the high. I think um

you know, I I've heard from in my notes I've heard from at least three that it's fine where it's at. Um, so I guess those are your parameters right there. I I don't know if if someone hasn't kind of weighed in on what they think to try to sway others. Well, again, I I think we're okay with who we are, but I would be amendable to something smaller. I mean, if that's where the if that's where we needed to be, something smaller be smaller than smaller than what? Well, I again to Council Member Dwillis's point, $100 a month isn't going to break the bank. Not smaller than 100, just smaller in general, right? Okay. Like $100 a month isn't going to break the bank, right?

Right. That's $1,200 more a year. Um just so we're not I just don't want to be gluttonous. I guess that's the what I'm trying to say is I don't want to be gluttonous. I will throw this out also. Some of the I will throw this out also. Some of this is symbolic. We are looking at a 2% decrease in revenue next year. And to me, you know, there's there's some symbolism there. And on why I I you know, my preference is to keep it where it's at.

But I think we have four three right now. Four people want it raised. Three don't. So, if there's a middle ground, I would stick with the middle ground of being on the lower end of it because I think that that's where the direction. Okay, I'll go 100. I'll go 100. If that's not going to break the bank, assuming it's not going to break the bank, I'm okay with that.

Okay. So, what we can do then is bring it back for consideration at a level of 1,200 a year. Is that correct? and um we'll we'll see where we go from there. We're not voting on it this evening, so that's not an issue. We're simply um uh arriving at a number that we can look at at a regular meeting and we'll leave it up to you to schedule that, Mr. Quentes. I will do that.

Thank you very much. I'll make a motion for adjournment. All righty. I'll second. All in favor? I I Okay.