Finance & Services Committee - Regular Meeting

Welcome back to this biweekly meeting of the Budget and Policy Committee of Denver City Council. Join us for the discussion as the Budget and Policy Committee starts now.

A beautiful spring day. We have a great presentation ahead of us. But before we get started, let's get with introductions. And I don't see any virtual participation. Is there okay. Perfect. Alright. Let me start on my right.

Chris Hines, Denver's perfect day.

Devin Flynn, Southwest Denver District 2.

Stacy Gilmore, District 3.

Amanda Sawyer, District 5.

Chantelle Lewis, District 8.

We are

parity one of your council members at large.

Jamie Torres, West Denver District 3.

Diana Romero Campbell, Southeast Denver District 4.

Laura Lidres, Lucky District 7.

Alright. For the three council members, take it away.

Alright. Councilmember Gilmore, you wanna start?

Well, thank Excited to be here back in budget and policy. It's been awesome working with Councilwoman Sawyer and Lewis on this charter change and the discussions around more transparency and accountability within the budget. So let's see here.

Can we pull up the presentation, producer?

Thank you.

Right on.

Does it move

it? There you go.

We've got the agenda in front of us. Won't belabor this. We'll have council members Sawyer and Lewis go through many of these topics, and we're happy to answer any questions that you might have. I feel like we have exhausted pretty much all the different scenarios on how we can get this to you and hopefully get it referred this summer so that it can go to the ballot so the voters can vote on it. And so looking at the city and county of Denver, the way that the city structure is set up, we're talking about the general fund dollars, which if you've been following along media wise or city wise, the woes of the Denver's general fund has been wide widely covered and talked about.

The uses of the general fund is what most people think of as Denver's budget. It's the largest city financial fund funded by sales tax revenue, and there's flexibility in what it can be spent for and how it can be spent. But just to remind folks, it was approximately 1,500,000,000.0 in 2024 and close to that this year as well. And staff salaries, benefits, city programs, and general operations. And then I am going to turn this over to Councilwoman Sawyer because she did a cut and paste project on this one that I would hate to not do it justice, justice, but we'll dig into it a little bit.

I'll start it out. The required fiscal policies, excuse me, is that it's a calendar year budget. It must be balanced, and it must include short and long term planning. Capital improvements, we're all very aware right now city agencies should be talking to each one of your council offices around the six year capital improvement plan for the city. That's both Department of Transportation and Infrastructure and Denver Parks and Rec.

A quick reminder, the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure is responsible for building everything in the city. If it's a parks project, it is still managed by the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure. And so I think that's important to note. Contingency must be at least 2% of the general fund, and an unassigned fund balance of 15% is required. And then, of course, we have the state required taper emergency reserve. And councilwoman Sawyer, do you want to chime in any on this? Or you'll mention it as you go through your call.

I'll mention it. Yep.

Very good. Very good. And so, you know, the constitution and charter, the required reserves, we have contingency of the 2%. Again, you can see the contingency uses and then the unassigned fund balance uses as well. And as council members, I would hope that we're all very, very well well aware of this.

But I think for the public, it's important for them to really understand what these different uses are allowed for and how as myself personally as a third term council person, I really think that this will make city council stronger in elevating the voices of the constituents and the people that we represent. And so that's one of the main reasons that I'm involved in this. And so I'm gonna go ahead and turn it over to take us through the rest of the parts of it. Thanks.

Yeah. So when it just when it comes to contingency uses and an assigned fund balance uses, I just want to kind of give you guys a reference point and the public a reference point. So there are three sort of quote unquote savings accounts that we are required to have by charter. The first one is that contingency fund. So in my seven years here, I think the lowest it's ever been is about $32,000,000. It's 2% of the covered expenditures. And then the unassigned fund balance has a goal of 15%. You can see the unassigned fund balance by going back to the schedule 100, and you can look at it. It's in bold about two thirds of the way down. It says ending budget unassigned fund balance.

So there's a dollar amount, and then below it, there is a percentage amount. And that percentage should be at approximately 15%. That's our goal, and 15% is where our fiscal rules start to kick in. And then the third one is our state required TABOR emergency reserve, is 3% of all covered funds that that is required by the state constitution. It must always be there.

So contingency uses, I like to explain contingency uses. All council members at this point have been through this a couple of times, so you kind of know what we mean. But, it's things like snowplows. So we don't know how much is gonna snow in a year. It could be like this year, the worst snow year on record, and we could have budgeted, like, you know, like, $10,000,000 for snow removal and not spent a dime of it because it hasn't snowed.

So instead of doing it that way, the way it works is that we take that money out of contingency. So as a general rule, the Department of Finance doesn't like to move any supplementals until closer to the end of the year when agency budgets are almost fully expended, but they track those dollars all the way, bless you, all the way through the course of the year. So so something like snow removal would be a supplemental that would come out of the contingency fund and into the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Fund, closer towards the end of the year. But that's why we keep those contingency dollars in there for things like, unappropriated retirement payouts. You don't know when somebody is gonna retire or when somebody's gonna leave and you and they have accumulated a full bank of vacation days that we then have to pay them out for, things like that that you just, like, cannot budget for.

So we keep this contingency pile of money to the side for those different kinds of things that you can't budget for. And then unassigned fund balance, that 15% is the goal threshold. Our fiscal rules were redone and relooked at about twelve years ago, fifteen years ago, and they so so the fiscal rules have been updated fifteen years feels like a long time ago, but it's actually relatively recently in city speak. So for funds above 15%, those are unappropriated dollars because, we, you know, we're budgeting for it to hit 15% at the end. If there are funds above that 15%, those are unappropriated dollars and the charter actually says those dollars then come back to city council to be reappropriated or to be appropriated in the first place, not reappropriated.

Sorry. Funds between 1015% get a little bit hairier. So funds that are between when the when the fund balance is between 1015%, that is where our fiscal rules kick in and there have to be mitigating circumstances that manage what that looks like. So that would be things like what we experienced what we're currently experiencing, things like hiring freezes, things like furlough days, those different kinds of things that preserve the dollars where because we know our goal is to get back up to 15 percent. So that's kind of between 1015%.

Below 10% is a real problem. That is when layoffs kick in. That is what we saw last year. And this is the the kind of concern that council president Sandoval and I brought forward when we, you know, got a call from the Department of Finance that said, unfortunately, it looks like we're gonna have to do layoffs in 2025. And that was the first time any of us had heard about there being a challenge or concern.

So this is why council president Sandoval and I moved forward the ordinance, thank you all for your support, that just passed that will just be quarterly financial reporting for city council so that we can see and track those trends a little bit better across time so that we're not hit with a surprise. But our when we had to do layoffs, that trigger is that we're our fund balance was below 10% at that time. So current budget timeline, you all live this. You're about to see on a slide coming up an incredibly busy slide that has our proposed changes in it. So we've split that slide in the appendix out into two different slides, year one and year two, in case it's a little bit easier to look at.

But just wanted to kind of make sure that, you know, we level set by kind of showing what the the budget timeline looks like right now. So you've all lived it. I don't need to explain it to you, but for the public wanted to make sure that we it in there. And there are benefits and challenges to having an annual budget as opposed to our proposal, which would be an optional two year moving to an optional two year budget. So the biggest benefit when it comes to having an annual budget is flexibility.

Right? It is it is easier to to track, outcomes, potential economic changes, all of those different kinds of things in a one year looking one year out than it is looking two years out. So things like that really are a bit that kind of flexibility that that adds is a real benefit. It's so we can quickly respond to economic changes and those different kinds of things and add some flexibility. There are some challenges to it, and these are the kind of the problems that we're trying to address here.

So, you know, especially people like our nonprofit community partners, they hire and staff based on the contracts that they have with the city and County Of Denver. And we know that in budget shortages, contracts get reduced. So we have city partners who have made plans, who have built their nonprofit organization in partnership with the city based on, an expectation of a set dollar amount that did not come. And so that means reduced staffing for them and all of those different kinds of things. So being able to work with our city partners to say, barring some sort of incredibly dramatic change in our economic outlook, we are you know, this will be your budget this year and this will be your anticipated budget next year, which allows our community partners to just sort of staff and plan a little bit better and a little bit more strategically than they're able to right now.

I will also point out, and as as we've all lived, capital improvement projects take more than one year. I don't think I've ever seen a project in the city of Denver that construction that took less than a year to get done. So being able to budget, you know, a little bit longer and sort of over two years because capital stacks sometimes include operational dollars, they sometimes include budget, bond dollars, they sometimes include capital dollars. There's a there's kind of a lot that goes into creating a capital stack, grant dollars from all different levels of governments and organizations. They're complicated, but they never exist for one for solely one year.

And then, you know, I think our biggest concern and sort of why we started having this conversation in the first place is about the community engagement piece as it comes to developing the budget. The only opportunity that our residents truly have to have a conversation about the creation of the budget and their tax dollars comes when we, at city council, open up a hearing for people to say something about it. And that hearing comes very late in the process, if you look at the timeline, one week before the budget is approved. So there's you know, of course, we try and do as much community outreach as possible and there's always opportunity for people to come to city council at public comment and comment on different things that they're concerned about in our community. But at the end of the day, when it comes to the budget, there is not a ton of public engagement.

I know a few council members got together last year and really did some targeted outreach and engagement, and I have heard nothing but positive feedback from the community on being included in that conversation. So props to you guys who set that up. The other sort of challenge we're trying to solve for is our time. Right? If we could get three weeks more, and split up that time a little differently so we could have more than, like, five days to look at a thousand page budget document before our budget hearings, If we could do our budget hearings over two weeks, half days instead of full days so that our brains were not mushed by the end of it.

Maybe that's just me. No judgment if it's not you. I'll just use I statements if my brain was

not mush by the end

of it. And and then the amendment process where we are trying our hardest to put forward in good faith amendments to the budget to execute on the things we have heard from our residents are important to them. But sometimes we put them together really badly because we don't have the time to have those conversations and we don't have the time for our attorneys to draft all of them up that we want. And it's just the time crunch really sort of is a is a dramatic piece here. And and that gets to the last point, staff time for ROI analysis and process improvement.

On the Department of Finance's end, they close the books at the March, and they start the next year's budget at the April. So there is no time for reflection, there's no time for analysis, there's no time for kind of any of those things to determine if the programs that we are using here in the city of Denver to help support our residents and execute on running a city are successful or not. And that is, I think, a real challenge because what we've run across is that many of them have ended up not being, and we didn't know it until it turned into a mess as opposed to kind of doing that analysis earlier in the process so that we can determine what our return on investment is for these programs and we can determine whether it is something that is valuable and whether we're getting our bang for our buck for that. So those are the proposed changes that I just talked through, and council member Lewis is gonna go through each one point by point. And then you're gonna see the big old timeline slide at the end, and I I apologize for that.

Thank you. So to talk about those proposed changes, after we gathered some feedback as council members from city agencies as well as as well as from community, this is what we came up with, to move to an optional biennial biennial budget cycle to require a public process to get residential fee residents feedback during development of the budget to simplify to simplify the budget process timeline and provide counsel a bit more time, as consolor and so already just meant mentioned, more time to analyze the proposed budget budget prior to hearings and then to define what a balanced budget.

Wait, no, you're ahead one. Go back.

I can't multitask.

Here, you want me to do Just see you next slide, and I got that for you.

Okay. Am I ahead? You're good. Okay. Thank you. Ms. You're on biennial budget cycle. Ms. You're so real for that.

Thank you.

Ms. Okay. So for the first proposal, we would like to move to the biennial budget cycle, and this would be a two year cycle as opposed to the single one year timeline graphic that you were just showed earlier. So there would be a main year, which the budget would be passed, and an off year where the agencies and council would analyze how to propose budget how the proposed budget appears to be meeting the needs and passing of smaller adjustments to the main budget if that were necessary. The biennial budget cycle would be modified under this proposal in times of uncertainty, as we talked about what we went through last year, to a shorter time frame to allow for better flexibility as needed.

The benefits for this one are pretty simple. It gives us more time to plan for longer term projects as well as longer term agency priorities used for the development of larger projects. Additionally the additionally, the added time will give us time during the off year to better understand how our programs are spending allocated funding and evaluating how budgets look for agencies over an extended period of time instead of the compressed snapshot that we see now. Next slide, please. So I pushed the button to turn

this on.

I got you. Thank you. Okay. Feedback. Just making sure.

So the next proposal is to require a public process to get residential This would create a requirement for the development of a two year strategic plan informed by the community input as the basis for developing that budget. This would be a substantial upgrade to the way that community input is collected now, as you spoke about earlier, which is largely limited to the efforts of individual offices to gather feedback in in the charter, requires public hearings the week before it comes to council for amendments. So it's not a lot of time for communities to engage. This would also empower communities to give direct feedback on budget priorities through surveys and community outreach. And, of course, speaking for myself, this is the most important aspect of this proposal change because this will better ensure that community budget priorities are truly grounded in the needs of our communities.

Next slide, please. Thank you. The next proposal is just to simplify the budget the process timeline before, which means two things here. First, remove the July 1 date, which requires a preliminary budget estimate. Move the September 15 date a few weeks earlier to allow council more time to review budget to review before our budget hearings.

And as you can see, the Department of Finance has offered some times and dates, and we want to hear from you all as council members because you live through this, what you think might work as well. The benefits are pretty much self explanatory. It gives the Department of Finance and the agencies more time to actually better be able to plan the budget in July, and it gives us more time as council members to review the budget as well. Next slide, please. Thank you.

Finally, this proposal would add a definition of a balanced budget. Currently, the charter requires that we have one, but it doesn't define what that means. And here's what we are proposing in terms of a balanced budget to define what a balanced budget is. Excuse me. In the event that unexpected revenues will be less than total appropriations from the prior year's long bill, the mayor shall propose and city council shall reduce appropriations by ordinance to balance the budget.

This will require city council approval for approval, excuse me, for expenditures out of the unassigned fund balance below that 10% threshold that that was mentioned earlier when economic changes occur. And then we're also interested in hearing your feedback on the right threshold for this proposal to the balanced budget to balance the Department of Finance's need for flexibility and for council's need for information. This the benefits of this include, it ensures projected expenditures cannot outpace projected revenue, and you don't have to do an art project. It increases transparency in the budget process, and it maintains strong contingency and reserve fund balances. Next slide, please. Okay. This is a very busy slide.

I'll warn you. This is my very busy classes.

It's a very busy site. But this is what it looks like in practice, and so there's a lot of information on here, and I'm not going to read all of it here. But I wanted you all to note that year one represents the main year where the budget is developed with community engagement and pass, representing the strategic plan for the next two years. And then year two reflects the evaluation of the first year's budget and the need for adjustments in line with the strategic plan. And next slide, please.

So we've held two are we okay. It's too much. So we've held two community town hall event town hall events for this proposal, one in November 2025, and then one not last month. What's the last month?

It was

last month. Oh my god.

I

know. Okay. And here's what we heard from communities. The mayor's office outreach team ought to lead the strategic bid the strategic vision process. The process for development of the strategic plan should incorporate the input and in involvement of advisory boards and commissions. We should add more time of public comment during the process, and city council should hire their own budget analysis to help with our oversight.

Hear, hear. Yeah.

That came directly from community. We did not say that, although we may have. Wanna do. Here's our legislative timeline, and happy to answer any questions. Thank you for helping me.

I can't multisask. Alright. Thank you all. This is great. This is great information. Presentation is really thoughtful and put put together well. Thank you. We have four council members in the queue. I have council member Alvidrez, Flynn, doctor Romero, Campbell, and Hines. Am I missing a new one?

Just before you get started with questions, I also wanna just acknowledge the Department of Finance is here. Yes. Thank you. And so is mayor's office to answer questions kind of on their end, what might be, available for them. They're not a 100% sold on this proposal. I think, they have outstanding questions. I'll just just give you an example. We kind of proposed that 10% threshold being the space where, you know, counsel would need to to lower or would need to reappropriate the dollars to a lower budget amount. They only calculate it, turns out, once a year. So, and it's right before they hand us the September budget.

So, like, that's not a good mechanism for them. So that was some feedback we got from them that we just haven't, like, figured out what to do with yet. There should be a mechanism, but our suggestion wasn't really the right one. So, we're still working on some things. That's why this is budget and policy. You don't see any language yet, but, just flagging that for you and appreciate these guys being here too.

Thank

you. Councilman Rob Videres.

Thank you so much, committee chair. Thank you all for another presentation on all your work here. I feel like one thing that I'm hearing changed is that it was more a two year process, and now this is an optional two year process. Can you tell me about that change and the thoughts there?

Yeah. The Department of Finance gave us some really good feedback that Lisa Martinez Templeton, our chief economist, sometimes really struggles with, you know, determining an economic outlook two years out because sometimes economies are shift more rapidly than in other times. And so the the flexibility to do a two year budget, but the flexibility to do a one year budget if needed seems reasonable to us.

That discretion would be in the mayor's office?

It would be with the recommendation of the Department of Finance. But if you feel like you would like city council to acknowledge that via ordinance, that's what they do in Fort Collins. We could do something like that. We could write that in.

Okay. And so if they chose to do a one year budget, would the calendar be the same as the first one instead of that second one, or would we still be changing the dates?

No. The dates would still change.

Okay. That's good to know. I think that's one of the things I like most about the proposal because it is you know, I'm not gonna say my brain turns too mush, but it doesn't not turn too mush. Also Fair. One of my questions is around the capital projects.

You brought up projects lasting more than one year. Totally agree. However, my understanding is that those projects that are budgeted in 2025, for example, stayed with that funding, and that funding exists somewhere and it's not reflected at all in the 2026 budget whether or not it got finished in 2026. So I'm curious if it would that stay the same as far as that money not showing on a 2026 budget, or would it show that half the spend down was half in '25, and we still have half of that money for '26?

That's a great question that I think we will kick to the Department of Finance because they're the ones who book all of that.

Yeah. Do I need to repeat the question?

Yeah. Counsel, I

appreciate the question. Yes. Capital funds are non lapsing, so their funding roles to

to introduce yourself.

Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. Jackson Brockway, capital planning and budget manager for the Department of Finance. Capital funds are non lapsing, so that funding will roll to the next year. And so in the budget book, a standard financial document reports actuals and then estimated budget and then the budget for the next year. So in terms of what the budget book would look like, it wouldn't look terribly different in terms of how the the capital funding would show up. It would still it would still just highlight the appropriated funds for for that year, and then rolled funds will will would need to be reflected in a different way, simply enough.

So those funds are not reflected right now. Right?

Not not in the budget book.

Okay. And when this would would it be in this theory of a budget book?

I

Is that Yeah. I don't I don't think it'd be reflected any any differently. The appropriations budget book simply as a appropriation document would would still show capital funding the same.

Okay. Thank you.

And then my last question is more around the definition of a balanced budget. When you say a balanced budget ensures expenditures don't outpace revenues, are we including the one time fund balances as revenues?

What do you mean by one time fund balances?

So, for example, the reserves and all of those other funds that we're counting on using, when we're balancing the budget, are we allowed to use those funds to balance the budget? Are we defining that those funds cannot be part of balancing the budget?

Yeah. That is a great question and gets exactly to the heart of what we're trying to look at here. So the answer to that is right now, the way it has worked in the past, those funds from those required 15% and below reserves have used have been used to balance the budget. So for example, in 2025, in November 2020 council approved a $1,750,000,000 budget for 2025. That is the amount of money that the mayor's office and city agencies had appropriated to them in the long bill in November 2024 to spend in 2025.

We did not see that again or have any conversation about that, but it became clear at some point in 2025 that the amount of money that was coming in was not going to be $1,750,000,000. But instead of reducing expenditures to a certain amount in conversation with counsel, what happened was they were approved to spend up to $1,750,000,000 because that's how their charter works right now. And then they had to reduce those expenditures and do layoffs in the middle of the year because it became clear that the amount of expenditures were going to match appropriations but not match income and that was gonna take us below our 10% reserve rate. Does that make sense? Yes.

Okay. And so does this change how would this change then?

Yes. So the language that we are hoping to write in, again, we need to figure out what the right threshold is because that 10% threshold isn't the right one according to the Department of Finance, and that is totally fair. But that trigger, whatever that ends up being, would then trigger a requirement that there be a conversation with counsel and that expenditures be reduced to anticipated revenues via ordinance, via an you know, essentially what we do with the long bill in reverse.

Thank you.

Thank you for a answering that with so much detail.

It's really confusing if you don't, and I wanna be really clear because we're talking about important stuff, money. Right? And, like, it's public and so I just wanna make sure we're, like, very careful about what we are.

Having the producer pull up its slide 13 and its bullet point two, and that's what they're saying. If you go to 13 bullet point two, fine fund balance below 10%, they're saying that the Department of Finance doesn't agree with that 10% and that's something they have to figure out. But that's that change that we require. That's the answer your question. That makes sense. Yep. I'm such a visual person that I have to see things. Okay. Next up, we have council member Flynn.

Thank you, madam president.

Just off the bat, at the working group, we have already discussed and we're in a holding pattern on a budget expansion request to add a budget analyst to the central staff. So there's already something on the table for that. Of the four proposed changes, I like very much two of them, the public process and the pushing back of the timeline to give us more more time. There is a definition of a balanced budget in the in the charter already, already, so I'm curious how yours might differ from I mean, what are you proposing as a definition that's different than what's in

the charter? Well, exactly the language that's on slide 13 is the current proposal. The top bullet is the language that we are proposing to add into the charter.

Okay.

In the amend, the expected revenues will be less than the total appropriations from the prior year's long bill. The mayor shall propose and city council shall reduce appropriations by ordinance to balance the budget.

Is that in the second year?

No. That would be in any year.

Any year. It was because it says the prior year's long bill.

Well, right. Because remember, we approved the long bill in November of the year before.

Are you do we still adopt that?

Yeah. We we have to. We're required. Yes. We're required to by a state constitution.

By the way, I hate the term long bill because the legislature uses it, and I just thought we were different. So I always I always say appropriations or

Yeah.

No. Council member Flynn, that's a really good that I wanna be very clear about. We are required by state law to approve a budget every year. Okay. Not nothing about that changes. Okay.

Yeah. The as far as a biannual budget, I am just simply not supportive of that at all. I don't I looked at slide eight, the challenges and the benefits of an annual budget, but I don't see any analysis of the challenges and benefits of a biennial budget. More cities in The US that more cities have moved from a two year budget cycle to a one year

Mhmm.

Than have moved from a one year to a two year, And there must be some reason for that.

I just respond to that really quickly? Because that's not a 100% true.

Finish. The the it seems to me that the challenges of the annual budget are magnified, are made worse by a biennial budget, and the benefits are diminished in a biennial budget. That's can we have have you done analysis of why cities have moved away from it?

Yes. Yes. Yeah. So I I wanna be very clear. It is not that cities have, like, gotten rid of a two year budget.

Their budget has their two year budgets have the flexibility option that is that we're talking about writing in here. So they could go back to a two year budget. We actually had a, conversation with Seattle who uses a two year budget as well as their county, King County, Washington does, and Fort Collins, Colorado. Optional two year budgets, but because they have, seen such economic uncertainty since COVID over the last few years, they have gone back to doing one year budgets to make sure that economic outlook, which is shaky, is clearly defined. But they have the flexibility to go back to a two year budget should they want to, which is exactly what we've written

in here.

Now to me, that says that we should stay with a one year budget. I believe it gives us more flexibility to respond annually. It it reduces chaos. Just in our time here at councilman Gilmore, you know the chaos we've gone through in with the great recession and then with COVID. And it just seems like a recipe for more cast. But more importantly for me, I'll be gone, you know, eventually from here and eventually elsewhere.

Hopefully not soon.

I'm I'm planning on it. But it seems to me that this reduces our ability to carry out one of our primary missions, is the city budget, by making it every two years even though we can adjust it in the off year. That reduces our takes away from our primary responsibility of financial oversight. If you take those other two things that I'd like, like the community input every year into the annual budget and the simplifying the timeline and then the public input, those two things, put them into the annual cycle in a charter amendment. I could I'd just vote that to the ballot today.

But the two years, I just think we're gonna be going back to we're gonna be doing too much adjusting in that off year. But last question then, because the rest was a statement, you know, my position on But when would this kick in? Because I'm concerned about an incoming administration being saddled with a two year budget adopted by lame ducks. So when would you think this would be effective? Well,

it can't be effective until 2030, just the way the transition works and whatever. So that will get where the effective date will get written into a Mhmm. A companion ordinance that goes along with this. Okay. But I think

Why 2030?

Because of if we if we oh, gosh.

You guys are all looking when you know.

Yeah. If we vote in November 2026, right, the 2026, 2027 budget will have already been passed, which means the 2028 budget would be the first opportunity to do it. Right. 2027 is when the mayor mayoral race and city council races are, so there will be a transition of at least some council members at the very least. Right?

Which means that having to do the whole public outreach process when you you know, starting in July when you are inaugurated, just there is not enough time. Right? Which means Exactly starts before that. Right. Which means, like, your your sort of first realistic time to be able to do that as an administration would be January 2029 for the budget approved in for 2030. Right? January 2029, so the outreach happens all year long. And then in November, we approve the 2030 budget.

Okay. I'm I'm confused. Why wouldn't you start in '28 Yeah. For the 2930 budget? Why wouldn't it be kicking in '29?

Because if in '27, when you're planning the '28 budget, a new administration or new council members are not inaugurated until the July

Monday to ready set.

Which then means if we are asking to move the timeline for when the budget comes to council That leaves like a month for community outreach, which just isn't enough time.

We could

do it in '28.

So if you did it

budgeted up in '28.

In '28 for the '29 '30 budget. Is that what is that not what I said?

No. Said it kicking in 2030. So I was picturing '30

Sorry. No. '29 and '30. Yes. Sorry. I meant the second year budget would be 2030. Yes. So it's '29 and '30 would be the

Okay. Mhmm. Yeah. Thank you.

I I guess my my last remark is we can't even get a one year budget right. On a two year budget. So it actually frightens me to move to a two year cycle.

Well, I think I think, councilman Flynn, you make really good points. And the chaos piece looms true because I can only say, and I'll use I statements, from when I, you know, was concerned about the spend of this administration in the 2023, there was nothing to point back to as to what is the strategic plan that was developed by communities and is this the actions actions that they want this administration to take and all of us as elected representatives? And so there was nothing around how many times did we hear we're flying the plane as we're building it. And if you talk about chaos, I don't know how much more chaotic that can be, especially for the constituents and the taxpayers into the general fund having tracking what their government is doing and you know the two year budget process especially around nonprofits and even small nonprofits are well versed in writing multi year grant proposals. So, I think it begs the question if half 1,000,000 or even a $50,000 a year nonprofit has the financial oversight and expertise to have a two year budget and know that they're maybe spending dollars, but they're leveraging other grant dollars, other capital improvement dollars, other bond dollars for projects.

Non profits do that all the time. The city, I think, gets off easy and they can allow that chaos, especially when it's a non profit that expected multi year support from the city and wrote grant proposals like healthy food for Denver kids, other programs, and then all of a sudden the city decides to go a different direction. And we've seen that angst that goes on in our communities. And I would love as an elected representative to have something to point back to and say, well, remember when we did all those strategic plan meetings with the mayor's office? It would basically be a replica of what the Johnston administration did in that 2023 going out to all our community, you know, asking about mile high, all in mile high.

We're gonna put shelters in everybody's district. That's how they garnered public input. Why don't we garner public input as to let's plan what is best for our entire city working together, and then we've got the plan, then let's work the plan and keep the voters along with us. And so I see it from that different perspective. Like that.

I like that, but I don't think that depends on having a two year budget. I think we should do that every year.

So I will I will say in the mayor's office defense, I think Dom died a little inside right now when he said that because it is a pretty extraordinary lift. And so I think that, you know, doing it every two years is a little bit more realistic in terms of staffing and bandwidth and dollars and all of those different time, all those different kinds of things than doing it every year. Yeah. I mean, it's a that's a kind of a compromise piece.

Thank you, madam president.

We accept we have council pro tema Merrill Campbell followed by Hines. Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you for the presentation. A lot of my questions have actually been answered. I appreciate the question that you had about, you know, our threshold and when would we find out. How did how when would we find out during the year? I know we said who, like, from the office, but what would when would we know that it would be a one year or two year budget?

Well, that, I think, is still to be determined, but the Department of Finance would need to I mean Alert us. This is none of us can do what Lisa Martinez Hamilton can do. Like, let's just be real about that. So I think it would be a conversation. You know, DOF comes to us in April every year, and they present in finance Finbiz or whatever we call it now, you know, as to what the pro what the economic outlook is gonna look like for the following year and what the kind of anticipated changes to the budget are gonna be, and and they look back in reverse as because they just closed the books on the prior year.

So they come and do that every April. So by then, they should kind of have a very clear idea of whether it's gonna be need to be a one year or two year budget. That's what they do. I mean and we trust them to do that.

Thank you. And then for the community engagement, I was actually thinking that I don't know if we'd wanna make it more prescriptive because it feels like we could say you need to do community engagement, but if we don't have some structure underneath it or some expectation of what that threshold is, it could just be a very light touch, and I'd want it to be what I think our intent is, is something very robust.

That is a question for the mayor's office because this would be a duty assigned to the mayor's office, and therefore, it would be their decision on what that would look like. And that's not something that's appropriate for counsel to determine because that's outside of our lane.

So I think that Yes. Making sure that

I heard one answer.

Yeah. And could be

for the future. I just think that intention of really wanting to have that robust community engagement, I feel like we talk about it in so many of our different forms of how we are engaging across the city.

Dominic Moreno, mayor's office. I think we would agree with having a really robust engagement plan for soliciting resident inputs on budget priorities. The only thing that I think the administration would have concern about is whether that prescriptive nature belongs in the charter, and I think we're open to conversations with the sponsors about what that looks like. But we would share the interest in making sure that it is a robust process.

Thank you. I don't have any other questions.

Thank you. Next up, we have council member Haines.

Thank you, madam president. Madam president Pro Tem, thank you for your your comment about specificity. I I think if I had one pain point about the Well, hi. Hey. One pain point about the budget, it would be just the the knowledge disparity, the lack of information until we get the floodgate.

We get this big book at the same time sometimes after the press gets it, we get it, but, you know, sometimes sometimes the same time the public gets it, we get this big book, and then we do the show as best we can, but there's just a knowledge disparity. And I remember one year, I you were talking about the July 1 announcement. I started asking questions of agencies about the July 1 forecast. And we got an email well, all of us got an email saying, stop making any sort of decisions or even analysis based on the July 1. You know, we're doing it because it was my interpretation that we're doing it because the charter makes us, and and that's that's why that's why you got an email on July 1.

So I I think for me, the biggest pain point is is the knowledge disparity. Like, the governor presents his budget on December 1, and here we are April 13, and the budget's still not through the the through the general assembly. And and they at the state, they have a committee that if you're on the joint budget committee, that's the only committee you're on. And there's a, you know, JBC staff of 30 people who helps, you know, with that budget. And I understand that the state budget's $43,000,000,000 and ours is 4,400,000,000.0, including the airport and, you know, pass throughs and whatnot.

But I think that's my that's my biggest pain point. I'm trying to figure out how a biannual budget helps that. Another kind of thought is I'm just the sum of the experience that I've had on council. I don't know a standard year. We thought 2020 was gonna be a standard year.

So I don't know when so to finish that, it wasn't. But I don't know when the mayor or the administrate or, you know, the Department of Finance would say, oh, yeah, this is a time when we could do a two year budget. Even before us, was, you know, the two thousand eight global meltdown. So I'm trying to figure out how this helps. I see, you know, moving getting ready to rid of July 1, okay, that's more a figurative thing anyway, but, you know, I see that moving some of the actual process back some, that helps me with my core pain point.

I I wonder so you've got King County, you've got Fort Collins. I wonder if there are other municipalities. I don't know of any business that does it biannually. Not that we need to start running more like a business. We're a government.

We shouldn't be a business. But I I just I wonder I I wonder operational things could be annual. We're gonna be doing these things like we do every year, and then maybe some of the strategic projects, you know, the white capital project takes less than a year. I wonder if some of the strategic projects could be forecast farther out in two years or or whatever the answer is. I'm just trying to figure out how how my pain point's solved.

I don't think it's just mine, but, you know, I'm trying to use my I statements. How my pain point is solved with a biannual budget, and when would that even happen, at least, you know, in the seven years I've been here?

Was that a question? Oh, okay. Yeah. Wasn't sure.

I like, what's to keep the mayor's office from choosing one year every year? I don't know why they wouldn't

think one one piece that we wanna make sure that you all are taking from the conversation is that it's also a strategic plan. And we talked about the main years versus not tweak years. What did we call it?

What did we call them? The main year. Off years? Off years. Thank you.

The main year versus the off years, that there's an opportunity to be able to make changes in the off year. And so that's what we're proposing. I'm not sure that I quite understand what your pain point is. Just know if I can answer the question about what how this solves for that pain point. So if you could state that. Thank

you. And I'm I'm let me try again. I'm gonna get out from behind council member Flynn. Here we go. Hopefully, I'm not too far away from the mic. Okay. Now I'm gonna get towards the microphone. I'll move out. Alright. There you go.

Sorry. So the the the pain point that I have is that we get the information as late as we possibly can, and then we get flooded with, you know, the all the the meetings with the agencies. And and it's like more than a fire hose. It's like we just get drowned with, you know, budget water. And and so I see, like, to your point about moving back some of the required starting steps, that helps me with extra time to get more knowledge to be more on par.

We're not totally gonna be on par with the Department of Finance because this is the only thing they do, but more on par with the knowledge that they have. But I don't so I see moving, you know, like, I see value in some of the stuff you're talking about by moving some of the dates so that we have more time and more more ability to get the knowledge. But I don't know what a two year I don't know how a two year cycle helps me with my knowledge disparity.

I think one of the things so going back to the two year strategic plan, one, it gives us more time. So if you're not doing this full budgeting process every single year, it gives you more time to be able to grapple with those things. But also remember that council members are going to be working alongside of communities as we're receiving that input. And so, hopefully, as you're working alongside of communities, you're learning what community priority is as well. And the point of us to not have this big budget at us every single year, to have the main year and to have the off year, is so that it's not so heavy.

And so it actually addresses what exactly what the pain point is that you're concerned about is you get flooded with information. This gives us an opportunity to be able to have that information not be from floodgates, but over time. And that's that's the intent.

I guess I'd be concerned that they would flood us every other year instead of every year. And so yeah.

I I thank you so much for that, councilwoman Lewis. And and so Councilman Hines, talking about the six year CIP list specifically. So we're presented with whatever projects Parks and Doddy think that they want to have as the six year CIP list. They tell us, they've already met with us, they're telling us what the projects are going to be for 2027 because they're trying to prep us for the 2027 budget. Well, there is nowhere in the city budget book and clearly from what was answered earlier, there is no place for constituents or council members to go and see specifically what the budget expansion requests are for each agency.

And that weighs into directly if our CIP projects are going to get done on time or not. And so having some mechanism either in ordinance that those CIP projects need to be better explained and accounted for in the budget because otherwise if you were a constituent and you're trying to go look at special project, let's say the 5280 Trail, and you're trying to figure out how this is getting done within the city, they're gonna come to your office and they're gonna say, why isn't this getting done? And you're trying to cobble together, well, this is what the CIP list or the bond dollars are gonna be used for by Parks or by DOTI, etcetera. That is not clear anywhere. And so the two year process would allow you to track year one, there's the strategic plan.

This is what the administration is committing to get done based on community feedback. That gives you then the responsibility as the elected to track that that is getting done. And then the second year or the second year of the budget, you better be seeing some expansion or continued work on that CIP project or there's going to be questions. Because we know that there are sometimes CIP projects that get taken off the very important list and they lag longer versus if we were being transparent and the administration was being transparent, we could keep a bead on that and keep it going forward because who is an elected wants to at a four at the end of a four year term say, well, I couldn't figure out what DOTI or what the Department of Finance was doing exactly, and we aren't able to get that project done. Now you would have something to point back to as an elected, as the body having the fiscal responsibility for the taxpayer dollars to say, well, this is the two year plan.

We might have to move it around. But you know what? I'm going to tell you exactly what that looks like and give you an opportunity to weigh in on it. And so if that's helpful to look at it from some of those examples. And the second part, you know, I would say that 2015 to 2019, my first term was one of those times because it was a heyday as far as build, build, build, spend, spend, spend.

I would have loved to had a two year strategic plan because I'm going on year ten and a half now and I'm still waiting for some CIP projects to get done in my district. And that's not equity. That's district. Us not knowing exactly what is the plan. And really now at this point, it's the Department of Finance, it's the mayor's administration, and it's their agencies that really know what the two and three and they have a six year CIP plan, they are planning out at least six years. They're just not telling us. And that's the real crux. Thank you.

And I will just add one more thing, council member Hynes, and that is a question back to you. Because we're writing this. Right? What if the determination of whether it was gonna be a one year budget or a two year budget was made jointly by council and the mayor's office with, you know, with information and discussion from the department of and a recommendation from the department of finance. Would something like that

Yeah. That's interesting.

Yeah. Because we might be able to do that. I don't know. No promises, but we can

We can ask what? Yeah.

For

sure. And speaking of know your audience, council member Gilmore, will this asking the CIP list, will we also get the list of the one budget expansion of each agency that was not approved? It would

be great. That's all up to this body. So, yeah. But the language is not written

yet, so Thank you. Councilwoman Torres.

Oh, thank you. That's, I think, the question that I had. I'm looking at the charter language under budget and finance. Is that the only section that references this process?

I'm gonna look to Briallyn for that one. I think yes is the short answer. But

Thanks, Brylin.

Hey. Brylin, Naughty, assistant, city attorney. Yeah. I believe so. That is the section.

And what I'm assuming is the goal here is to go for an omnibus overhaul toward this skull in order for it to be the single subject situation for charter, as opposed to councilman Flynn who liked two of the four, but not all four of the changes.

That's the goal. I mean, because I think part of the our conversations and the feedback we've heard from the mayor's office and the department of finance is around bandwidth and staffing Yeah. And timing. Right? And that, like, while this might be, you know, while while it might be a great, in theory, idea to have an entire mayor's office outreach plan every single year that they're creating the budget.

Like, there just isn't the staff and bandwidth to do it. Right? That there are, you know, things happening that we never see in the Department of Finance that, like, just to do this every year is too much. So to do it every year during times of economic uncertainty, but, you know, every two years when we're sort of in a solid space, like 2015 to '19, that that would make the ability to get all of this done a little bit easier. It would be kind of more stressful in one year, but then a little bit less in another year because there would still be the opportunity to tweak different things in the budget based on changing economic conditions or based on projects, you know, falling through or based on all the different things that we see happen here.

But that doing all of that work every single year is too much. Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. Thanks. I

have a couple questions. So in the slide I'll find it now. On slide on one of the earlier slides, you define if it can be a one year or two year times of economic uncertainty. Do we have a definition for that?

No. But when we talked to Seattle and and Fort Collins, there was that the kind of idea of that flexibility really bubbled to the top, and we're happy to share the white paper with you that shows a number of different cities that do this. This was these were just kind of the two that we spent the most time engaging with to understand more in-depth kind of what what they do and why they do it and how they do it. But the I I think that the determination of whether that should be a one year budget or a two year budget is entirely dependent on the circumstances of the moment.

Yeah. Okay. Because I was thinking about our class just in general. Yeah. I think when the administration came in, they have we had one already declared state, like, official emergency that had been declared under Hancock. And under Hancock, we had COVID. We kept extending out. And then when we had the migrants, I think, believe it was Hancock. And when you all got elected and came on, it was already a state of emergency. And then the next day after this administration

Two. We

we had to. Right? We declared the state of emergency, and that one stayed all the way till 2023, if I remember correctly. '24. '20 yeah. Even '24. So just wondering, like, to council member Heinz point of we've never been able to have a time where I think a two year budget cycle would have been able to work. But I do agree. I was a council aide starting in 2012. And under that, it would have been nice to have a two year budget cycle with some of the work that I was doing in global area around the I-seventy and a lot of the things that were going on in other parts of the city.

So I can see pros and cons to having both, right? So I appreciate slide 13 where if we're sure the addition to require city council approval for expenditures out of the unassigned fund balance below 10%, I appreciate the addition of that. My question on that part is, is the 3% TABER, the requirement, is that part of the 15%?

That's a it's separate, I think. That's a whole separate yes. It's all separate.

Stephanie, do you wanna

Stephanie. Stephanie's nodding. If I had to find If you introduce introduce yourself, I have a question.

Sure. Certainly. Stephanie Adams. I am the city's deputy chief financial officer.

So where do I find that 3% in the budget book?

It's in the budget highlights in the front of the book. It's actually outside of the schedule 100.

It is outside of the schedule one Totally completely different.

And and the majority of that requirement is met by property value. In fact, there's very little cash in that particular fund.

And so it can meet and these and that's required by state? That is correct. Yep. Okay. And then I had one other question Sure. Regarded to the fund balance. And then the 1%, how is that where is that highlighted in the budget book? The 1%? Do you

mean 2% for contingency? 2% for contingency.

Actually, if go to

slide five, I think.

Is it on schedule 100?

It is on schedule 100, and so is the 15%. Now you said I wanna Uh-huh. Point k. Do you see it under contingency? General contingency under use?

Contingency. Yep.

You said reserves. And I I do wanna just go back to councilwoman Alziedra's question, which is a really good one, which is should there be another year where we do in fact have a great year and we close above 15%? Your question about whether or not the over 15% is included as revenue is a question I also have. So that that is a a really good question because and I also just wanna point out to you right now, every year, we do have unspent and that's the other piece I'm not sure, councilwomen, if if you believe that we should no longer have unspent. So you see how the schedule 100, how we balance the budget?

So to councilman Sawyer's point, she was concerned because the appropriation exceeded the amount of revenue, and therefore, we took steps to put savings aside so that we can be flexible. Right? So think about it this way. Hiring freezes, great example. We don't know over the course of the year how many which agencies might have more positions than others. HRCP, really great organization, doesn't usually have a lot of turnover, which is fabulous. DOTI, parks, they do. Part of, I think, what the council sponsors are asking is that we would actually go through and make rescissions to every single appropriation in the city. That's a whole budget process. That's how you do appropriation.

I think that's part of the concern we have is making a decision in the middle of the year does require us to go to every single agency, have them develop a proposal. I don't know if elected would be part of that or not part of that. I will also say that if we have to do that, it would be an across the board reduction, which is the least strategic thing you can do. We have to act that quickly and actually go in and ask you to run an ordinance to reduce every agency. So just wanted to clarify the 10% comment that councilman Sawyer made. That's what our concern is, this idea that we'd have to come through you. You'd wanna talk to all the agencies. Right? So we do, in the middle of the year, work with agencies over the course of the year and say, revenue's not looking so great. What can you do? And then we have that flexibility through the through those months. So that was not your question. I do wanna But

all of these, especially this line, like, page five and page six, all something that are really important to us because I don't think just like I don't think it should be 10% because I agree. That's across the board. That's not very strategic. And city council even when everyone else had a fight at hiring freeze, we did not last year.

Flexibility to

do And we worked with you because if that 10% were across, I think that would also include independent elected offices.

I'm not sure. I I guess that's the thing. I I guess, you know, if if we exclude some folks over the years, you may have noticed we haven't, for instance, reduced host very much, but that's very intentional because those were the needs. Whenever you exclude an organization, and I know all of know this, we have to cut deeper somewhere else just to make it balanced. My only thing I would just say since I have a moment we hear a lot of the changes the city council would like to make.

We would just love to have some opportunity to have a conversation, maybe an ordinance, try some things. My hunch is that a strategic plan for each one of you probably looks a little bit different. And I would hate to write something in city charter that's supposed to stand the width of time, and then only to find that is actually not going to work very well. So our request would be, could we just work on ordinances where we want to try some things and we can make some changes along the way so we can at least figure out what we can do and what might meet all of your needs. Dates, a 100%. Those have to be in charter. If they're currently in charter, we'll have to make those changes. Yeah. So

So I'll just say I appreciate you saying that writing some ordinances that can make it a little better. I was gonna say I like the July 1. I appreciated that. As somebody who was looking at the city council overall budget and comparing it, I liked just so you all know, that's the way my mind worked is I was like, oh, let me see what they sent me in July. And then right when it got dropped, the first thing I did was went to Bonita and sat down and looked at what the comparison was.

Because then you all were going to come in and How's my budget impacted, right, for the next year? So I appreciate I wanted to say I would have kept the July for some something in there. I wouldn't have liked to get it August 15 and then know that we're scrambling at as something underneath the an independent agency as the clerk and recorder independent agency, the auditor independent agency, how those would be impacted, right, if we only get it on August 15? Because that's what we saw last time. I was not paying attention as council president to the auditor and to the clerk and recorder.

I was paying attention to ours and how did that melt down to all of you for to prepare for our 2026 budget. Right? And then we ended up in budget amendments for these independent agencies. So when I'm thinking about the whole entire overall budget, I appreciate the July. So I would want that kept in there. I do appreciate having you all come forward earlier. It's really hard for you. It's hard for us. It's hard for every single person in the mix. I've never seen one council president since I've been here even as a council aide not struggle with the budget timeline and the colleagues and the back and forth and the amount of time that it goes.

So with that being said, I don't know if you all have suggestions on how to deal with this because but it is a problem that I do see and I do see these three council members working really hard to come up with solutions and to meet where the our constituents wanna meet have us be at, like what happens with this budget, what what makes up the budget. And so putting this all together and thinking about it, I appreciate both both aspects of it because I think that they we can solve for some of the issues that we're facing.

Mhmm.

Can I just say a couple of things? So number one, we had proposed that August 15 date as a date. I have since had a conversation with Nicole where there are some bond disclosure things that happen in the month of August that, like, maybe it needs to be a September 1 date. Yeah. The mayor's office has said we can get it to you by September 8.

That one week buys us one week to either read it or one week to do amendments, but not one week to do both. So I I don't think we see how it could be successful before September 1 or with Labor Day, we might need to fix that language a little bit, but, like, I think there's a there's a compromise there somewhere. We just haven't gotten to exactly where that is yet, so flagging that for you. In the same conversation with Nicole, we talked a lot about what Stephanie just said, and we don't think as a policy decision that counsel, having to reappropriate or miss or un un unappropriate? Rescind.

Rescind? Rescind. Thank you. Rescind every single dollar from every single place like that there needs to necessarily be a conversation about that, right? Like what if it is a percentage space where we were like where when it's triggered by a certain percentage reduction, then we have to have a conversation about what that looks like, and then the ordinance is crafted and goes through. But it's not necessarily every single agency, every single dollar, every single moment because we are a strong mayor form of government. We also need to be respectful of that piece as well. So there's a balance there to

be

had. I'm still waiting. You know, it was spring break two weeks ago. Like, everybody was out of town. Not me, but everybody else was out of town. And so still waiting to hear back from the Department of Finance what their recommendation on what that threshold might be and what that process might look like and haven't heard anything from them yet. So there's more discussion to come before we, you know, would head to committee, which I think at this point, there's only one date left, it's June no. June 15. June 15? June something like that.

Mid June. But for to schedule things for to get for committee to get to the charter in the timeline that needs to come. So so yeah. So there's you know, we've got some time here to hammer that out and and make a determination of exactly what that's gonna look like. I think we have always said what needs to be in charter versus what needs to be in a companion ordinance. We are prepared to write a companion ordinance. But there's like, we need to make these policy decisions first. So we don't disagree. We get it. We just need a recommendation then on what that like, where the where the threshold is and then what exactly that means so that our attorneys can write the language.

Yeah. That's what I was gonna say for the Department of Finance. If we could have a if you can opine on, like, what you think would work so that we can have that and all understand. Because I have I have to admit, I did not have a briefing with you before this presentation because I have the only the PDF to opine on. Right? So but I would like to

go ahead. So I just wanted to clarify the request. So I think the request is, should we have to make adjustments in the middle of the year, at what threshold would we come to city council to let them know what those adjustments are? We did you may remember during COVID, we made midyear reductions. We did not seek an ordinance to make those changes. I think probably a really good example is in April or May 2020, we put money into we put money aside within appropriation. It's called the 98. It's a sequestered account within everybody's budget. It stays within their appropriation. We made a pretty significant reduction for every agency, including police, in May, and then we had to release some of those dollars when the protest happened.

And we had that ability to do that, but we did come to you in May and said, here's what every agency is going to set aside. But it didn't require an ordinance. It was just walking through those those changes.

At city council, right, when we have our elections, we have to sequester some of the money. And then if you win, you can have your full balance so that we don't end up situations like when we got elected, meaning our class where council members' budgets were already set spent.

Yes. So I just wanted to clarify. That's your question is at what point in time making changes to a budget what's what's the threshold for which we would come and just do a presentation and walk you through that? Is that the request?

Yes. And I think and I think yes. For now Yes. There's probably some follow-up to that. I think that we need to kind of just talk through with the Department of Finance and Okay. Like I said, we don't disagree with them. We just we don't do the money, so we need to know kind of the specifics of what it looks like on their end.

Okay. And just wanna go back to I know councilwoman Tarzai, you're still

I'm good.

Are you good? Mhmm. I that hopefully I can't remember.

I was

trying to look up my notes, but I can't find them. It's coming soon, the first time that we'll get the reading at city council for the ordinance that Councilwoman Sawyer and I worked on, and we'll be able to have a little bit more preview into that so you're not just stuck with that July 1. Because I think that will also I think all these things together, it's like a puzzle piece. Right? You all are trying to figure out the border and then fill in the the interiors, solve the budget.

But how does it work better together? And I don't know any other class of council members who've actually worked on train trying to change this budget. I've always known every colleague who I've worked with since being a council aide. No one's ever loved the budget cycle. I don't know one council member who was like, this works perf this works great. But I will say this class of council members, we started actually approving budget amendments. When I was working for Judy, I don't remember them ever passing any budget amendments. I think sometimes when the budget would pass, the council members weren't even here. They were absent. Yeah.

And so it was really, I think, in 2019 when that class came in that we actually started passing budget amendments to the actual budget and really using different tools that we had. And to everyone's point, building the plane as flying the plane and building the plane as we had it. I guess

I do have a question to Stephanie and DOF's request. There may be some things that can be tested, but I'm curious if the charter allows us to do very many things because it's only permissive. So

the

one thing, example I would say, is on or before the September 15. You could deliver an earlier budget, but there are other things that are still baked in. So that would just be helpful for me to understand where we could not test for a year as opposed to making the policy decisions this year and going to charter changes. So that might just be something that I wanna understand a little bit more.

Yeah. Absolutely. We can work with our attorneys to sort of Okay. Walk through each of those things. Can I just ask a follow-up question for you? Are you like, there are some things that just simply don't exist in the charter. Correct. Right? Like, for example, the conversation around, like, a threshold amount that the budget estimates were off by, like, that exists nowhere in the charter. What exists in the charter is the flip side of that, which councilwoman Kinnich brought through as a charter change in 2021.

And it is the charter change that requires council appropriation of new unappropriated dollars. So this is essentially the flip side of that. Right? Yeah. The flip side of that where there's a reduction, but the approval from the long bill is still there to spend up to the initial previous November amount. There's the charter's fully silent on that.

And when it's silent, you can't just do

You can't do whatever you want. Yeah. So I I'm happy to kind of walk through with our attorneys and see we can put together some sort of, like, clear one pager of those kinds of of what we can and cannot do under the charter. I think the the, challenge is that it just doesn't where it doesn't exist at all, it doesn't exist at all. The idea of putting together, you know, a community outreach plan and sort of creating the the overarching two year goals or what council member Gilmore is calling a strategic plan, that doesn't exist in the charter. Yeah. So, you know, it's a it's a tough it's a tough one. Okay. Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. Mhmm.

Okay. So thank you. Oh, council member Flynn, go ahead. Yeah.

Yeah. I should have us in the beginning with regard to a two year cycle, have you factored in or considered the impact of collective bargaining where we may have multiple agreements over that two years that sort of skew our projections. What what's your thought on that?

Yeah. So our thought on that is to deal with it the way we deal with collective bargaining right now, which is not council member Watson's favorite thing. He but he's brought up a couple of times his frustration with the idea that we use contingency dollars

Right. Yeah.

To address collective bargaining pieces. And that is the way it works right now, and nothing about that would change because we'd still have to have the contingency set aside every year. We would still have to have, right, all of those things. Whether that is a like, the right way to address it, I don't know. But I think that's a totally separate issue from what we're talking about here because the the way it works right now is the way it would continue to work. Those those collective bargaining pieces would come out of those contingency dollars.

A little simpler all in your cycle, though. We don't we can't budget for it because we don't know what it'll be, obviously. But I don't know. Stephanie, do we have anything in the budget for this for the following year when we have collective bargaining agreements with the safety the three safety groups? Have we ever budgeted something prospectively and then covered any the rest with contingency, or we just leave it at whatever the current salary was and then appropriate out of contingency the entire settlement? Because that's we're gonna have probably five at least new agencies Mhmm. In the coming year that enter into the cycle.

Yeah. The answer is it depends. So it depends on the timing. Yeah. I know. The perfect answer. I'm not even an attorney. So if we, for instance, are able to close a collective bargaining agreement and it's it's fully authorized by city council in time to add it into the budget for the following year, we do add it into the budget. Otherwise, we do use contingency. I will just also say, as a percentage of the total FTE, we've had a lot more flexibility. As our unions grow, that's sort of probably the place where we get a little anxious if it's significant portion of our personnel. So we've had the flexibility. Sheriff is not a huge percentage, for instance, of our population.

Alright. Thank you.

Yeah. I will just say in follow-up to that, it's not that you can't that you do not budget at all in the second year. You have to budget in the second year. The state constitution requires it. So just like it exists for collective bargaining now, if they can budget it in because of the timing, they do. If it is approved, like our sheriffs were approved in, I think, November, of last year, so it had to come out of contingency. It did. And then it will be budgeted in for the 2027 budget. Mhmm. That's exactly the same. Nothing about that changes.

Alright. Thank you. Okay.

So for next steps?

So for next steps, we appreciate all of your feedback. We, are planning to continue conversations with the Department of Finance to figure out specific language for a charter change and a companion ordinance, and

then we'll see you guys in committee. Thank Thank you.

Thank you. Actually think we're gonna have to move it off of the thirtieth because that is the day that Excel franchise agreement is gonna come through.

Oh, lovely. No other further action. We stand at your notes. See you at 03:30. Thank you.

Our