County Council - Special Meeting

Good afternoon, I'd like to call this meeting of Lancaster County Council to order. I ask that the clerk note for the record that a quorum of council is present. A public notice of the meeting including the meeting agenda has been posted the required length of time in the lobby of the county administration building and on the county website. And the news media has been notified of the meeting time and place. I'd like to welcome you to your County Council meeting. would ask that you take a moment to turn off or place on vibrate any cell phones. Thank you for not wearing any hats or caps in the council chambers, and please be considerate of others in the room by refraining from conversations during the meeting. I ask that you please stand and join council for the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by the invocation given this afternoon by Council Member Charlene McGriff. Okay, we're gonna go on now to the approval agenda. Do I have a motion to approve the agenda? So moved. I have a motion from Ms. McGriff. Do we have a second? Second. Second from Mr. Luis. All those in favor, please raise your right hand. It's six to zero for the vote. Mr. Harper had to step out. He'll be back in a few minutes. We don't have any citizens' comments. We do have one... that came in via email. And this is regards to feeling safe in the community, asking that we change the percentage raised back for our first responders to 6%. And... make sure that we take care of them, thank you. That was from Ms. Claire McConaughey. We're gonna move on to item 6A, Historical Commission Update, Mr. Witherspoon. Good afternoon.

Meet Ms. Ann Christie, who serves as our secretary. Today, I'm here briefly to share some exciting information with you to give you an update on some of the things that, well, one thing in particular that's happening across the street. And we're really excited about this. This has been in the works for a while and it has come to fruition. And we're always looking for new opportunities to grow. but also establish some long-term sustainability. We feel that this will help us, but also give us more exposure in the community and also give our citizens opportunity to serve. Because right now, you can only be a commissioner or an advisor. This is a totally separate organization, totally independent of the Historical Commission. I'm here before you today to present to you the Friends of the Lancaster County historical museum in that what that is is a group of highly motivated. Individuals who want to serve. After much discussion we decided that the best way was it for them to form an independent nonprofit. So they organized They went through the proper procedures to file the paperwork with the Internal Revenue Service and the Secretary of State of South Carolina. All of that was approved. And so they hit the ground running. And they already have, they participated, had a booth at the Red Rose Festival. And they have another upcoming event coming up in the near future that I'll share some information. But basically, I just want to read to you the mission statement and share with you the leadership and then talk a little bit about the event and then I'll be out of your way but the mission statement reads as follows the friends of the Lancaster County Historical Commission is a non-profit group that seeks to raise funds for the museum's exhibits programs and build a membership base of individuals and businesses who are committed to the museum's success and to ensure the museums committed growth by raising community engagement and awareness. So that's their mission statement. And right now they have a board of directors in place serving as the leadership. and the board of directors are Kathy Cato, she is an at-large member and she has been serving in different capacities, historical commission for many years and she stepped away but she thought this would be a good fit for her. Ms. Allison Jobe, Dr. Allison Jobe, she serves as the vice president. She's a professor at USC Lancaster. Brenda Jones is a retired business owner here in Lancaster. Sandy Lakatos, she's serving as the president, but she's a retiree who relocated here who has a lot of experience in marketing as well as education. Susan Langford, she's also a teacher. And then Miss Mickey Stacks, who has an interesting story. She has been involved with the museum in different capacities for a long time. And then also Miss Brittany Taylor-Driggs with USC Lancaster and the Native American Museum. So you see if you recognize some of these names, this is an experienced board who is quite familiar with the historical commission as well as the museum. So the organization is in good hands. And then the last thing I have is you see a flyer before you. having an event on June the 27th of friends wanted where they'll be introducing themselves to the community and then also kicking off some events around the historical courthouse because the discussions around the courthouse started in 1828 and so thought it would be good to have some type of community programs to recognize the significance and the start of the construction phase of the museum and then finishing in 1828. So that's basically it. Just to recap, they're totally independent of the commission. They have their own 501c3. We will partner with them just like we partnered with the Arts Commission and Native American Museum. So we feel that we'll have a good working relationship. But we wanted to be transparent to you all and also keep you up to date on what's happening. At this time entertain any questions and something I can't answer I'm sure miss Christy could share more information any questions for mr. Witherspoon Thank you, sir, okay, thank you We're gonna move on now to item 6 be a detention center update.

Mr. Chad catlage Good afternoon.

Thanks again for having me here. I Let me see if this works. It does. The detention center project is continuing to move along just as planned. Over the past month or so, we've been continuing with some masonry work on our interior load-bearing, non-load-bearing walls in Area A. Remember, we have the building divided up into four sections, Area A and in the administration and kitchen section. We've been continuing our non-load-bearing wall installations on Level 2. The roof decking is complete in all locations and I believe as of this week will be completely dried in with a roof surface there so that allows us to continue with some other installations on the inside. Our miscellaneous metals work continues installing some stairways and making it a little easier to get around the building. Site retaining walls are complete. We're starting on our exercise yard foundations now and our hollow metal frames on the inside level two are going in. Our overhead mechanical and electrical and plumbing installations and rough ends are ongoing in area A levels one and two. Roof membrane installation as of time of this report was completed A, B and C and D is underway as we speak. Our staff parking lot and the access road for that turbine gutter is in and fine graded. And we are roughly 53% complete with the project on the building project itself. We have a couple of ancillary projects. There we go. So a couple of ancillary projects. Remember, we had to extend the 12-inch water line from Highway 9 down past the detention site. That project is complete. The only outstanding item is a dedication agreement, and I believe your legal staff is working on that with Lancaster County Water and Sewer. And ongoing right now is our roadway widening project. It's a mess out there, I'll be honest with you. We've got a one lane on Highway 9, but we're nearing completion of that in August. That will be complete. But it's progressing well. Couple of photographs, so this is a drone photograph from Highway 9 looking into the site. You'll see A.R. Rucker in the very, very far background, and the administrative wing on the left side of the detention center, and you can start to see the parking lot layout there. A little bit closer shot. It's an interior courtyard where the exercise yard foundations have begun. There we go. You'll see in the bottom left corner, I think a better picture is coming up. There's our staff parking lot. You'll see the curb and gutter in there. Our generator is set. That's a mobile home size generator, so we'll be well backed up on power. As far as costs go, again, our budget is $90 million. That was the approved budget back in December of 25. Our construction cost to date, just under $40 million. Soft cost, just over $6 million. So we're about $46 million into our $90 million and still holding well on our budget. Just a few milestone dates. We've reached our top-and-out date. We have dry-in, as I mentioned here this week. So we're excited about that. Substantial completion as of now, still set in December with a final completion and turnover in January of 27. Any questions on the detention center project?

Any questions for Mr. Catlin? I just have comments. I'm glad to see, Chad, that you're on budget and on schedule. That's good to see. I think you said around 52, 53% completion. That's good to know. And that much in spending.

We're going to try to get you set up for a site walkthrough. I shot a couple dates to Steve earlier today, and we'll see if that works toward the end of this month.

Okay.

One other thing I didn't mention is our steel cell modular cells, they were manufactured in Georgia, and we're bringing those in. Our first round of those is actually next week. So when you come, we'll have quite a few cells that we can lock you guys up in.

I've got a few. Why did he look at you, Jose?

You know, I still have a concern with the entrance and all of that, the buildings out there. How are you going to make that entrance more attractive to kind of take away from the other buildings on the road, on the highway?

So we've got a pretty extensive landscape plan. This is an overall site plan here. Let's see if this works. Oh, yeah. Um, overall site plan, uh, actually needs to be updated. So we've, we've, we will have one single entrance, uh, to the facility right now. You see, we have a construction exit. It's a really mess out there. Uh, that all gets consolidated into a one large entrance and exit. Uh, and it'll be heavily landscaped, uh, across the front. And now with our road widening project, we helped you because I have a turning lane in the middle. So it will clean up much nicer than what you see now.

I see the turning lane, but I just see all that other stuff.

Thank you, Chad. So I was going to echo what Ms. McGriff was saying about being under budget and on time. And then this question that I would ask, is there anything that you're anticipating with weather delays based off where your construction is right now that could possibly kind of delay your progress or anything like that? Setting aside any storms or things like that?

Yeah, there's always that possibility. As of right now, we don't foresee anything. Things are progressing really nicely. We're starting to get our outside site work in place. We should be backfilling against the building on the administrative side, which is our largest backfill area here in the next week or so. So I'm excited about where we are. Don't anticipate anything, but the unknown could always happen. Okay.

Any other questions? All right. I guess while you're there, we'll go ahead and go on to... Item seven, our discussion and action items. First item 7A is fleet maintenance and IT building update. Go ahead, Mr. Cowich.

Glad to be here and help present on this. Let me back it up here.

Do we have copies of any of this?

It's on you.

It's on, I didn't see it.

On your computer.

I didn't see it on my.

Yeah. Presentation, he just done and this one.

I got it over here. Okay, I got it. I got it down. I got it. I wasn't looking in the right place.

Okay. I'll just talk through this. Feel free to stop me anytime. We were, so the county engaged with an architectural firm, I'm not sure when, more than a year ago, and quite a bit of programming with the departments that would be moving into this building was done, and some schematic work was done on drawings and some budgets produced, and I think that budget was somewhere in the $3 million range, $3.2, $3.6 million range, I don't remember, but it was a, more than you wanted to spend. So we were engaged to help kind of narrow that down and pull the scope back some. And so that's kind of what I want to present today. This first sheet kind of breaks down the cost into a couple of, the top two things are completed already. So there's some geotechnical investigation work that's been done. The programming and architectural work to date is the second line that has been complete and paid as I understand. There would be architectural fees associated with the work to move forward, which would be construction documents to do the up fits that are decided upon. And those fees are listed here. And then the pole barn alternate, those fees are listed there. So those are sort of our pre-construction subtotal numbers of totally $178,000 if you were to move forward with the scope we present tonight. And then a construction budget of 1.4 million that we'll go through here now. So this was the schematic drawing that the original architect came up with. What we did was take this drawing and just use it simply for program. So we dissected this back down to what is the program needed, whether number of cubicles, office spaces, or whatever. And our goal was to figure out how we can do this the most efficient way. And so that's what we've done. This is just a segment of that. Most of the work was over on the IT side that we reconfigured, and this was the result of that. So we end up with actually a little bit more seat space than the original design, but hopefully it's done in quite a bit of a more efficient manner.

Are those just cubicles?

Those are workstations, yes. I believe there are six hard wall offices and the rest are workstations. Yeah, cubicles, if you will. So now let me just kind of walk through some of the scope. The scope of work that is still included in our budget is some interior demolition to reconfigure portions of the building to accommodate the new IT offices and fleet maintenance operation. As part of the renovation, there are two new ADA compliant restrooms. You say, well, there's restrooms already there. Well, there are. They are currently not ADA accessible, and the level of renovation we plan to do will require you to bring those up to speed. So that's why we have to add two new ADA restrooms. That is not a bad thing either because the current building didn't have 35 employees working there either. So adding two additional restrooms is probably a good thing. But that is currently in the scope. and those are complete restrooms, not modifications to existing restrooms. We're doing some operational upgrades to the fleet maintenance areas that include installation of a new 18 foot by 16 foot bay door in the front of the building so the approach off of Highway 521 will kind of be a direct approach into the building. The large door now is on the left and there's not enough turning radius to get larger vehicles in so that will be put on the front of the building with new concrete approaches there. There'll be a new concrete approach on the left side as well, just because of the beat and wear and tear to asphalt that the heavier vehicles take. On the site, there's some infrastructure improvements planned. These are to some storm drainage locations on the right side of the property that need to be addressed. repairs to some existing water and sewer lines. We're adding, I believe it's 1,500 feet of chain link fencing for security on the property. Then on the interior, there's quite a bit of office upgrades being placed for the IT and the facility maintenance. operations this will include some some work in the in the mill break room repainting of the entire interior some of some areas will retain existing flooring but we have new flooring in the majority of the space and then of course revising the layout for to accept the new workstations There are miscellaneous roof repairs. The county did a roof evaluation report before they bought the building and there were some deficiencies noted. So those repairs have been accounted for in this budget. There's miscellaneous mechanical and electrical improvements. The HV system, I think you guys talked last time, the control systems have been bypassed. So there's some repairs that need to be done to that. Electrical work, of course, associated with the new wall layout and all the workstation adds. And now we do have an addition of a diesel generator for full building backup in this budget as well. Collectively, these improvements will kind of set the building up for long-term use for the county in both of these departments. Getting back to some budgets. So alternatively to the budget, we have a pole barn alternate at roughly $600,000. And this is for working on equipment that will not fit in that building, tracked equipment and that kind of thing. Right now, I think he's working on it outside. But it is an alternate. You could choose to do it or not to do it. A couple of these next line items were identified by the county early on, that there's some slab repairs that need to be done. inside to accept a new lift for some larger equipment. You see that budget there. And then, of course, we got some upgrades in data and low voltage and access control at roughly $100,000. The system furniture, which is all the workstations, budget roughly $160,000. Some construction phase testing for material testing. And then the project contingency is roughly at $150,000 at date. All that totals, including the alternate for the pole barn, $2.6 million, which is about a million dollars less than your original budget. A couple of alternatives. We can not do the pole barn now, and we can remove the generator, and you're back down to about $1.6 million.

Can we put the door in and fix the air conditioner?

Can you put the door? You, you, you, you get to choose whatever you want. Yeah.

Yeah. I said, uh, you know, the public's not going in this building. It's a functional building. You know, you can get workstations or cubicles put in, drop your lines or whatever. Uh, I know you need the, uh, they need that bigger door, but, uh, personally I'd rather wait on the new administrator to look at it and go by his recommendations when he starts analyzing all our assets and buildings that's just my opinion any other comments I mean we know that we have space needs now I mean we're

at capacity or more at this building. And from the standpoint of the pole barn, I think that is an option that we need to go with because it's no fun working in the shop anyway, but having to work out in the outside on a piece of equipment is even less fun, so. We need to make sure that we've got something that's suitable for equipment and for our employees.

The only thing I would add is to get that number of IT workstations in, you'll have to do the balance of it.

You have to do what?

the balance of the scope that we talked about would have to be done before you move that many IT people in. That number of workstations won't fit without reconfiguring part of the space.

But it's your choice. It looks wide open to me. I mean, it's a lot of open space that you can put workstations in without reconfiguring anything.

So this is in your pack. You can take a look at it. This is the reconfigured layout, and all the reconfiguration was done in that large, large area. There's a whole lot more walls than what's shown here. I guess what I'm saying is we've laid it out, and you can take a look at that, but ultimately, you get to make the call.

We're going to either do it now or do it later. It's going to cost more later. Yes.

I would challenge everyone to go up and look at the building. This is gonna be back office. This is not gonna be open to the public. It needs to be a clean facility with proper air and everything and cubicles and I think it'll be ready to go. That's just my opinion.

I mean, most of the budget is putting stuff inside the building. It's not really improving the exterior of the building.

What I don't want to happen is we make a decision not to do it, and then we wait, and the price has increased, doubled. So I'm looking at 8x8 cubicles.

Some 8x8 and some 6x6.

That's not pretty big. I mean, for a person to sit in there all day in an 8x8 cubicle. I think we're doing good, but I'm going to go with Chad. I don't have experience in this, so I'm going to go with the people who are qualified. Steve, you're qualified. Chad's qualified, but still, I think we've got to look at what we need today.

Where's our funding coming from? We had some ARPA money toward this. All right.

Possibility of $300,000 worth of ARPA money left over or $250,000, we need an update on the homeless shelter because that's got to be spent if they don't do it. I mean, and I don't see how that's going to happen. It can be reprogrammed. It needs to be reprogrammed now to an existing project, I think.

And you're right, Steve. I think we need to talk about that funding and where it's going to go and why we waited so late to get to this point. I'm not understanding why at this late point, We're deciding to move the money.

Yeah, we did. You have to put it on a project that's already approved. Why did we realize at this point that we had to spend it somewhere else?

I think you had to spend it on a testing facility.

That's what I'm saying. Jenny, can you answer why we waited so late? We didn't see this as a problem?

I believe council has received a privileged email from me previously about this, and I would rather not discuss it in an open session. It's an executive session matter. But it was just brought to my attention in the last month or so, and I did advise council as to some legal concerns regarding it.

So before that, it didn't come to anybody's attention? And when does it come to your attention, Jenny? All legal stuff has to be brought to you?

Okay. I just wanted to say that the funding, the ARPA funding was used to purchase the Burns building and general fund dollars, I think in the amount of 950 was used to do that. And then with regard to the other issue that y'all spoke with, please keep in mind that we did lose finance and of the project, particularly that y'all were discussing, started long before a lot of the staff that was here. So I think there were probably some gaps, and I'll just keep it at that. But we're working through it.

The homeless shelter, there's got to be a definite date when it's a yes or a no. I mean, that needs to be, we're already into June.

So I would like, Wadena. We've got to December of 26 to determine to have that money spent or approved somewhere else, right?

Yeah.

Mr. Chairman, could you have them back in here in July?

I will. But we have to have it spent by the end of the year. By the end of the year, yeah.

For this project?

Yeah. For any project.

I think all of it's got to be spent by the end of the year. Go ahead, Ms. Harris. What I'm saying is you can't switch it now from one project to another.

We do still have flexibility to be able to spin down all of the funding on any approved project. And so we are working through the process right now of reviewing, making sure that we scrub any projects that have any funding left over, the homeless shelter being one of them. And so just to the question about the timing of why we hadn't come in to realign to a current project is because we're working with the United Way right now to be able to properly close that out. When it was detected that there was a concern about whether it would be spent down, they were contacted immediately. But it came by way of just the regular review to close out the entire funding project, all ARPA-related projects. And so once we're able to recover those funds, it'll be realigned to, it can go to any of the projects that are currently approved, whether it be the evidence bay or the storage facility or the corners project. And so we had tentatively, you know, assigned it to the corners, but it won't be until we have actually recovered the funding to be able to.

Mr. Chair. One other thing on this one is, is, And I remember talking about this generator, but last time we had a meeting in May and the line item for that generator was $30,000. So I don't know if we missed a zero or whatever, but there's a difference between $30,000 and $300,000. This would pop this thing up from the last meeting, at least from what I can see.

I think in the original architect's estimate, he had $30,000 plug for a generator, and that is simply not enough.

Okay. I mean, that makes sense to me. I mean, there is a difference between $30,000, obviously, and $300,000 in terms of generator and what we're trying to do there.

Yeah, so $300,000. Keep in mind, we're at the budget stage because architectural fees will have to be incurred to design the rest of the project's properly sized the generator, but from my experience, generator, transfer switch, all the work that goes associated with getting all that connected, pads and those kind of things, you're gonna be in the $300,000 range, yeah. Yeah, 30,000 might put one at your house.

Right, that's, yeah.

Do we have any other discussion?

Yeah, I still, the funding for this Is any of this included in this fund balance that we've done depleted? We don't have any left. We're down to...

I think we've committed a fund balance.

That's what I'm saying.

How much did we set aside for this project?

We've got a

For the Burns Building project, the initial approval was for $950,000. That was done last fiscal year. And because the project had not been completed, the funding had not been encumbered, it's not assigned to it again. And what we're holding for is a bottom line, what is the actual amount that needs to be appropriated for that? That original appropriation was when it was slated to be the fleet slash voter registration building. And so we had not come back to council to ask for what's needed to finish out that project since it has changed to fleet IT building.

And that's the amount we're looking for right there.

Which is not included in any of the current budget allocations. That's correct. That's right. That's, I think, the question that you're asking.

Yeah, is what we've got to finance.

Right, and so the plan there is once they've established what that bottom line total is based on an approved plan, we'll come back with that bottom line amount to ask for that based on that estimate.

But right now we've got to decide on these alternatives, whether we're going to include those alternatives, Mr. Chair, or what?

Any other questions? I'm asking a question. Yeah, we're gonna have to decide what and how we're going to fund it and what level and how much.

And how much, yes. I'll make this comment just as a general comment. I mean, we obviously have a fairly sizable fund balance now. We're in the process coming into third reading to spend that down. I would say that at the end of the day, a lot of times you would probably bond part of that instead of spending your fund balance down. I would expect that at some point, as we have other opportunities, whether it be this building or... economic development or whatever opportunities might come through or further funding for fire stations or equipment that we're going to need to bond at some point and borrow some money. I mean, I just, I think that should be something that council should be should certainly be at least in the back of your head as we go through this next year.

At least consider, because we do not want to touch that fund balance. We're right at the level we need to be to keep our credit rating. And I agree with you, Stu. We need to come up with other options on some of these other projects that we need to deal with.

Mr. Chairman.

Go ahead, Mr. Willis.

Just as information for council, obviously, you'd be working on this and our bond council, Councilman Graham's point. You look at the last comprehensive financial report, we had a little over 50 million, I believe, in available debt that council could issue without going to the voters, the 8% cap. So there certainly would be capacity if you want to have that, but also, There will be some savings, particularly in the fire trucks. We know it's not gonna cost the full amount. There might be some opportunities there that you will have with the next administrator to look at these potential funding sources.

Yeah, I agree. We need to wait till the next administrator gets here and let's look at this and study this, see the best direction to go.

It's only three weeks away, but who's counting? He's got to get his feet wet.

We'll make sure to share the dollar amount of our bond capacity. Thank you.

All right, thank you. Okay, we're going to move on to Item 7B, Operating Budget Discussion. Ms. Perusnak and Ms. Harris.

Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. Real quick while Jamie's coming up. Became aware today that there was a grant that was applied for through FEMA. I guess during the transition, it just kind of slipped through the cracks. I became aware about it today. Kathy let me know FEMA was... pushing for the paperwork. Working with the county attorney, we'll have this for you at the June 22nd council meeting, the resolution. It's for a generator for emergency management warehouse. It's right at $145,000. And that's just a warehouse. But it is a 75-25 grant. We'll have 35-7-10 as our local match. But that'll be in next year's budget coming out. But since I became aware of it today, I just want to make you aware it's coming up at the June 22nd meeting. Also sent you an email received today from Robin asking for consideration on moving the part-time to full-time person at the Veterans Affairs office.

Thank you for that, Lauren. So for this session, it's going to be slightly different because it's a continuation of the conversation from Monday night. So Monday night, what you have in your agenda packet is exactly the same from Monday night. So we're going to what we've done in the meantime over the last 48 hours was record where you were pulling money from and where you were adding back money from. So the handout or what you were adding money back to. So the handout that's coming around is the conversation from Monday night and more or less the work that Mr. Graham was doing for you. And so to orient you, you have every item is listed. And then we have, let me get you going. What you pulled, which then turned into what is available to you to use in order to balance your general fund budget. So that subtotal of $2.4 million is what you have available in quote unquote revenue, right? So the work that Mr. Graham was doing, we've tried to recapture it here so we can continue the conversation. The second table are the things that you requested to add back, so to speak. And I'll give you a minute with this because, you know, you had the conversation, but now you've got it written in front of you. So the add backs would be a total of 2.2 million. which leaves available the $175,000. So we thought the best way to use this session with everyone today is to go through and confirm, and you could vote. I don't know if you want to vote. I know you were voting on Monday as well. You can vote in this session. But to make sure that we heard you properly as far as what you want to see removed, which then makes revenue available, right? Because you've removed the budgeted expenditure. Then what you want to see added back and so the focus of the conversation today is only on the general fund because that's where you need to Spend your mental energy trying to balance the general fund and then when we come back for third reading You would see the final iteration For the general fund the 18 special revenue funds and the capital improvement plan and then also have that second public hearing and So if you just if I could see you guys are looking down so that fair enough to give you a second to mull through the information and then I could do it live for you. And Sabrina can also work some numbers live if need be to and have this sort of be more of a working.

Session yes, ma'am Jamie so for the record and for the purposes of minutes under FOIA if you've saved this document Originally if you make changes you'll need to save that as a whole new document because we will need both this as well as any live changes You make here for the record for minutes for FOIA purposes Absolutely want to make sure you knew to save it as another document so that we have both What came in and was presented and what came out?

Absolutely. Thank you for that

The question, so the row that's highlighted, the Sheriff's Office Detention Center, can you just talk through what, because there is a, whatever it was, $300,000 that was...

Yes, and thank you for saving that for me, Sabrina, because she's able to work in this live, too. So we have the original... And then we're going to have tab two, which is the same document that we're going to edit for you. Regarding the Sheriff's Detention Center and the 24-7, that's the care for those that are detained with us. So we on our end need to hear from you. Did you actually pull that number back? That's why it's in order.

I did. You did. I did. So it was like, I don't remember the exact number, but it was like $900,000 in the budget. And then the sheriff said it's going to be like $600,000. So I was using that in the...

So if I actually put in $300,000... Right. ...you have available to you... Thank you, Sabrina, too... I know this is new and different because we're doing this live But we thought this might be the best way in the interest of time. So now you have available to you The 2.7. Does that look right in your head? Yes that you have cut back expenditures making room so to speak 2.7 available to use to put other things in. Does that make sense? Am I making sense here? Let me know, because I look at this a lot and forget that. Everything is included. So did we want to walk line by line and make sure everything is accurate based on your conversation? Or is this the best way to proceed? Do you need a minute?

Okay, so during on Monday You moved to add 1.5 mils, okay, so now don't remember don't forget what you published at you published 83.5 So you would go up?

So you would go up to 82 and change in mills if you, in fact, stay with this. So what does that generate and make available to you? A little over a million dollars. And that's that first line. You then have the conversation regarding, OK, for public safety staff, and they're listed there, we would like to see their across-the-board increase decrease by 1%. So that's a savings, right, of $248,000. So they go from 6 to 5. Regarding EMS, now they're a different animal, as we know. I say that with love. But they are doing major changes to how they're doing business with the 24-72 schedule change. So we pulled them out just for our own mental purposes to be able to track this properly. But they would also be having the 5%. And so that's a reduction of 1%. And that equals the $252,000. So you're making room by reducing the across the boards. Regarding the comprehensive class and compensation study, that's on your fund balance list, so it lives in a different world. But you said, no, let's not do that this year. So that's going to take your fund balance appropriation down by $125,000. You also discussed the hourly wage and removing that amount of $919,000, which is shifting people, full and part-time staff that this applies to, from the 15 to the 17. But you've decided to, OK, we're going to forego that, and then the compression that is attached to that. So you've made available to yourself the $919,854. And then regarding sheriff's office, and our sheriff has said, okay, I can peddle back on 24-7 care for those that are detained with us. And so you have the $300,000 now that you can shift and move. You're moving your budgeted expenditures around and creating more revenue for yourself. $2.7 million.

But just for clarification on that public safety that includes the 911 staff as well.

Yes, that's in that first. What is row seven? I just wanted to make sure I just want to be thank you and I can actually clarify that as well, but that includes your corner it includes fire services

Okay, I just want to be clear that you left everything, just pulled EMS literally off us. Correct.

And Jamie, the $300,000 on the Sheriff Detention Center does not appear on our printout.

Right, because what is on your printout is what we heard from the second. So I'm like changing it live on the screen. And so we're going to have the two versions for FOIA, what you came with today, and then also for your minutes, what you're leaving with. And so what you're leaving with today will be the start of what you'll see on June 22nd. So it's like a moving, you know, we're inching our way up the street. So the 300,000 is on the screen and the total is there. So you guys don't have to, you know, quickly do the math or you can do the math however you want to.

But it was a question for us to make sure we heard you properly.

So now you know you have this pot now of 2.7, right? And so now you're having conversations about, OK, what am I going to use? What am I going to add back? The first one is the position for the auditor, and that's regarding—because of the Homestead Act. And so that's one new full-time clerk position. That $64,000 includes the recurring and nonrecurring expenses to bring that position on, and that $64,000 is for 12 months. We heard from Carla regarding the case and records management. And so her follow-up email had 20,000. We put the FICA and the benefits on top of the 20. So that's giving you $26,470 for that employee to take on the various and sundry functions related to the records and management of. regarding Mr. Cato's schedule change for both the paramedics and the EMTs. So you see the five paramedics, they would be starting on January 1. And so that 297,000 number is just those, it also includes those non-recurring expenditures. So we're still gonna buy for them their radios, their uniforms, the things they need to do their job. But what's at six months is just that salary piece and the personnel expenses. Similarly with the EMTs, six months start, four EMTs, $183,000 and change to move the schedule from this 2448 to 2472. So then there was also a conversation around how to train for EMS staff. And so this is kind of like the cost benefit analysis, right? So do we bring on the paramedic instructor and do the training in-house? Or do we continue to budget for and travel to Columbia and get our training? So that's a decision point if whether or not you want to add back the paramedic instructor or if you want to keep having the EMS staff go to Columbia, get training, et cetera. So that's an orange because we need to hear from you on how you would like to train the staff.

So that paramedic instructor is included in the 2.257 total?

Well, so what we did, yes, it is. It is, but if you want that. Okay. Okay. Yes.

Regarding this. Back here, if you'd like to hear from him, I think personally we'd probably want to look at keeping his instructor. Why can't you come up?

We discussed that the other night.

Well, I think, I think this is going to this, this 20, the 24 seven is going to be, or the 24 to 72 is going to probably be the biggest question that I have, because I just want to make sure that, that we have the personnel allocated to, to make this change as clay. Cause I think that's, that's where the confusion was. Right. So listed on here, you can see there's five and four. for the paramedics and the EMT and then the training position. So what are we missing?

So I met with finance today and the five paramedics needs to go to seven and the EMTs need to go to six to get us to 2472. And that figure is not in there.

Do we have that figure? Okay.

Can we add that in?

Yeah, let's just add that in just so we can see it if we've got it.

Say that again, Clay. You need how many?

So to make it fair across the county, we're going to need 13 positions to go to 2472. Right now there's only nine. And the reason being if we don't get 13, I'm going to have half the county running 2448, half the county running 2472 making the same thing. So this half is working less than this half making the same amount of money. Do you know what kind of morale that's gonna create? It's gonna be an HR nightmare.

You're saying additional four?

I need the additional four and today we added two more to the paramedic line and two more to the EMT line.

That would be about the total 415,961, something like that. Add about another 115,000. Is that about right? If I take the 297,115, divide that by five and then multiply it by seven,

It sounded like they, I think you already calculated it. Yes. Maybe.

Calm down. Yeah, I don't want to give you a hard number because it really is a little bit fluid right now. And so we're trying to settle on, we've gotten the exact number and we know we need to adjust the total dollar amount based on the number that we were just given this afternoon. But for the paramedics, each one all in, and this is the salary, the associated benefits and the non-personnel items that go along with that is right about $138,000 each for the paramedics.

And then what's the other EMTs?

Um, I want to say it's right about a hundred thousand, but I need to double check that. But, um, just based on the new numbers that we have, we'll need to insert that. So, um, you know, that'll take away from the bottom line because it's more positions than what we had initially estimated.

So you, I'm sorry, you were saying you need how many paramedics then seven?

Seven, just got five there, but we need to move that to seven. So let me ask you a question.

The five that we have currently budgeted at the 297,115, are those all the same? The same salaries? So if you get 297 divided by five, you end up with 59,423. Then you multiply that times seven, you get the 415,961. That's about $115,000 difference. Is that correct? I mean, is that? Right, you do the same with the four. I just, the only difference is if the roles are different and they're not equal.

Right, I wish it was that cut and dry. But I will tell you, as we receive the position requests, they're not all priced out the same way. Some of them have come as an individual position that might have a dollar amount for training, a dollar amount for associated equipment. Another position, exact same position, might have different levels of those same items. And so the price I'm giving you is an average based on those requests that we got.

Okay. And you said it was 138?

It's approximately 138,000. That would be the high-end estimate.

Okay. And that's for the full year?

That's for a full year for one paramedic.

Okay. So that's about 70 per role. So that's an 140,000 for two.

Approximately. Yes.

Okay. And then for the EMTs four, is that the same? Same cost.

Yeah, not the same cost. And so I'll tell you what we do in order to narrow down on exactly what Clay's need is. We will go back to his original request. to be able to confirm which package of the paramedic he's needing to add to this bottom line. because it's not the same for each one. And so we don't have a quick answer that we can give you. It's an escalation.

I'm just trying to get it like in a ballpark. I'm like trying to be in the same ballpark for a paramedic is right.

The ballpark for a paramedic is about 138. Yeah, yeah, exactly.

How soon can you get us these numbers for the additional four positions, EMS?

We should be able to get it to you as soon as tomorrow. We're just finishing up that conversation almost literally right before we came in here this afternoon.

We've got to have some definite numbers.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

Yeah, I'll tell you just the mix is very different from where we started. So we're just trying to get down to, you know, what the bottom line request is for these positions.

You're adding two paramerics and two EMTs to each of those, right? You'll be at seven paramedics, six EMTs.

Or additional positions. It's about $140,000 for the two.

If you're just looking at the salaries.

$138,000 for the year, so if you divide them both, that's two half-year.

If you're just looking at the salaries, are you looking at the whole package?

I was looking at the $138,000.

Okay, so the $138,000, that is combined, the salary and the non-personnel cost.

Correct.

And so if we cut it in half and say we want to start it at half year, we're halving the salary. But those non-personnel expenses, those are in full, like the equipment and things that go along with it, those are still the full cost.

Okay.

And just to be clear on the paramedics instructor, because there was another piece of this was the partnership between EMS and fire. So you're saying with this in the paramedics instructor, you can accomplish that as well?

That position is currently not listed in there.

The paramedics instructor?

If you think back to the line I asked, I said 15, the magic number is 15, this is 14. And the paramedic instructor currently is on a grant that ends the same time the insurance does in September. So it would be only funding for three quarters of a year. And just for the record, that position, That subject was offered a job today to leave, to become a paramedic instructor somewhere else, if this doesn't go through. So in September, if this doesn't go through, he'll be leaving us.

So that's the question is, your preference is you would rather have your own instructor instead of sending everybody to Columbia.

Affirmative. You know, I explained to Sabrina and them this afternoon that this person teaches like three days a week. The other two days a week, we get to use him to help the citizens. He works, covers ball games. He covers, backs up on truck. He does other stuff. So we get a full 40 hours out of this person. He only teaches three. He does planning some of the other days, but if we get busy like this weekend, helping at the Juneteenth, we can put him there because he's a paramedic just like everybody else. So we can put him as we need it. It's just another body for emergency purposes.

Well, I mean, I think for continuity and for quality that you can build your own program in-house and save time sending people to Columbia, I think it's better off.

It is a cost savings because every time I put five people in a car and send them to Columbia, they're on the clock. That's a worker's comp injury. That's more liability for the county. And I have to abide by their class schedule, not the county schedule. When we do it in-house, we accommodate their work schedule, so we cut down on the overtime that they pay. Because if today's their work day and they're in class, I can't shut that ambulance down. I've got to pull somebody else in for overtime, unfunded mandate, so to speak, to keep that ambulance on the road.

So the $116,000 is enough to cover that. Yes, sir.

We need to leave that in. Yes. It's in there already.

But the other thing, that paramedics instructor that's listed on here, that additional one is the same salary or similar salary?

It would be a similar salary to the other position that we were talking about for the fire EMT program count-wide, yes.

Okay, so similar. So you're looking for...

It would make the same thing work, same hours.

$116,000 and then... Okay. Okay.

And of course, it depends on when you want to start that program. July 1, September 1, January 1. Slicing the apple, saving the money.

He needs additional one. He needs two.

I have a question.

Go ahead.

I think with the program of the EMS and fire, we might have to wait a while on that because I don't think we're going to have funds. So we've got some other stuff that we've got to get added in. So we're doing the 24-72, making sure we get that.

That's obviously you guys' call. It was just a proposal that we made a while back to try to provide better services countywide.

That's right. We've got to do what funds we've got. I understand.

So am I correct? We added 300,000 more. So the bottom line there, we should be at 475,000.

Yeah, I think we actually are going to be, I think with what we're just talking about now, I think we would be able to do that based off of what we have right now. There's going to be enough funds to add the two paramedics, the two EMTs and the paramedics. the additional instructor, there's, there's going to be enough funds to do that, assuming we don't do anything else. But as we're sitting here today, it's going to work.

Yeah, I do want to be able to just add a little bit of context there that these additional positions that we just learned about today, they are not reflected here. And also the adjustment that we need to make for that 24, 72 model, there's some new information that we learned about that that we need to make adjustments for as well that are not reflected. So once we have settled on exactly what the model change looks like to include those new positions, we'll be able to accurately price it out to see where we land.

I'm just seeing conceptually or just roughly... you know, adding two and two and the instructor is about, and the instructor for a half year is gonna be about 320 total. I mean, roughly, but we know that we've got right now, we've got 475. So I'm saying we've got some wiggle room there. So I would hope that it wouldn't be that big of a difference.

Let's don't. No, no, I'm just saying conceptually it's there. We got to look at the fire service and stuff that was left out. Yes. The two firefighters that we hire every year, full-time firefighters, is not in this. It was eliminated, and that's something we do every year, but hire two full-time firefighters that work the whole county. We've got to figure out some way of adding this in here some way. and the apparatus technician for the fire service. There are 400 work orders behind and this was put in there to try to help to give them a third person to help keep up with the work orders on our fire equipment. The logistics officer, I can hold, I support holding off on it. But we gotta look at trying to get some fire service stuff in here, because it was not in here at all. But I agree, we're gonna go with your stuff, Margie. 24 seven stuff, 72 stuff, I'm good. I hate to throw that kink in there, but it was left out.

No, I agree. I had that on my list. So we have, it's the two firefighter engineers. Those are the two that you're talking about? Yes. That's the 432-264.

Those figures include them a truck also, I think, is my correct. Where's Greg?

Yes, I believe that does include a pickup for them.

Okay, and their equipment stuff that they'll use, yeah. So that's not salaries, that's equipment and everything.

Yeah, salaries, benefits, and a truck. Can we add that? That's one truck for the two.

Yeah, can we add that just so that we're back to having this as a live document?

And either way, on the maintenance tech or the logistics officer, if you want to go lower on the logistics officer, that position, Billy Lloyd does most of the logistics. So if we go to the lower one, that relieves him from having to do it so he can work on more trucks. So whichever way is better for y'all. I mean, if you want to go to the lower cost, that works for us. Because right now our maintenance staff does all of our logistics too, so that don't help any either.

So one's at 128 and that's at 136.

So the 128 works better. That'll relieve the maintenance tech now to work on more apparatus. It's 432, 264, Jamie. So either way direction, or if you want to do the maintenance tech, we can work that way too.

And then the second one, so which one did you want to add? I mean, whatever grade. Which one works for you? Which one do you need? Either one of them is good.

Maintenance tech would be our higher number because we can hire them and they can take part of the logistics also, so that would kind of split it up.

So it's the apparatus technician.

Yes, sir.

That was just an apparatus. 136, 856, Jamie.

We're getting close right there, aren't we?

No, we're over.

We're way over.

We're about 700 over.

Yeah, yeah, because if we do the 2472, we still need $240,000 that hasn't been added back into this.

Jamie, could we, maybe that's the, just so we're looking at this, could we add the, I guess, 140 for the two paramedics for EMS? I don't know, that's not exact, but it just is a rough number. And then two of the EMTs at $100,000, just so we can see it.

two of the EMTs at 100,000.

So Sabrina's itemizing that for you in blue. And so where you are here is in the negative 333,000. So I'll scroll back up to the area where we added.

And these are on the firefighters, are these full year cost?

Yes.

So if we took that to half year, then that would cut that cost. Well, it wouldn't cut it in half because you still got to buy the trucks.

Yeah, we would buy the trucks this year.

I mean, we would buy the trucks out of fund balance, would we not?

We could move them over to fund balance.

I mean, I would not pull that out of operations. Yeah. Well, we're still at 31% of fund balance. We're not at 20.

Two full-time people.

What they do when they buy two new trucks for the fire service, they take two of them out of service and put into a fire department for brush trucks.

The brush trucks, sir, are in Fund 11.

That's right. Yeah, I know that.

And so that's fine. You're fine in Fund 11. And you'll be getting those two brush trucks for F47, but out of Fund 11's millage.

Okay, so we need to adjust the two firefighters to a half-year position. That's, I think, weird. That's going to be weird because there is the cost of the trucks in with that number.

Yes, sir.

So we need to break that out before we.

I don't wanna say off the top of my head, I think they're to the tune of $125,000.

Those two trucks were probably $120,000.

Yeah, probably.

I think they're to the tune of $125,000, a truck. Do you know what just the salary would be, Chief?

106. 106, so you basically... That's for a year. Per year.

They might be really eyeing me right now, but I think it's about 106. Am I mistaken? Is that just one pickup in that, or is it two? Okay, okay.

A truck per person? Mm-hmm. Or a truck per...

Okay. So you... Basically, we got salary and fringe... So that would be 212 instead of the 432 if we did it for a half year.

So where does that take us to now?

And could we start the apparatus technician for a half year as well?

I think. I'd prefer to keep them a year just so we can get caught up on some of our money. We're more than 400 now. Okay. We're breaching on about the 500 range now. If we could keep that for a full year, it'd be great.

I think we'll be able to. It's going to be a half year. We've come within 113,000.

It's going to be, I think we're very close with that as a full year.

Chairman. Go ahead. If I could just remind council, this would be something you'd probably look at first half of next fiscal year with the new administrator. But y'all have had a proposal for a while about a methodology where we could pay for those firefighters out of Title IV versus Title VI. Make your life a lot easier on something like this.

I can check it. Typically, if we're hiring two for another position, we would take those trucks. Okay, never mind.

I'll take that back.

All right. We might go to one truck, but that's it. Yeah. I mean, whatever you need to do. If you need to do the maintenance tech a half a year, we can live with that. But if we're good to firefighters, it's one thing. All right. The maintenance tech, definitely. If we could keep them in for a year, it'd be great.

Do we have any other things we want to add or any other discussion we want to put in on this?

We didn't add the VA role.

Do we know what the part-time salary is now for that?

Is the question, what is the Veterans Affairs receptionist?

Yes, if we took them from part-time to full-time.

Well, they're in your exhibit list as full-time now. Yes, sir.

I think the other part of that discussion is, like, should we really, on the corner, should we really go for that as a full position versus trying to piece something together, too? I mean, I think that's a worry of the discussion. you know what I mean, instead of what Carl, I mean, she's basically piecing stuff together instead of adding a position, so.

I think she has a part-time position she's gonna make full-time.

She's gonna have to.

current role that she's using additional responsibilities for, if I understand that correctly.

And adding to her plate as well.

He's going to generate additional fringe costs.

Regarding the coroner's piece, that's right here. So you had said about $20,000, or Ms. Deese said $20,000, and so we added in the extra fringe. with the $6,470. And so that amount would go to the existing employee to fulfill additional duties, right? The case and records management function.

Carla, Mr. Chair, can we?

Carla, can you come forward?

I'm going to ask the same question as Monday. What do you need? What do you want?

I'm okay with it being like this. It's going to be an additional duty for another employee, but that's okay. I have some room for that. The primary point in this is as we grow, I need the case management done because we're still on paper as well, so we have to review everything before it goes to court. and before it's archived or goes to families, so on. That's part of that, and then plus, providing statistics for all of you guys as well, and for finance, when y'all ask me for things, right now, I have to buy supper for my crew and say, Saddle it, we're going to cook tonight. We have to literally count hundreds and hundreds of files. So this is gonna take that place. To take it to just a bump up, like you guys called it Monday night, I'm really okay with that this year. We're moving into a new building. It's going to take some time to kind of grow into that anyway and get this built out the way I want it. Not going to tell you that next year I may not come to you and say, can we move it up? Or maybe a year after that. But for right now, I'm perfectly fine with this. We'll make that work.

Next year, yeah.

I'm going to give the data part to the other person. I'm going to take the case management part. Okay. And I need to be real clear, I am not taking any additional salary to take that case management part.

That's the part where.

I am okay where I am. I am very happy where I am. So, thank you. Okay. That's right, that's right. Okay, thanks.

Can someone remind me, the VA, what was the situation with that? I need to understand.

Part-time receptionist and they want to take it to a full-time.

So part-time meaning there's someone in that office talking to people 20 hours a week and they're open more than that or need somebody for more.

They're open five days a week but this person only works half a week. They want them for a full time because they need somebody to answer the phone to help them be able to handle their case management work and working with the veterans.

I would definitely support that.

Their caseload has grown every year, I think.

Is the full-time salary for that person $130,000? Is that what it is? That's what I'm saying.

Veterans Affairs receptionist?

$64,000, but we're adding for a full-time, but there should be a part-time already built into this, so that should be cut out of that amount. Yeah. Go ahead.

So we already did the conversion from pulling out of the part-time line and using that to make this a full-time position, so it's not an add-to. We're using current part-time salary dollars and adding an additional, I guess it was 20, 30 grand to make this a full body, 63.8. So this is full-time.

This is the full-time amount? Yes, sir. Do we already have in the budget the part-time?

Yes, and we've used it to build this.

The reason it costs more is because you're having to add insurance.

Do I get a credit for the part-time because we're already paying the part-time?

Is the part-time added in?

Part-time's already in the budget from last year.

And not the full-time. Part-time's already added into the budget currently. We used that. We made it whole, and then we added the benefits, the health insurance, the da-da-da.

To build it up to the 63 total. Correct.

Yes, sir.

Health insurance is a killer when you go from part-time to full-time.

Yeah, the health insurance is a little over 17 grand. on the county, not on people.

Can we add that in just to look, just so we see it?

Yeah, 63.

So Sabrina's going to add the Veterans Affairs receptionist one full time for $1,800.

Guys, I'm going to tell you, that's about all we can handle.

And what would that cost?

I think that's all we can handle on hiring people. We need to see where we're at on that.

Okay, so to reorient you, negative number of 176.1.

I'll scroll back up, your ads are in blue here.

Jamie, that may be one you may have to calculate. That's probably gonna take it to about 1.7.

The 212, what's the 212?

That 212 needs to be a half. Sorry, the firefighter, the 212, that's a full year. So it needs to be half. It needs to be half that. And that should be closer, right? Yeah, yeah.

So do we want to continue going down?

Absolutely. I think we left off with the sheriff's office, and that was the staff attorney position at a half year, which also includes a vehicle. That vehicle is on the fund balance list. How much was that vehicle? Sheriff and Shaw do a good job. They usually come in at $66,000 for a vehicle.

That's not in this 157. You're saying that's out of fund balance?

Correct.

This is strictly salary and...

Yes. Okay, so the whole salary then is 314 or 315, around that? As a whole person? As a whole year. That's all.

That's why I'm saying.

Oh, no, no, no, no. Can I do a point of clarity? Can I do a point of clarity, Mr. Carnes? Yes, the car is included at $66,000 in the 157.

That's what I thought.

Because the position at a full year is closer to like $100,000 or something like that.

No.

Can we move that car to fund balance?

That gets us closer.

Yeah.

Yeah. If we can take the car out of there, we're getting pretty close. And it goes into. How much did he say the car was?

66. 66.

Yeah. Yeah, that'll, that'll really, that'll be balanced. Yeah.

And then that leaves the staff attorney role at about 180 with benefits and all that? And that's appropriate? That's an average amount of what we pay all attorneys?

Not the subject matter expert on pay for attorneys, but yeah.

We should be consistent, right? Let the sheriff come up. Yeah.

And deputies make more than my attorney makes. So, no, I think this is a fair salary for what I'm asking for, plus the car, plus the office equipment, you know, computers and everything that has to go in.

Okay. So you have staff right now that's getting a different compensation?

Oh, yeah. Yeah.

Okay. We should probably look at that across the board.

Well, I hope that person will go to part-time. We won't be doing that anymore.

Okay. Moving on to corrections officers for the opening of the detention center. This was a change that was made to six corrections officers, fully funded, 12 months, and then two at the half-year point, January 1, for a total of eight corrections officers for the facility, the new facility. 681-097. Similarly, the four non-sworn booking clerks, all four, would have the start date of January 1, 2027. 145.5. Regarding Council on Aging, you had a presentation from Council on Aging, and I believe there was follow-up as well with numbers. You did agree that you would fully fund their request, so that's an increase of $100,000 to a total of $200,000 for the Council on Aging for FY27.

And just for clarification, is that a recurring cost? Is it going to be a recurring, or is that just while the grant is active? Do we know how long?

That would have to be a yearly request.

That's what I was.

It's just one year. I guess we'll know that on a yearly basis.

Because I'm wondering if that should be a potential fund balance as well instead of operating. Yeah, come on.

You're talking to me.

Yes.

Thank you. Do you want to ask me that question or you want clarification on numbers?

No, it's just a question. Is it a recurring $100,000 or is it a yearly kind of amount that then gets just requested every year?

It would be reoccurring but not at a steady rate. It would be about that. The federal government lets us know our award notice and we have that amount for that contract for that fiscal year and how much we have to have in that local match.

I guess do we need to have it as a recurring amount or can we have it as a fund balance amount and then it gets re-upped every year depending on what the request is?

I think we have $100,000 reoccurring.

Correct, and it's the extra $100,000. Now it's extra.

I think it's going to be left up to us because if she get more money next year, she may say, I need 220. So I think that's going to be a 100,000 can be reoccurring, but the additional amount will be under discussion.

If you build your ridership, you're going to have to have that money or you had to cut your ridership next year. Is that correct?

That is correct. To answer that question twofold, if we don't get the $200,000, then I cannot get the full amount for this program, which you guys have the numbers in front of you. It was in the packet. Your $200,000 gets us that full program, which is a $625,000 program.

So, Jessica, do you usually get the same amount every year? Yes.

that's a great question that's that second part is the government has set it up the FTA has set it up as a formula and so you we turn in a ridiculous amount of reports to federal and state levels and then that formula decides how much you are awarded each year it's a it's a bit of a delay so you don't see it instantly it's something that comes in We are now tracking where we're using the full contract in a year, where historically we haven't. It's taken a couple years to use the awarded contract, which is why you see an increase in ask this year.

But from our point of view, we can, the $100,000 can go to the fund balance. Yes. It can't technically.

But if it is recurring, yeah. I just have it as an option. That's why I wanted to get the clarification.

But I think it's, because Jesse, you requested on a yearly basis regardless, right? Yeah. We've got 100,000 appropriate.

It's not a requirement for us to have it. Yes. Okay.

Did you need any more follow-up on the numbers? Did you have the hard numbers that you requested from me on Monday?

No, this is great. Thank you for that. The only other thing that I would ask is just what are you projecting once you're going to get ridership up so you get this funding? What are you expecting to get as a result? What's the increases that you're going to see? That way we can balance what the request was and what the return on that investment is looking like.

Absolutely. Those are, again, that's that slow formula. This allows us to use that full program. There's other things that I'd be open to talking to council about that might help the county. And when you're meeting with other businesses that want to come into our area, I could also contract with them to get their employees back and forth. So whatever helps the county public transportation wise, I'm open to that.

That would be a great conversation for our economic development folks. I would think.

I'm definitely open to that, to that growth that way.

Thank you.

Anything else? Thank you so much. Thank you.

We're almost done. The non-public safety staff, we talked about the across the board increase for that bucket of staff, existing staff. So we would take them increase from what is now a 2% to a 4%. So this $484,000 is a 2% increase. And then procurement mileage, $700. So now you have, you're very good, you're in a good place, $5,104. Very good, good work. Jose gonna write us a check. Very good work, I'm proud of you guys. So, I mean, do you want us to take the liberty to pull 5,000? I mean, how do you wanna balance, right? No. It's up to you guys how you want to do it, but you're, I mean.

I think there's, I mean, some of the firefighter, some of that stuff's not exact, so we're going to have to just see what that.

Y'all will need to put in all the extra stuff, and then we'll see where we're at next reading.

Right where we need to be. Absolutely.

I think we're very close on what we've added there, so we just need to. find out what that final number is. Absolutely. Okay, do we have any additional questions, comments? Hearing none, I'll call for a motion to adjourn.

So moved.

We stand adjourned.