Common Council - Regular Meeting

All right, we're going to go ahead and get the meeting started tonight. Um we're going to start out uh have uh the prayer. Uh it will be by Jo uh Pastor Joanne Angi Anun from God's House and then Councilman Nick McKenley will do our pledge of allegiance. Welcome sir.

Thank you. And my name is pronounced Jo Andy Anrand and I am the pastor right here in downtown Marian on uh six in Gallatin. If you guys wouldn't mind, please bow your heads. Heavenly Father, we come before you this evening with grateful hearts. We thank you for this gift of this day, for the privilege to gather and for the responsibility you've entrusted to those who serve the city. Lord Jesus, you are the prince of peace and we invite your presence into this room right now. We ask that your peace would settle every heart, every mind, and every conversation. Where there is tension, bring calm. Where there is uncertainty, bring clarity. Where there is weariness, bring renewed strength. Father, your word tells us that if anyone lacks wisdom, we may ask you, and you give it to us generously. So today, we ask for wisdom that is pure, peaceloving, considerate, and full of mercy. Guide every discussion, every decision, and every vote with integrity, discernment, and compassion. We pray for unity with uni without uniformity, for respectful dialogue even with even when opinions differ and for hearts that seek the good of the people above personal interest. Remind us that leadership is all about service and that true strength is found in humility. Lord Jesus, help each person here lead with courage, listen with understanding, and to act with justice and grace. May this meeting reflect order, purpose, and hope. And may the work done here

contribute to the well-being and future of this community. We commit this time to you, trusting that you are invited and you lead us in the way that we should go. I pray for Mayor Morell. I pray for the city council and I pray for the people of Marion and in the mighty matchless name of Jesus Christ. Amen. I want to say God bless you guys. God bless Marian and God bless America.

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

All right, next up we'll do a roll call. Kane here. Marshall here. Ford here. Brunner here. Klein here. Divine here. Whitten here. McKinley here. Calgill here. We don't have anybody uh for the spotlight for this evening. So, we'll go right into the consent agenda. Is anybody have any discussion on that? I see none. So, I would entertain a motion.

Mr. President, I would uh make a motion to pass the consent agend agenda as it's presented. Okay, we have a motion by Councilman McKinley and a second by Councilman Klene. Roll call, please. Kane, I Marshall. I forise. Hi. Runner. I Klene. Yes. Divine. Yes. Whitten. Yes. McKinley. Yes. Calgill. I Okay. at this time. Uh, does anybody have any committee reports?

What?

Yeah. Anybody else? Okay. Seeing none, we'll go on to uh unfinished business. Um, before we do this, I just want to tell everybody in the audience tonight that this isn't a second reading public hearing. So, we we won't be able to hear anything from the public at this time. But you guys will hear all the discussion between uh the utilities or their council and us. And when this is all done after that, then we'll take a vote to either uh override the mayor's veto or let it stand. and Robin and I had talked u if it doesn't go through this doesn't mean it's done. It just means we got to come back with another plan that works for both sides. So, okay. General ordinance number 30 2025. Go ahead.

General ordinance 30 2025 amending monthly water user rates vote to override mayor's veto. An ordinance amending the monthly user rates and charges for the city of Marian Indiana. Introducing an ordinance to adopt water rates and charges sufficient to support the utilities ongoing revenue requirements and obligations under Indiana Code 81538. Speaking uh Robin Schrader, director of Mary utilities. Good evening once again. Thanks for having us. Um I'm not going to do a ton of talking this evening. Um instead, um we've got the several things to present to you. some information that we feel like might be helpful for you to make this decision. But I want to introduce to you Christian with Bose McKenna. He is our legal counsel and um he's going to share some things with you.

Welcome. Can Can everybody hear me? Okay. I didn't know I was going to be the star of the show tonight or leading off here. Uh my name is Chris Chanok. I'm an attorney with Bose McKenna and Evans in Indianapolis. And I've represented the city of Mary and its utilities for 15 20 years probably. And I know there's been a lot of discussion about the rates and where we are. And I thought I'd talk about not necessarily how we got here, but where we are today. And with me is also Jennifer Wilson. She's with uh Crow, which is the financial advisory firm for the utility. And Marty, have you shared the letter with the council that I sent to you?

Okay. So, you you're going to you've heard some of this, but for the benefit of the public, I'll go ahead. Absolutely.

Share it with you. Uh where we find oursel financially as a utility is uh our revenues are less than our expenses. So typically you want to see a hund at least 100%. So you want to have your revenues be 100% of your expenses. That's, you know, any household would tell you that. Uh any business would tell you that we're under 100% for the 12 months ended June 30th of 2025. Jennifer would tell you she does not anticipate that changing anytime soon. So we're underwater now. Why that? So, it's not a temporary thing. We see that going on into the future unless some sort of action is taken. And to date, we've tried to raise the rates to fix that problem. Um, not only is it a simple business problem, it is a problem because we have outstanding ordinances and agreements which require us to not only have 100% coverage, but 125% coverage. So our revenue revenues have to exceed our expenses by 25%. So we are we are way way off at this point. Now what that means is and I and I've given you the documents and Marty's shared the letter with you. We have a bond ordinance with the um that requires this and that's the obligation of the city of Marian not just the utility the city of Marian that it will have rates and amounts sufficient to have 125% coverage and the bond holder who happens to be the state of Indiana has a bond ordinance that allows them to enforce that against the city. We also have a financial services agreement with the bond holder that says we will do this. Um the documents the bond ordinance and

the financial assistance agreement say that if we do not do this then the state can take certain actions and you may say what what are they going to do? Uh well what they can do is they can come in and intercept the funds. they can basically either take over the utility or go to court and have a receiver appointed and the receiver will administer the utility. Uh in the state of Indiana, I've been doing this I'm kind of an old guy. I've been doing this over 30 years. This has never happened in my time. Jennifer, so this would be unprecedented and and unprecedented in a bad way. So we we have a problem that we need to fix uh in some fashion. Um, if a receiver is appointed, we can talk some more about that. It sounds doom and gloom and I don't and it is kind of doom and gloom from a financial perspective because if the market finds out that the city of Marian is defaulting on bonds and have a had to have a receiver appointed, I think it will not only affect the ability of the utility to borrow money but also the city as a whole because it's just this is very uncommon. Um, and so we need to fix this. Uh, it's that simple. And how we fix that, that's up to you. We've offered rates and I think you adopted the rates and we would ask that you override the veto. I I understand where the mayor's coming from, but where we find ourselves right now, we just need to fix this for not only just for your water utility, but for the city of Marion as a whole. So, with that, I can answer any questions. I can sit down. I'll I'll um but I'll stop for right. I think that's enough for now.

So um you might as well just stay up there. Yeah. Okay. So you're basically saying that if you guys don't have the money or whatever that Marian needs to pony up whatever you don't have. Is that what you're is that I understand that right?

Not m the obligation is the this is not property tax back at all. This is all user rate driven. So the utilities are supported by user revenues only. So it won't be the city of Mary imponing this up. It will be what will happen is we need to have rates in place because the utility stands on its own. uh you can use property tax revenues but uh typically speaking the user revenues and what the obligations in the documents require is that your user revenues cover your expenses plus 25%. So either the the council um gets in a place or the utility gets in a place where it can cover its revenues and expenses plus 25%. or the state will come in and appoint a receiver and they'll do it without any input from you. They'll just do it. They'll hire somebody like me to come in and run the utility. They'll go to court and they'll get a receiver appointed. They'll appoint somebody, it won't be me, but you you get the picture, that will come in and raise the rates and raise the rates in amount not only to cover the expenses that exist now, but also to pay for all of the proceedings that go into having a receiver appointed. So, this is a utility issue. Uh, so it will be user rates that need to be increased in some fashion. Does that make sense, Mr. President? Yeah.

Go ahead, Mr. Clay. and you sort of have done it, but my one question for now is in short and plain Anglo-Saxon plain English words, tell us what happens if we sustain if we do not override this veto.

Yeah. Comma, please. Yeah. And if I start using mumbo jumbo legal words, slow me down and tell me to Yeah. Yeah. Hey, stop it with the legal mumbo jumbo. Uh here's what you need to know. I think if we do not override the veto or get coverage in some way, then the we will notify the state that we are in default under our documents and the state will come in and have somebody they will take over the utility and they will increase the rates. and they'll increase the rates not only in an amount to cover your current expenses, they'll increase them to cover all of their costs from having to come in and do that. So, it that would be bad for the rateayers and the the city will have the reputation as a whole of not honoring its obligations and it will make it very difficult for you to borrow money in the future.

So, what did you mean when you said get coverage in some way? Explain that.

Yeah. So either we override the veto tonight, we this the utility has come forward and told you based on a recommendation from its financial advisor that these rates that you have before you will get you coverage. That solves the problem. If you override the veto, we have solved the problem and we're good on a going forward basis. Are there other ways to get coverage? Not that we know of. Um but you know, I don't want to act like I'm the council and telling you what you can or can't do. I'm just telling you the rates need to be raised in some fashion and that's the only way that I know to Is this still going? Only way I know to get coverage. Mr. President, may I

Yes. Go ahead. Just question. Yes, sir. So, there was a loan taken out for I think 1.8 8 million from the water utility, from wastewater. Why now all of a sudden are we are you saying they're going to be in default? Why weren't they in default before they took the $1.8 million loan? Why now is it the state going to say we're in default? Why weren't we before?

Jennifer, you want to cover that? So generally they look at it on a year-end basis. So when we did the analysis using year end or we did a year end June 30th of 2025 that's not considered your fiscal year end. So now that we're at the end of 2025 and you've taken out a loan and the metrics will show that you don't have coverage using the prior fiscal year which is going to be year end 2025. The other question I have on the bond payment is um and to try and keep it in simple terms um the income that I receive, I pay my mortgage first, my car payment first, I pay all those things first and then whatever's left. Wouldn't the utilities pay the bond before anything else?

No. In the bond ordinance, there's a flow of funds and the first thing that gets paid is operating expenses. So that's the first bucket that's get get gets filled and then the bond payment gets filled next and the funding of the debt service reserve that's called the syncing fund those two together and then the depreciation fund which it funds your capital improvements or also called extensions and replacements. So right now you are putting enough money into the operating fund bucket and maybe a little bit into the bond and interest and the debt service reserve but since it's below one that's actually being decreased. So you're not filling your buckets like you need to and there's no overage that 25% overage that's supposed to go and pay for capital. So you basically have no money for capital. you're not making enough transfers for your bond and interest payments and your debt service reserve and you're making all your operating expenses according to what the bond ordinance says that's how it's supposed to go

and then so this might be a question for Robin but maybe you can answer it um yeah at the time of the raises for employees we'll say over the last three to five years was the board or the director ctor aware of the 125% rule and if they were why were these large raises approved?

I can only speak to when the debt service started to come on. You closed on that loan in February of 2024. So, and it's a draw loan. So, you haven't had full year of debt service payments. It's been an increment increasing over time. So it was a smaller amount in 24 that was due and grew in 2025 and in the I think it's in a year or two it will be at its full amount of what needs to be paid. So it hasn't been building it hasn't been at the highest amount it needs to be or hasn't been at the highest amount it will be for another year or two and that was designed that way to go along with the phase in of the rate increase.

Right. My question is, and I'll just be blunt to the point, is why were such large payraises approved when the financial situation was dire over the last five years, reserves were dwindling over the last 10 years? So my question is did the board and director know of the 125% rule prior to no prior to approving uh any of these payraises over the last three to five years.

It's not that we were unaware but our board has um had a history of trying to take care of our employees because without the employees we don't have a utility. Without the employees in the middle of the night when a water man breaks on your street, there's no one to come and fix it and you're not going to get a shower in the morning. Without our employees, we don't have a quality water product to provide to the city of Marian. And quite honestly, if we contract those services out, we're looking at even greater expenses. Our employees are our most valuable assets. They are important and we have to take care of them. And historically we have provided increases based on a very systematic process looking at the national cost of living. So it's not a random number. It's not halfhazard. It's been systematically trying to take care of those folks because we know that when we lose them, we are losing the utility. Last question or statement is um every city employee we have is valuable. Every police officer, every firefighter, we don't take care of them. We don't have safety and security. But as a city council, we're the fidiciary body and there's we have to separate emotions from data and facts. And we only take in so much tax revenue. So therefore, we can only spend so much. So my push back and you can respond is knowing what you're receiving for user fees, the data doesn't did not support it. I'm not saying myself or any other council member here don't think the employees there did not deserve a raise. our police and our fire, our other

street department, all our employees, we could definitely give them a raise if we could, but we would be in the red as a city. And thankfully, we have some very dedicated public safety, very dedicated city hall employees that come to work and do the job and do it well knowing they can probably make money somewhere else. And so, but at the end of the day, you only bring in so much, you can only spend so much. So, I just don't understand if there was a 125% rule and the board and you knew about it or whoever was in charge at the time, why these were allowed, at least in a time being when you knew you were in dire financial straits and upside down financially, why couldn't those raises of raised? And I've seen the the pay scale and I've seen the salaries and and doesn't seem like anyone at utilities is is doing too bad. Uh they they look like good healthy salaries, especially compared to city hall employees, but at the end of the day, it's still numbers in, numbers out. And I just don't understand why that was approved knowing that this was going to put you in a dire financial straight. And I feel really offended as a council member that we are we're come to basically expected to rubber stamp this and go no matter what decisions we made at utilities. You guys have to bear the weight of saying yes to a rate increase and then we're held accountable. Like I've said at the other meetings, we're the only elected officials here that are held accountable to what's going on there

because we, the mayor, the council appoint the board, but we also are the ones have to approve the rate increases. And so this is why we're here and discussing this. But I feel like the decisions that are being made at utilities are just done thinking, well, we're just going don't worry. We're just going to go to the council and they're just going to raise the rates to take care of that. That's all I have. Well, in response to that, I would say first off, when we do uh look at the salaries and when we establish those or when we make adjustments, anything of that sort, that's all based on data that comes from the American Waterworks Association wage study, which is comparing apples to apples. In other words, looking at folks who do exactly what we do across the state and then across the nation. We also take into consideration our neighboring utilities, neighboring counties, and the economic situation here, which is why if you look at that wage study from 2025, you'll actually see that our wages are comparable or on the very low side of things. So that's our attempt to make a concession for that. But beyond that, the bigger picture, you know, we we spent several weeks talking about the $740,000 that, you know, what what was that and where did that come from? And we we talked about part of that was health care cost, part of that was a salary increase. If memory serves, I believe the actual salary increase amounted to about $340,000 of that 740. When you look at $340,000 versus 10 years of zero capital improvement projects, we're kind of talking about a drop in the bucket. So the grand perspective on this is that we have to focus on the things that are the most important. And the most important part of this is we need to invest millions of dollars into the system that

we simply don't have. the the wages and salaries are such a small portion of that comparatively speaking that I just feel strongly that we're focusing on the wrong part of this this equation. Um, I understand what you're saying, but I've been with the city for 30 years between the fire department and city council. And um, out of those 30 years, probably a third 10 times, we've went without raises. City employees I'm I'm speaking of. And we aren't comparable. You're saying at least you're comparable. We're not we're we're low paid and the differences between a lot of people on the utility and then the equivalent to what they would be with the city, they're making like $50,000 more than what the Okay, I'll just read it to you here real quick. The executive director for the utilities with this is adding in the 2.8% 8% that you had is going to be at $149,171. Our mayor, which is equivalent to the top with you, is at $101,000. So there's, you know, $49,000 difference there. The assistant director of engineering, he is going to be making $137,575. Um the equivalent our engineer Mike Graph after 20 years of being with the city only makes $70,000. There's another 50,000. Your executive assistant makes 101,000. Our executive assistant, well, it depend. If you're talking about the mayor's executive assistant, she makes 38,000

compared to 101,000. If you're talking like the controller again, 68,000 to 101,000. Your IT guy, he makes 98,574 and he has an assistant too that makes 68,000. So your IT between the two is 166,000. Our IT guy doesn't have an assistant. He only makes 75,000. So he does all of our IT. That's I mean that's a $90,000 difference. And and sometimes you just believe me, it's it's not easy to tell employees no because I I agree with you, Robin. I think your employees are where it's at. And you say we got to take care of our employees. And and I commend you guys for wanting to do that. But like the 10 times that I've been involved, they said no. It's strictly because we couldn't afford that. You know, we I feel like your board is just giving and giving and giving and and and like Councilman McKinley said, I feel like and then it's put on us to take care of it because look, if you don't, we're in trouble here, but yet we we had no say in how the financial situation got here. And it's not just with raises. I agree with you on that because I know you went 10 15 years without pay rate increases then, but we didn't do that. The utilities did that. That was the utilities. uh idea not to do that. But then now because of that and I know you wasn't director then you had nothing to do with that. But but because of that now we're trying to make it all up in one lump sum. I I'm going to be honest with you my phone has rang off the hook the last two weeks. I I've had probably I got here at six o'clock for me. I've had three Texas since six o'clock. um they just don't think it's fair that whether it be the board or whoever's in

charge of all your stuff that because they have misandled the money in the right way that now we're wanting to put it on the back of the taxpayers. And I have a problem with that. I do. Um I I've been torn for two week. I don't know what to do to be honest with you. I don't know what the answer is. I've told you that too. Um, something's got to change. There's no doubt about that. And I agree with your your counsel. You know, it's uh I don't know what that answer is right now, but I do believe in the ying and yang theory. No matter what the problem is, there's a solution. We just got to figure out what that solution is together. And and I also can't thank you enough, Robin, for saying, "Look, I'll come in. We let's talk, you know, get on. Let's do all this together because the more people we have involved, the more likely we're going to come up with an answer quick. Um, I'm an elected official. They elected me when they swore me in. I promise to do the best thing that I can for the citizens of this town. And um, I just I can't bear from that. I I I personally cannot bear from that. So, I don't know. We'll I guess we're going to see what happens. Um, I do know that if this does not get overridden, and I discussed this with you earlier, I've talked with the mayor. We can doesn't mean it's over. We can come back immediately and get together, figure out a better compromise that is a better compromise for the citizens of this town. It's a compromise for you guys, so you're able to put back in there. Um, do you, and I'm not sure what fund it is, Robin. I don't know who it would be to answer this, but do you guys have like a um uh like a capital gain and or whatever there that fund would be called that's got like seven or eight million dollars in it? Is that true or no?

Not for the water utility. Okay, that's why I'm asking. Okay. No, not for the water utility. Those funds have been spent because we didn't have a rate increase for such a long period of time.

Okay. and and part of the reason for that there was a different council, there was a different mayor, um there was a different board, there was a different director. Um and it's, you know, we here again, we've we've talked a lot about how we got to this point. Should we have talked about rate increases a long time ago? Probably. So, in an attempt to serve the public as best we could, we did the best that we thought we could with what we had. and we lasted a long time because of the way things had been set up back in the early 2000s. But a lot of things have changed and we've talked about a lot of economic development and economic changes that we've seen. We've had a couple years of record setting inflation that's happened. And quite honestly, you know, to to be fair, sometimes the city has had an opportunity to provide raises to its employees that have far exceeded what we've had. It's kind of been back and forth. If you look back at the history, but I can also, you know, I'm I'm not going to speak negatively of anyone, but I will speak positively of the utility. you know, we've we've taken on the trash services and you know, fortunately, you guys approved a rate increase for that last year after having gone kind of on fumes for 10 years. Um, and that was incredibly helpful. We also took back the street sweeping and we didn't increase the rates for that. Um there was a lot of COVID relief money that came to the city, but the utility was not able to make advant take advantage of any of that money. Um you know, we've we have loaned the city money on several occasions. Um even written off a $ 1.77 million loan several years ago. So it's it's been our attempt to help the city at every opportunity.

And you know, I here again, I I can't speak against um it seems like an unfair competition to set the city utility city employees up against the utility employees because those job descriptions are very different. And I haven't seen the job descriptions for the city employees, but I know what's required of the utility employees. And I know that some of the guys who are out there in the middle of the night four degrees plugging a water mane. Um they're not being paid enough and and we are we are withholding that because we are trying to be considerate with that. So again, regardless of how we got where we are, we are here today. We are asking for your help um because we need we need to make this happen because we want to be able to continue providing a quality service. We got the best water in the state. I will not I'll argue that with anyone. You know, you guys do a great job. It's And I'm not trying to compare city employees with utility employees either. But when we're we're just talk when we're trying to talk about facts, then we we need to talk about the real facts. And I know there's a lot of misinformation that people I've talked with that they said, "Well, you guys are talking about a 40% increase." So, I know your water bill is not 100, but let's say if your water bill is hundred, then they're saying so it'll go up to $140. And that's not true because we're only talking about the water part of it alone. So, if your bill was $100, it would go up to like $106 or $107. It's not a whole 40%. So, I want to make sure everybody understands that. Go ahead.

Yeah. And with that that that 40% if you recall the the previous rate increase had already approved 15 of that. So the reality is that difference is not even the 40%. The the request is just to scoot up what had already been approved and then the extra 19 20 on top of that 20% on top of that. Just just for clarification.

No. Yes. I'm glad you said that because I'm trying to get everybody to understand what what's really happening. Um, and I get it on like you said, the guys out plugging a main at four degrees and stuff. I get that. But something else I could testify to is when you're out at 4:00 in the morning, it's 5 degrees and you're running into a burning building, you come out, you're free. You're frozen. I mean the police officers trying to run people down when I mean so it both both have to have common ground that we work that works for you works for us and I don't think in the past that that's happened but I think that's what we need to do now 100%. And um

well, and if you if you look at the the rest of the salary package, so the the folks that that were kind of in that upper echelon,

um they're servicing not just one utility, but four utilities. And even the wage study that AWA provides only looks at two at a time, water and wastewater. And so I'm I'm not making a case to justify that so much as to say the rest of those folks, the folks that are doing plugging those mains and sweeping the streets and whatnot, they're actually for the most part lower than a lot of the salaries that were mentioned by the city like the fire and the police that were on that list as well. So just, you know, taking in the whole picture of things Um, I know one of the things that we talked about was options of where we can go from here. The first one being to override the veto and then not given any other real options. Um, is there a possibility of going back and readjusting the budget to be able to meet that criteria of the 125%? Um, and what what would that look like? Had you guys even discussed that? So, that would ultimately be a board decision. And here again, just for the sake of the public, remind you that three of our board members are appointed by the city council and four appointed by the mayor. So that's not a choice that the utility has. Um that comes from you guys collectively. Um that would be a board decision, but the the stuff that we're talking about, even if we subtracted those employee increases for this year, it's it's a drop in the bucket. it is so insignificant compared to what we need overall. It's still not going to get us

to that point where we're financially healthy. So, and I don't know what else we could cut at this point uh because we've slimmed down considerably. I have a question. Based on this experience going through all of this, the mayor's veto, what if anything will change moving forward or what will be done differently at utilities to prevent us from getting in this situation again?

I mean, we're always consulting with our adviserss. Um, you know, we keep close contact with Jennifer at Crow as well as Chris at the law firm and we're listening to those folks. Um, I think the biggest thing is perhaps just sharing with folks how things actually work and how that needs to be done. And that's an education factor. And I'm happy to provide that. You know, I I've stated in the past, the utility operates in full view of everyone. We provide you guys with our regular our monthly financial statements, um, our year-end reviews. State Board of Accounts comes in and is overseeing all of that on an annual basis. and giving us uh their perspective on things. So we are completely an open book um for for folks to come and learn about how things actually work because I think sometimes we have part of the information part of the story and it's easy and I'm guilty of this. Um it's easy to make an assumption and and kind of think that we've got the whole thing figured out when in fact there's so many parts and pieces. You know, I I wouldn't presume presume to know how the city's financial structure works because I haven't studied it and I'm not and I'm not part of that on a daily basis. And I wouldn't expect you guys to be able to come into the wastewater plant and to know how much we should uh waste activated sludge that we should waste out of the system and how much we should return to the system to make sure that the bugs are happy or how much we should dose the chlorine to make sure that it's safe to drink but not going to kill you when you drink it. Um those sorts of things. So I think education probably is is the biggest thing and you know we we try to do that and we can certainly increase our efforts on that front perspective again as we operate be as a

nonprofit entity. You know we're every dollar goes back into the city. It goes back into what we're trying to do the infrastructure that we're trying to care for so that we can help Marian be the best that it can be. The uh gentleman who um put a veto on this is the mayor and I would like to hear from the mayor who's been sitting there very quietly throughout the evening. So, mayor, can you uh tell us why and how and uh um your your take on the entire situation, please? Well, what an honor to be here. I'm glad to be here on the this first first council meeting of 26. Um um yeah. So as I was preparing to speak today, trying to figure what I was going I was going to say, I decided to take the position in the voice of the people. As you look at and you see many of them that are here and many who couldn't make it. Um we've been in situations in the city of Marion where we've had to make tough choices. Um, we've had to cut things, move things, and ultimately try to do what's best for the 28,000 and some change of people that had that live in the city of Marion. And what I've heard and the feedback that I've received from those people that I and we represent is this is at this time it is they can't afford to pay this. Um we in respect to honoring our utility cuz again I would do believe we have the

best water in the state as well. there may be need may need to be some type of increase. But what I will propose and hope is that um we work collaboratively in public working sessions with the council administration and the utilities um with the public and be involved in having uh in the step and have an opinion on how we craft this because ultimately you know they're pay they're the ones that have to bear the brunt of paying for this and everything that we do um as public servants is heavily scrutinized and rightfully so. So, I believe that that scrutiny needs to be withheld in every element of the city of Marion. So, if we're going to move forward with any type of rate increase um asking those who are struggling, times are hard. You know, we did a major um food giveaway and the line was wrapped so around the block because people are struggling at this moment. Um things are going on in the world that that that are tough. So for us, if we're going to go out and lobby to increase any type of fee tax, um that make the citizens pay more money, it has to be a solid, justifiable reason why. And um if a rate increase is necessary, I would like us all to work together and be transparent to come up with that what that percentage is. And um and ultimately have to answer to the citizens. That's what I'm I'm I'm here to do and want us all to be here on the same page to do as well. We have to speak for the citizens and do what the citizens want us to do ultimately. Thanks.

Thank you, mayor.

Any other discussion? Just one last time before we vote and I hope um what is the short plain English explanation of what happens if the veto stands please.

If the veto stands, our lender, this is no different than your home mortgage. Our lender will start foreclosure proceedings. It's that simple. We're not paying our bills. We're not honoring our obligation under our mortgage which is the bond documents. So we and I haven't been here and I'm not you you know I'm not from here so I who am I kidding? So but I understand we've had lots of meetings, we've had lots of discussions. Uh even if you got rid of all the rate increases, you still need a significant rate increase. I mean instead of 20% you may need 18. Um, we need to do something, guys. And it needs to be pretty quick because our our just if you don't pay your mortgage, your home lender is not going to sit there and wait for you to get further in the hole. They're going to do something. And I would anticipate the state will do the same thing. Our lender,

while you're up there on that, um, how long you say they'll I thought you might ask that question, but it's legitimate. Finish. long uh before the banks would knock at the door. I mean, now we have the loan going on. And the reason I ask is that kind of adding on to what to the mayor said is, you know, maybe we can come to a compromise somewhere. Maybe it's not through this particular ordinance. Maybe it's through another one. Uh obviously, we're paying the bond now, correct? We didn't miss last month's bond payment, did we?

Okay. We did not miss last month's bond payment. Great. So, how much longer can we continue to pay the bond uh before this urgent rate increase is needed? I know we're still bringing in a revenue because, well, I just paid my water bill. Um, so how how much time do we have if there needs to be a compromise or maybe come to the table and and maybe understand better the process of moving forward for a rate increase? What's our timing?

There's two parts to this. Maybe Jennifer can handle the how long can we make the payments, but that's one part of it and I'll answer the second part if that's okay with you, Mr. McKinley. Go ahead, Jennifer. You want to answer the first part about how how long we can make these payments. Right. Right. So, since you have a loan from the sewage works, you're able to make the deposits into your bond and interest fund to make the payments. So, because of that loan, you're able to get through you did not have that loan, you would not be able to make the payments into the bond and interest account.

Uh what on a monthly basis, uh how much monthly are we in the red after we make all our payments, pay all our expenses, how much are we losing each month in water? I don't have those numbers. I I just have what I did for the rate increase that said you need to raise your rates. So we don't know how much we're paying out versus what we're bringing in on a monthly basis. We have it on a quarterly. Is it? Yeah. Is that right there? Right.

Yeah. So it's 1,323,000 uh million. Sorry. 1,323,000 overall annual increase that we're asking for. So if you divide that by 12, it's a little bit over 100,000. Whatever you know 10,000. I understand what increase you're asking for. That's also to

to make capital improvements as well. Yes. It's also to build up your cash reserves. My specific question is how much are we upside down per month? How much are we paying out per month versus how much are we bringing in? How much are we losing each month? I don't have those numbers specifically because it is all-encompassing. You have to look at all these items. operating bond and interest putting money away for capital improvement. So it's hard to segregate just that one operating item and you addition to that you had gotten a loan from the or the water utility has a loan from the sewage works. So that is propping up your fund balances at this point in time.

Right. And the reason I ask is I wanted just to know how long that loan money will last and to nail it down to what I'm really asking is how much time do we have figure this out before he says the banks are going to be knocking at the door.

The the that's a legitimate question. Uh and here's the here's the issue and this was the second part because I thought you might ask that question because I that's what somebody at home would say when they're trying to rectify a budget. Is this a short-term thing here? Your lender does not want you running your utility into the ground. If you can't make your payments now, that that's only you're digging a bigger and a bigger and a bigger hole. And that's why I think they'll be pretty aggressive. Now, the real question I think you're asking is how much time do we have before the repo man comes uh and appoints a receiver. Um don't know that. Um but I think this is something we need to get solved within the month. So we have to have a solution within a month. I really do. I Now, does that mean on day 31, does that mean the state or bond holders aren't going to come in two weeks and start sending us notices and send them uh hey, you need to fix this? Or I don't know how quickly they're going to do that, but I I think we need to come up with a solution within a month. And if we can tell them, we will come up with a solution within a month month, I think they they'll work with us. But guys, we have to we're gonna have to be aggressive about this and and I'd like for you to kind of amongst yourselves figure out a deadline of when you think you can do it. And I'll tell the lender that and report back. Um, but I think we need I think we need to figure something out in 30 days.

Thank you. Yep. And I assume, and I haven't talked to Marty about this, but I think what you're talking about is maybe starting over. So, we'd have to notice this up and do new public hearings and um I I think that's what we're talking about. So, but as long as we can get a solution within the next 30 days, and I I would rather you fix it tonight, uh obviously because that's I'm not sure the solution you're going to see is going to be materially different from what we're talking about. But um we need to do something pretty quickly.

Mr. President, thank you. Um I'm sure the people in the audience are as as frustrated as we are sitting up here. Seems like everybody's uh wanting to pass the buck here to this city council um with with no ownership from the water utility board. And I'm not sure how many of those are sitting in the audience tonight, but uh I know in the past previous meetings, they didn't show up. They weren't interested in coming to our meetings and and hearing what was said. There was a couple here. There was a couple here um but not not in force. So I this is just super super frustrating. Um it seems like we're going around in circles and and utilities doesn't want to take uh any responsibility for the problem that they're they're in right now. Uh the financial advisor, uh Crow, I I'm not sure where they were in all this and how they let this happen. Um they knew this was Well, maybe they didn't. um they didn't seem to know this was a problem until the last few months and all of a sudden now they're asking for the city to to bail the utilities out. So, um I I think I share everybody's including the public's frustration in this that uh this has to be put back on the utility board. They need to go back to the drawing board and figure out, you know what, what are you going to do? Do you maybe take away I'm sorry. Maybe

do you take away the raises for this year? I maybe it's too late for that. I don't know. But every little bit helps. I've I've worked for many different people over the years and and there was some mighty lean years that there was no raises handed out, people laid off, cuts made, uh improvements not done, uh expansion plans pulled back. So I think the utility board itself owns this and so um I think along with with the mayor and this board and the utility board I think we can sit down and maybe work out some type of a compromise uh to where this is more palatable poor for us and the public uh to swallow. So whenever whenever you're ready for a motion, I'm ready to make a motion. Mr. President,

Councilman Marshall has a he wanted to speak for

I've uh sat and tried to listen and and understand all the dynamics that are here and the biggest problem I have is that I haven't heard the word compromise from the utility. I've heard us say that and I haven't seen anyone suggest that there is room for compromise. So that's the problem I'm having with it. I'm not comfortable with the the increase and the amount of it because I haven't paid the bill just like everyone else. And you know, um it's unfortunate that we've gotten in this position and it seems really odd that we would it has been allowed to get this bad. So I I too feel like the board of utility bears a lot of the responsibility for not pulling and stop and saying something needs to be done years ago. So, um, I hope that we can find a compromise. And to me, that means you all going back to the table and saying, "Okay, this is what we hoped for, but we can live with this." And and then maybe everyone feel better about it. So, it's not a question. It's more of a statement.

Thank you. Say it. All right. There's no other discussion. I would entertain a motion. Mr. President, I move that we uphold the mayor's veto. Second. Okay. Uh just point of order if I may. Not arguing the motion, but a yes vote means I was just getting ready to explain. Okay. Thank you. So his the motion is to uphold. So if you vote yes, that means you are agreeing with the mayor and the veto stands. A no vote means you are wanting to override the mayor's veto. Is that not correct? Yes, sir.

Okay. All right. Roll call, please. Kain I. Marshall. Hi. Forice. No. Runner. I. Klene. No. Divine.

Yes. Whitten. Yes. Mckenley, yes. Calgill, yes. So, the veto is not overridden. The veto stands.

That's what I'm saying. Yeah, the veto stands. Um, we got uh I agree with council. It needs to be done right away. Um, I say that Robin or whoever uh get with the mayor and he will get with the council and I I'm willing to do what whatever it takes. I mean, there is a compromise in there. I know it there is. But we need and we need to get this done quick and and I do strongly hope that the board is realizing the situation, how bad it's gotten and um that you know they they they work with us as well to come up with a compromise of some sort. Okay. Next item on the agenda is general ordinance 322025

economic development commission ordinance second reading and public hearing an ordinance of the common council of the city of Marian amending the city of Marian code of ordinances. The city of Marian previously created the Marian economic development commission. The commission assists the city in financing economic development facilities through the issuance of economic development revenue bonds. While the commission has been a long-standing body of the city, their enabling authorities have never been codified into the city's municipal code of ordinances. Additionally, the city would like to increase the number of commissioners from 3 to 5 as permitted by Indiana law to meet the growing demands of the commission. Speaking mayor Morell,

good evening again and happy new year. Excited to be here um and talk about some of the progress we have going on. So um as you know the economic development commission, it's currently compromised of three people. one appointed by the mayor, one appointed by the uh city council, one appointed by the county council. Um the state law allows for us to update this ordinance to have five appointments. And the reasoning to we're searching after this is because with the frequency of our um projects and new things going on, the economic development council is a council that meets only on a um as needed basis. And because of only three people being on there, it's harder to get a quorum to be able to get these projects forward. thus um putting us in positions where we've had to stall things because of that. And if we expand out our our economic development council, that gives us more people to be able to pull from to be able to get these uh get these things done. So, I'm just asking that we um update and actually codify this ordinance to be able to allow us to have uh five members on on EDC.

Any questions or discussion from the council? All right. This is a second reading public hearing. So, anybody from the public would like to discuss either against or for this, you come up to the microphone, state your name and your address, and you'll have three minutes to speak. Council, could you do the timer, please?

Yes. Mr. Cal, thank you. I appreciate it. Yeah,

that's a minute, right? Um, only thing I got is going from three to five. Okay, we've talked about going off an economic cliff. We talked about doing all this and spending all this money. And you know we have to look at the wants versus the needs or the likes. And the needs even in the thing here it says we would like to have but do we need to have and what really defines the need? You know, we got stuff going on now. As you start to get more revenue coming in and more base of population coming in, then yeah, maybe that's time for that. But I don't understand why we would want to do that when we just debated on finances and now we're going to add positions. That makes absolutely no sense to me. And then we also got to realize that we have a unique situation over the last couple years. We had a lot of funds that were allocated from the the rescue fund, the ARPA. Those are gone. We don't have those no more. Now we got to actually get in and account for the budget that we have going forward. So I just I just caution adding adding more people adding more people and really take a look at being fiscally responsible for these types of things. Thank you. Thank you.

Oh yeah. Can you state your name and address real quick please? Sorry I was too busy congratulating you all. Bill Cree 1409 Ironwood Marian Indiana. Thank you, Bill. Yeah, Mr. President. Just go ahead, Mr. Cree. I also I just want to let you know that these are not paid positions. These are voluntary. So, there will be no more cost on the city going from three to five. Can I make a statement? They will have expenses, right? No. No. It will cost the city zero for having go from three to five. They won't have any expenses. No, sir.

No, sir. They come to a monthly board meeting. Yeah. I just wanted so that you understand that. All right. Anybody else like to speak for or against this? All right. I see nobody else coming to the mic. So, we'll go close the uh public portion of this. Uh council, is there any other discussion?

I think this is a fantastic idea. Thank you for addressing this, mayor. Um and just for clarity, this is a basically a board position volunteer. There's no per DMO expense account. They get this. So, they it's just going from three minds making a decision to five. So, uh, but I appreciate your input because, yeah, if there was an expense with this, I would definitely critique it, but there's no extra expense. In fact, whoever the two new people are, it's an expense for them to come in on their own time and drive in and, uh, contribute to this board. So, um, it is voluntary and and I appreciate the mayor. I think five minds is is definitely better for three, especially when you're having to have a quorum and you're missing one or two people. It's much more difficult to get a quorum with three versus five. So, commend the mayor for doing this.

Anybody else? If not, I will entertain a motion. Mr. President, I'd like to move that we suspend the rules on general ordinance number 32, 2025. Second, man. That seems weird. I didn't suspend the rules. Um, so we got a motion by uh David and we have a second by Nick. Roll call, please. Kane I Marshall I Fordise I Runner I Klene yes Divine yes Whitten yes McKinley yes cowgill yes I would now entertain a motion to pass

Mr. President, I'd make a motion to pass general ordinance 32-2025. Second. Okay, we got the motion by Councilman McKinley. Second by Councilman Kaine. Roll call. Kane. Hi. Marshall. Hi. Forice. Hi. Runner. Hi. Klein. Yes. Divine. Yes. Whitten. Yes. Calgill. Sorry. McKinley. Yes. Calgill. Yes. Okay. Well, that was the last item on the agenda for tonight. Does anybody have any announcements? I need all of the council members to not leave because this ordinance requires everybody's signature. I I have to leave right after. Sorry. No, sir. Not allowed.

Okay. Uh I'll take no announcements and I'll take a motion to adjurnn. Mr. President, I make a motion to adjurnn. Second. Have a motion by Councilman McKinley and a second by Councilman Brener. Roll call. Kane. Hi. Marshall. Hi. For ice. Hi. Brunner. Hi. Klein. Yes. Divine. Yes. Whitten. Yes. McKinley. Yes. Calgill. Hi. Okay. Cal.