City Council - workshop

you

Ich nenne diese Sitzung des Stadtrats von Klymeth einen Workshop und erkläre sie. Die Sitzungen des Stadtrats dienen nur der Informationsbeschaffung und Diskussion. Der Stadtrat wird in den Workshop-Sitzungen nicht abstimmen, nicht abstimmen. Der Rat behält sich das Recht vor, zusätzliche Punkte zu besprechen oder Punkte von der Tagesordnung zu streichen. Ich glaube, das Einzige, was ich heute Abend auf der Tagesordnung sehe, ist die Diskussion des vorläufigen Haushalts für das Haushaltsjahr 2026. Ich habe gehört, dass dies gestreamt wird, aber nicht in Teams. Bevor wir fortfahren, Herr van Wagon, würden Sie uns bitte im Gebet leiten?

Gerne. Father, we ask you today for your wisdom. We ask you that you guide us and guide us.

Help us to make the best decisions for our community. And we thank you for your ongoing blessing for Clermont. And I pray for your blessing for our citizens, our companies and our council. Just be with them and watch over every single one. And thank you for everything you have done for us. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen. Amen. Thank you. Ich wollte Sie nur wissen lassen, dass ich noch ein Gespräch mit Ihnen führen möchte, bevor wir am Donnerstag in unsere Sitzung gehen, nur um sicherzustellen, dass wir alle auf dem gleichen Stand sind, damit Sie sich den Haushalt noch einmal ansehen können. Wenn Sie noch einmal über die Steuersätze sprechen möchten, was auch immer Sie besprechen möchten, I just wanted to give you an additional conversation before we get to it, because I had the feeling that there were probably more questions and that the household still had a lot of moving parts from the last discussion. Scott and I have had numerous conversations and would like to invite Scott to come by and introduce you to some of the things we have looked at. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Rick, and thank you very much. Scott Borre, Finance Director, Finance Director. I have a few short films here to show you where we are in the process and what the situation looks like at the moment. And then, as Rick said, we will open the question and answer window and discuss everything that the Council thinks is right. As you may remember, we had our workshops on July 7th and 8th. Later in the month, the City Council then decided on the maximum tax rate of 4.92. Our first of two hearings is then held for this Thursday, September 10th. Held? That's a session at 5.30 p.m. Then follows the last one on September 24th. There we will say goodbye to the final tax return and the final household. A few more notes on the updates after the workshops. You may remember the quarter-annual household report at the last city council meeting. I gave you a first estimate for the general fund. We assume conservatively that at the end of the current business year we will have an excess of about 4 million dollars in general funds. And then we will receive an excess of funds in the city, which is largely due to our investment expenses. This year we had an investment budget of $41.47 million. This year we will spend about $128 million. This means that all of our fund lines across the entire spectrum will be in good shape and in a solid position at the end of this business year. After these meetings in July, more precisely on August 16, we issued the City Council a package with current information from these meetings. These were updated contracts. These were updated sales forecasts due to the reduction of the tax rate and so on. That was our timetable for the changes. From today on, our current household book is also available online on the financial ministry's household portal. It is very similar to the proposed budget format. What? As soon as we have the finally approved budget, we will expand the recommendations of the GFOA to a comprehensive online budget book. This is available from today. Bedingungen des Staates des Allgemeinen Fonds. Sie erinnern sich, im späten Frühjahr, vielleicht im Juni, haben wir eine Richtlinie oder eine umfassende Richtlinie verabschiedet, die eine Definition unserer Definition des Haushaltssaldos enthielt. Und das According to the recommendation of the GFOA, the government must structurally provide recurring income that is greater or equal to recurring expenses in the deferred household. The reason why this is important is that it helps them to distinguish recurring from non-recurring income and expenses within their general household. On paper, the General Fonds today calculate a household deficit of US$ 5.6 million. If you calculate these non-reversible bills, there is a structural deficit of 870,000 US dollars, which on the one hand...

Excuse me, Mr. Mayor.

So that's a change?

It is a change. Yes, sir. What I have in front of me is correct. I show here the total debt in the amount of 6.3 million.

We sent updates via email two days ago and you should receive an updated package in printed form. Didn't you get that? We are forecasting updated figures. Total household deficit of 5.6 million US dollars, structural deficit of 879,000 US dollars. On the one hand, a structural deficit at this level is a long-term problem. On the other hand, it is important in connection with trimmings in the state of Florida whether you have sufficient funds to cover the expenses expected in your budget completely. In our case, this is a clear yes. This leads us to a conversation about the status of general fund reserves. On this slide, you can see a momentary recording or an excerpt of our balance sheet in general funds at the end of the last business year. If you scroll all the way down, you will see that we had a total balance sheet of 44.5 million US dollars. Some of it has already been approved or is in a non-exploitable format. The number we usually refer to when discussing the balance sheet is the non-approved balance sheet of 36.6 million US dollars. So if we say a household with a deficit or a structural deficit, this is the line that is best applicable and covers the deficit in a planning context or from a planning perspective. This slide here takes the status of the last household year and now we are integrated into the plans for the current year. We predict what it will look like at the end of the fiscal year, the second season 20. At the very top it is the same 36.6 million US dollars. You add what you expect for the current fiscal year. So we predict a initial unassured balance of 40.6 million US dollars. Then we start to pull away from it. They take into account a requirement of 25% of the non-targeted equity fund. This is, so to speak, our emergency fund to cover the business in a worse counter-performance format if necessary. This corresponds to about 13.8 million US dollars. They take into account our structural deficit. And then you take into account, thirdly, something that I will talk about much more in detail here, namely a proposed decision to assign a part of this grant to future projects. If you take these three things into account, the prognosis of the non-targeted grant for the end of the business year drops to 5.4 million US dollars. Still a very strong position in general funds. I'm going to go back for a moment and want to talk more about the decision on the non-targeted equity fund, which came about in earlier discussions with the city council, including the household workshops in July. I'm now back at the momentary recording of the saldo fund and you will see these last two categories down here, a proven and a non-proven line. A possibility for the Council to use this 36.66 million is to submit a public statement of the state by resolution, in which it says, we have identified programs and projects that are not quite ready to be included in the household, but we want to deposit money and resources for these purposes in the future. So if the council decides to do something like this, it only means that in the balance sheet money of 36.6 will be transferred to this category of 3.1 million US dollars. So we will continue. Together with Lawyer Wall, we have prepared a resolution for the session on September 22, in which we will add 15.8 million US dollars of the available reserves to the three future programs and projects that you see here. EMS transport, parking lots and possible future land buyers. That's a starting point. That's a design format. It can be anything or nothing that the council wants. You don't have to do that. But you have the opportunity to make a public statement about how we want to use these unadded funds in the future. An alternative option that I have only brought into the discussion here and that I have actually already mentioned in the past is the financing for the stabilization of pensions. One thing that is becoming more and more popular in the field of state finances is the use of a program in which they openly open accounts for certain long-term purposes. This could contribute, as the name already says, to stabilizing the effects on the milleges in the future through investment payments. If, for example, you take 1 million or 2 million US dollars or whatever we consider appropriate and invest in this particular purpose, this would compensate the future growth of pension obligations. In our case, it could be something that we should look at in more detail in view of the enormous numbers we are talking about in the additions, especially on the fire side. This concludes my prepared presentations. We open the question round and most of our directors are here to answer all the questions of the council.

Before I open the meeting, I would like to say that this workshop is a public session. All those present in the plenum who would like to speak on this topic can come to the microphone, give their name and address and have three minutes. This is a public forum. Everyone present in the plenum who wants to talk about this topic can come to the microphone, give their name and address and have three minutes. Since no one is responding, I will end the public comment function. Mr. Wayne, there is no one online. No one. Then we give the floor back to the council. We accept you, Ms. Council Member Strange.

We have a question for the employees, Mr. Bohr, and I would like you to ask questions. Let's follow the SAM format. First the questions, then the statements. How do we want to do that? So first the questions. In the last household presentation, Mr. Bohrer, we were at 75 percent of the household year. If I remember correctly, the output quota of our general fund was 65 percent in terms of area. I admit that I haven't looked at every single department where this could have happened, but... My question to you is, do you believe that we could use these numbers, the actual numbers and not the budgeted numbers from the fiscal year 26 to create a budget for the fiscal year 27 that shows how the deficit of 890,000 can be equated

I would answer this question in two ways. First of all, I have already said that we assume that we will withdraw more than 4 million from the general funds. These are mainly missing investment expenses, but some of them also include ongoing business. Second, you should bear in mind that we have another month with a third period of salary in the fourth quarter. The 65% are probably more realistic and are therefore close to 70%. In short, I would say that I would stay with the budgeted figures. But there will obviously be some operating costs that flow back into the balance funds.

Can you tell us how we can compensate the structural deficit of 870,000?

Now, first of all, I would like to go back to my earlier comments. According to the Federal State of Florida, in connection with Trim, we have excessive interest rates. To compensate for this, if this is not the approach that the council wants to follow and they strive for a really structurally balanced household, this most likely has to come from the issuer's side. Regardless. Whether it's about a capital, a vehicle, a project or whatever it is. And it should most likely come from the issuer's side.

In this context, I like the way you presented the structural deficit and the non-advocates in comparison to the advocated means. I think that's really helpful for the compensation. I think the end result is a good way to do this. Thank you very much. My approach to this household is, as you said, the recurring income compared to the recurring expenses, which you defined as a structural deficit. And I imagine we wouldn't have any general reserve funds and would simply look at a structurally balanced household. My question to you is whether I know the numbers and whether I will add more context. We have spoken publicly and privately about the fact that the capital funds should make up 10% of your household. That would be a healthy goal. So my question is, if we have a structural deficit of 870,000 recurring revenues compared to recurring expenses, do these 870,000 include the 10% capital that would correspond to the best procedure?

Our budgeted capital spending for 2027 is 7.1 million US dollars in general funds.

Is that included in the calculation of the structural deficit of 870,000 dollars? And how high was this number?

Well, it's part of it. So we have vehicles that we have classified as reversing. There are also a few other smaller things. But in general, the first thing that comes to mind is that we have a considerable amount of household expenses in the police station for the replacement of vehicles, which is of course capital.

Okay, I'm with you. So if you take out the amount of funds that has not been allocated and look at what we have currently allocated for capital and compare it with the recurring income and expenses, we currently have 10% in the budget for capital. It's probably less than 10%.

But I can't definitely sit here and say one thing or the other. But I suspect it's under 10 percent.

And do we have a capital fund that exists outside of the general fund reserves or within the general fund reserves?

Yes, we have that. These investment expenses could come from various sources for state activities. Of course, we have fees for the leisure activities whenever they occur. Similarly, there are fees for the impact on the police. We have also anchored this in our guideline. The city administrator has measured the amounts in the framework of the household plan, which go beyond our fund-grant guideline, to be moved into the funds 320 for state investment expenses. This current household still has a transfer of 1 million US dollars for this purpose. Theoretically, one could reduce this number to get a really structurally balanced household. However, this would again go at the expense of stripping or shifting some projects that are currently planned for next year in the Fonds 320.

So if I look at the documents provided, the city-wide summary, I can see Fonds 320 investment projects and expenses. Rechnen damit, das Haushaltsjahr 27 mit 1.000.019 zu beginnen und wollen erst in 11.030 hinzufügen.

Das ist der vorgeschlagene Weg, um mit Transition umzugehen. Und um das im Kontext von Investitionen klarzustellen. Wir betrachten verschiedene Arten von Investitionen. Eine davon sind wiederkehrende Investitionen, beispielsweise Polizeiautos und Feuerwehrfahrzeuge, die wir jedes Jahr anschaffen müssen, im Gegensatz zu Investitionen, die beispielsweise alle 20 bis 40 Jahre für die Reparatur eines Pirs verwendet werden.

Ja, die Reparatur eines Pirs, eines Gehwegs. Oder eine Erweiterung. Es könnte sich um eine Reihe verschiedener Dinge handeln, die regelmäßig anfallen.

Okay, das ist alles, was ich habe. Vielen Dank.

Herr Bürgermeister. Danke, Herr Bohrer. Eine Frage zum stadtweiten Investitionshaushalt. Ich sehe mir gerade Folie 3 an, die Aktualisierungen nach dem Workshop. The city-wide investment budget is 51.7% and our actual planned expenses are 18.1%. Isn't that in the course of the year that we are still in? Yes, in the course of the year. So what is the reason for such a drastic difference between what was budgeted and what is spent?

Let me also make it clear that the point of reference could be misleading. These two numbers do not only refer to the general funds, they apply to the whole city. So our corporate funds are included in it. And some of the larger investment projects on a city-wide level, which come to mind immediately, which were included in the budget and which we will no longer deal with this year, are the expansion or reconstruction of Hartwood Marsh or the relocation of the supply lines, as I should call it, Yes, these are projects where it's about meeting them in the middle. There are a few others, but these are two examples, larger examples that come to mind. It's hard for me to sit here in my position and say why we haven't dealt with them. Sure. I would have to pass this on to the other department heads who take care of these points, but these are a few disgusting examples.

52 million minus 18 million, that's obviously, there's a pretty big difference. What happens to the remaining dollars? Because that's obviously more than 4 million that flow back. So what happens to the other dollars that are not used in this fiscal year, but were budgeted for this fiscal year?

Most of it flows back into the corresponding stock. Now this year there was a deposit of 15 million dollars that we had expected for a loan for the parking lot. So these 15 million dollars are simply gone, as it was a loan repayment and not a loan. So if we include this, we get 18.33 dollars. So we're actually talking about 33 to 18 million dollars that flow back into the corresponding fund deposits.

This loan is simply doing what we had budgeted, but we didn't take it into account. So right, it is essentially set to zero. Right. It is on the income side as well as on the expenditure side. So it is neutral. Net zero. Net zero. Neutral. That's the terminology I saw in some other documents. Herr Stadtverwalter, ist es möglich, dass wir eine Liste der entsprechenden 51,7 erhalten? Welche Entsprechung? Also, was war budgetiert, um diese 51,7 zu erreichen, und wie viel wurde voraussichtlich von den 18,1 ausgegeben, um diese beiden Listen für uns zu erhalten? Bevor wir weitere Maßnahmen ergreifen, ist das möglich? Thank you. These are my questions. Council Member Meyers.

Good afternoon, Scott. You have already answered my question about the deficit. I thank you and your team for your hard work.

Thank you. Council Member Petersen.

We had a meeting earlier in which we discussed the effects it would have if the vote on the basic tax goes through. Does this show that it doesn't go through? Or do you have a second question that shows what effects that would have?

We decided at the beginning of the cycle in spring not to take Proforma in one or the other direction in this current cycle. The city manager and I were sure of that because we had a solid status and strong reserves from the general fund. We carried out an internal analysis of what it might look like. However, this was not included in any of our this year's budget plans.

Oh, thank you. On your last slide, you were given 15.8 million from existing goods reserves for future programs and projects. In addition, we have 5.3 million for EMS, 6 million for a parking lot in the city center and 4.5 million for future property purchases. Is there a reason why we never sign the 9.1 million for the project Mieters in the Middle? Never sign.

No reason, sir, except that these are the three that Mr. van Wagner and I identified in our preparations on the basis of previous conversations and instructions, if you will.

We can certainly add that.

It is again in the measure of the city council.

If we add that, how does that turn out to be the end result if we start to spend this 9.1 million?

Well, that would exceed our forecasts. If you now want to have a discussion or debate about which points should be applied there or whether you should do this at all, then that is your five things. However, if you would simply add 9.1 million US dollars, you would be in a prognosticated deficit in terms of the non-added balance sheet.

Well, I was just curious when we would have 9.1 million US dollars, which were basically approved by this council. We never state this in our budgets or anything. I'm just trying to find out why we don't do that.

Teil Ihrer Diskussion war, dass dies aus den Park- und Rackabgaben finanziert wird und dies der allgemeine Fonds ist.

Besser. Wenn Sie dies also ändern wollten, könnten Sie dies tun, aber in all unseren Diskussionen ging es darum, dass dies ein neues Projekt ist, das für die Abgaben in Frage kommt. Wir haben zahlreiche Gespräche mit Christian und allen anderen geführt und es qualifiziert sich für die Erschließungskosten, wenn Sie sich dafür entscheiden, dies für die Sitzung in der Mitte zu tun.

Nun, ich war immer der Meinung, dass wir sowohl allgemeine Mittel als auch Erschließungskosten verwenden würden. Und natürlich haben wir bereits einige Zuschüsse, die dafür bereits zugewiesen wurden.

Wir haben einige Gelder dafür zurückgelegt, aber ich habe von Ihnen keine Anweisungen zu Prozentsätzen, Zahlen oder was Sie wollen. Und ich bin mir nicht einmal sicher. Es könnte niedriger sein. Es könnte eine höhere Zahl als 9,1. Ich weiß nicht, wie hoch das ist, bis wir das haben. Das haben. Daher bräuchte ich eine Anweisung von Ihnen, sobald ich Ihnen konkrete Zahlen vorliegen habe. Freddy believes that this will be the case in November and that they can be submitted to the council in December, according to him. Correct. But the exact one. Well, we have the exact price for November in view, but I know that it was approved for 9.1. So. I would think if we don't show it somewhere in our budget, include it and register it somewhere in the budget, then our budget is correct. It is there because it is there, but I go through everything again and again and never see anything below 9.1. And it doesn't have to be the whole 9.1. As you say, if we only use 3 or 4 million from the general fund, hey, that has to be ruled out. We just say the other part comes from the exclusion fees, that's okay. I know that the entire project cannot be financed from exclusion fees, because the entire project, if I'm not mistaken, Mr. W., is not qualified for exclusion fees.

Ich glaube nicht, dass das die Analyse ist. Ich meine, es hängt davon ab, wie viel wir an Erschließungsabgaben haben und woher sie kommen. Woher sie kommen. Meines Wissens nach ist die Idee hinter dem Projekt beispielsweise, dass es für alle in der Stadt von Vorteil wäre. Richtig? Und wenn das so ist, dann können wir großzügig aus unseren Erschließungsabgaben verwenden. Großzügig. Ja.

Nun.

Es gibt ja Rechtsprechung, die besagt, dass wenn eine Erschließungsgebühr beispielsweise aus dem Bereich Wellness Way stammt, wahrscheinlich einen direkten Nutzen für Wellness Way haben sollte und so weiter, wo auch immer wir sie herbekommen. Versuchen wir bei der Zuweisung der Erschließungsgebühren sensibler darauf zu reagieren. Simply put, Mr. Mayor, if we only had $9.1 million in closure fees, then we couldn't use the entire $9.1 million for this one thing. Because I'm not sure if it's necessarily a direct benefit for some of the remote places that we get closure fees from, but I think it could be a high percentage. I don't know how much more.

And I don't think that even 9.1 million would be a little too much. I never had the intention to use the entire settlement fees for it. I have always suggested that we also use the settlement costs as well as the general financing and everything we get from subsidies and everything we get. I already know that we have received 2.5 million in subsidies. But I would just like to see that so that we have more detailed information.

I'm sorry that I didn't hear every comment that was made in the last two minutes, but I talked to our household manager and confirmed that we have over $900,000 in the proposed budget of the general fund for the exchange of the DOC, which is a component of the project Meet in the Middle.

Well, that's one component of the project for which, in my opinion, we can actually use exclusion costs, namely for the DOC and everything else. When we did the whole thing, it brought us to do the project the way we did it. Because by moving the stock from its current location to the current location, we qualified for the closing costs. So that's the one area where I really look at the use of the closing fees, wherever this part comes into play. Because that is the only part that actually comes into question for closing fees, from which I know that it applies for the entire project if we place it up there. But I just say, hey, I think maybe we have to get together and make a decision about what we have to show. Because for me, we shared it like this. I said it in consultations and for 9.1 million, we can't show it anywhere. So we have to make sure that we take that into account somewhere, I think. Whether it is about exclusion fees or where the general fund is located, a combination of subsidies. Of course, I don't know that I will end up with 9.1 million. I expect a little less than that. Of course, I know that we have already taken part of the original offer of 9.1 million from the over 300,000 dollars for the demolition of the docks of the old pier that the company took care of for us. This small part is already disappearing. Another question you mentioned, but recurring expensive vehicles, police, fire department, what do we have? I think I have to talk to the boss about it. What about personal protective equipment for the fire department? Is it in there? Do we expect it to have to be replaced from time to time? How often do we have to replace it? I have to turn to the boss. And will that fall under return? You know? Because I think, when we tried years ago to create these investment budgets, I thought that personal protective equipment and everything else also belong to it and I ... Yes, boss.

Good day, Börgermeister Onra. Ah yes, we do. We actually have an account only for the replacement of bunker equipment set up ... When they came into the department seven years ago, I also came across something that the manufacturer prescribes, that the equipment has to be replaced every ten years. We were able to plan this. Each fireman received two sets. At that time we had 75 firefighters and 150 sets of equipment. So we knew that we would have to buy 15 sets per year for the replacement alone. We also planned the costs for new settings, where there is occasionally a set that cannot be repaired. So this money is available. I don't have the exact numbers, but we spend about 200,000 dollars per year on the replacement of the bunker equipment. You say 15 sets? I know that we have done this exercise. This year we have increased the number by the additional firefighters that we have hired. Now we are at 96 firefighters. So that's a higher number than we have in budget. But we plan to replace a tenth of our bunker equipment every year, plus a few sets in addition to the setting of new people who do not fit into the old equipment and everything else.

So we have already added that as part of the recurring costs.

Yes, sir. Capital is a cost factor for the business administration.

Well, I haven't heard much about the upper limit for personal protective equipment and everything else lately and would like to make sure that we also take care of it, because I know that we have carried out these exercises here a few years ago to try to do this together with the vehicles and others. So ...

Yes, I think we have it in the budget for three to four years now. Thank you.

These are all my questions. I have another question. Can the bike give me the permission to ask you? It's nine.

May I first briefly introduce myself? I'll give you an update on the topic of rent in the middle discussion. Kyle. Also confirm once again that one million dollars in the general fund for the project of the leveled seats is contained.

Which of the leveled seats? This is our total amount of the general fund for project-related expenses in the middle at 1.9 million dollars a month.

Thank you.

What about the, if I'm not mistaken, there is another grant of 1.5 million for this area, right? Federal Florida. Federal Florida. I don't remember the status.

Mr. Mayor, I don't remember the status. We have to, but there were 1.5 million that we pursued with the state.

And Scott, this is in the recurring operating income of the general fund.

as investment projects. Uh, this kind of investment project would not go back.

So you have already made investments? The Fonds 23, with others.

Uh, general funds? General funds.

But it was taken into account. They were removed from the expenses to calculate the 870,000.

Right. Thanks.

I wanted that. Um, but I had another question. Um, Christian. There was a hint that 18 million dollars into some corporate funds. Assuming these funds could be used, if we assume that these funds could be used, and I don't know if that's possible, and I don't know if that's possible, and I'm not asking today because we're in a public workshop, could we use these funds, which we legally use to withdraw from the corporate funds, since they could refer to the loan that we have taken up for our supply companies, could we use these funds to pay back part of this loan?

I don't see a reason for that. I mean, Scott, do you have an opinion on that?

That would depend on the loan agreement and the existing agreement. That's my standard answer.

Well, the agreement would protect the loan-believer from repayment. Right. Oh yes. No, Scott is right. Because there are scenarios in which you have to have a minimum. In other words, sometimes loan-believers acquire these for a certain period of time. And that's part of their commitment.

the recurring revenue sources that come with it.

Yes, you check that.

Could we use this money in this context for the repayment of the loan in order to possibly lower our electricity rates?

This would also require an examination of this specific agreement, because although the MAHA could do this mathematically, the agreement could, do you mean that?

Yes, you said that last week.

I think that's just general English. But...

I said it first.

The agreement could suggest that we keep the tariffs at a certain level. And...

I was just curious.

That's an interesting idea.

I'm just saying that the city is usually obliged to keep things at a certain level when we get involved in something like this.

I don't know. We'd have to check it out, unless you know it by heart.

No, that's the best answer I can give at the moment. But I would also suggest the following. Just remember that because we did not spend the money for an investment project this year, this does not mean that the necessity for this project is lost. We could use this money in the budget for next year or maybe in the following year, depending on how long the projects last.

I just wondered if that would be legally possible. And then we come to what I wanted to say. I have comments if we want to start with that. At the moment, we are calculating a deficit of 4.20%, if we take into account the operating costs of recurring income and the outgoing and outgoing expenses of 870,000 US dollars. For comparison, this is a budget of 63 million US dollars. And 870,000 US dollars with a budget of 63 million US dollars is a very small percentage. It's a big number, but it's a small percentage. I think we have extremely competent employees. I have the greatest trust in our employees. We have not done anything to shorten this household so far. And we are now at 429 with a deficit of 870,000 dollars. I believe that the employees can bring us to the goal of 4.2, with which I have at least applied. And that is important to me, but it must also be important to the citizens of Clermont, otherwise I would not be sitting up here. So my goal will be to get to 4.21. I would like to remind the council and the employees that we have asked the employees in the workshop to provide us with a balanced household of 4.21. Regardless of what number we have, I urge the council to ensure that the household is balanced, that our recurring income and expenses are equal, so that the citizens have a clear way forward. I believe that we should finance the 320 fund with 10% of our operating costs decided for this year. I think we can do that from the general fund reserves and I would support that so that we get to 4.12. I think that the 320 fund should be fed from some excesses of the previous year in the future. And that we should ensure that the 320 fund always covers 10% of operating expenses. I can estimate the cost of 6 million US dollars for a reaction time of 6 minutes, which can also include the rescue service. These can be divided or summarized. That doesn't make a difference to me. I think for 6, 6, 6 million for 6 minutes, if it feels right. And I think we can explain it to people very easily. For context, this includes the opening of fire station 6, the planning of fire station 7, the assurance of the appropriate financing of fire station 5 and the further work on the traffic question. I think that we should collect the existing funds from our general reserve funds, which relate to the city center, in a simple supply program for the city center and determine a amount with which we are satisfied and should not lose ourselves in details. We should turn to the CAA and our partners in the city center to determine which projects to act on. Finally, I would like to note that Mieters in the Middle was never financed. So the engineering department was further led so that we could receive a final number. We had no plan how and where we should finance it or which numbers, why it was not financed. I think that would be one of the projects in the city center that should be taken up in the middle, which we should issue from the general fund for projects in the city center.

Yes, Mr. Bang, many Danke, Bürgermeister.

Vielen Dank, Bürgermeister.

Meine Zeit ist um. Nein, nur Spaß. Denke, die Mitarbeiter haben vorgelegt, haben sich an das gehalten, worum wir sie gebeten haben, um den Konsens darüber darzulegen, was der Rat gefordert hat. Und wir haben ihnen 429 gegeben und sie haben uns 429 vorgelegt. That lowers our tax burden for our inhabitants. And I support that. What I do not want to support arbitrarily and theoretically are arbitrary numbers that we should set without context and without data. We have taken shortcuts. I think there was a document that was sent to us in October by Mr. Bohrer by e-mail, which showed that, if I read this correctly, it was a net reduction of $545,100, which was based on changes to the previous budget. And of that, $491 was intended to adapt the lower tax rate of $4.2929. So we made a reduction. I think that there are three unknown people in relation to the amendment. And I think we have to be careful and careful if we take measures for certain positions without knowing the results and knowing how they could affect us. I have already spoken to the city administrator today that we will possibly start the household process on January next year, depending on the result of amendment 3, since we have to check things exactly depending on the result. And that's why I think it would be good if we would give ourselves as much flexibility as possible for the next year, if necessary. Und falls nicht, könnten wir im Januar einen Beschluss fassen, der Mittel für Projekte zweckgebunden bereitstellt. Ich bin auch sehr besorgt über die Verwendung von einmaligem Geld für laufende Ausgaben. Das ist keine bewährte Methode, wenn es um den Kontostand geht. The account should give us the opportunity to replace the DOC. I know that there are some ongoing expenses on this DOC, but it is not about ongoing personnel costs that we add to the general fund every year. We have to be aware of that. And finally, I also think that if we start with the purpose binding, we have to have a serious discussion about which projects could be taken into account and the public have to include what they want to see as part of this purpose binding, instead of just saying that we are binding the purpose. Vielen Dank. Als Mitglied Maas.

Ich stimme vielem zu, was Herr Beine und auch Frau Strange gesagt haben. Mit diesem dritten Änderungsantrag, der über unseren Köpfen schwebt, können wir wirklich keine endgültigen Thanks, member of the council, that's...

Project Meat in the Middle keeps appearing and as far as I know, the closing costs were the main funding source for the project Meat in the Middle. In any case, we keep hearing that we would split it up because the veterans keep coming to us. When is it coming? When is it coming? When is it coming? We have received a lot of funding. 1.5 million from the state, another from the South Lake Hospitals Fund and the LifeWell Foundation. I think it would be nice to show the citizens that we are not just talking about it year after year, but that we are making improvements somewhere in the system. Ob es nun Tränen sind, der Pavillon oder vielleicht der Brunnen, der am Ende des Spaziergangs entstehen soll, auch wenn der Spaziergang noch nicht fertig ist, äh, Fassens, es könnte ein Vorgeschmack sein. Ich denke, es wäre ein guter Zeitpunkt, um zu zeigen, dass wir nicht nur darüber reden, sondern auch etwas tun. Äh. Und damit bedanke ich mich. Vielen Dank, Herr Fein.

Äh.

I will not repeat many of the things that you have said, but one of my real concerns is also, when I look at this, that it looks like we have given money and we have planned deposits for ongoing expenses. And that always scares me when we use deposits for ongoing expenses. My philosophy has always been that you never use deposits for ongoing expenses, for recurring expenses, year after year after year. Ich habe kein Problem damit, Rücklagen für einmalige Projekte zu verwenden. Aber uns zu verpflichten, Ausgaben zu finanzieren, wenn wir bereits ein Defizit haben und dafür Rücklagen verwenden müssen, denke, das ist eine sehr schlechte Praxis. Ich höre immer wieder, dass alle besorgt darüber sind, was mit dem Steuergesetz passieren wird, dass über Änderungsantrag 3 und allem schwebt. Das hat natürlich keine Auswirkungen auf diesen Haushalt. However, I am of the opinion that we have to be careful with what we are doing here and ensure that we deal with the tax money of the taxpayers smartly. As Mr. Barne said, we have already asked the employees to go back to 420 and I can support that. Now we are asking here that we try to lower it even a little bit further. And while we already have a deficit, why do we want to continue to lower it and continue to fall into the deficit and still spend more and more money on recurring expenses? I just can't support it. To meet for us in the middle? My knowledge, and if I'm not mistaken, was the request to get ahead with me in the middle at 9.1 million dollars. And if things change in the next two years, we will come back to that and check it again. Er, Sie sollten sich Ihr Protokoll vom Oktober ansehen, das Protokoll vom 28. Oktober, genau das steht da. Deshalb taucht es immer wieder auf. Und Sie haben recht, Herr Peterson. Es wurde immer gesagt, dass wir eine Kombination von Mitteln verwenden werden, nicht nur einen Fonds. Es sollte eine Kombination von Mitteln sein. Wir haben uns nie hingesetzt. Ich denke, mein ursprünglicher Vorschlag wäre, die Hälfte der Fördermittel und die andere Hälfte aus dem allgemeinen Fonds zu verwenden. However, that would be before we even start receiving subsidies. And I know that there are other means that will probably be available for this. I think we have to take this seriously. And together with you, Mr. Petersson, I believe that we have to push forward the project as quickly as possible so that we can show people that we mean it seriously and that they can no longer sit on us, because we have been working on this project for almost ten years. So we have to move forward. That's all I have to say. Gibt es noch etwas? Nur zur Klarstellung. Es ist so klar wie Schlamm. Ich weiß das zu schätzen. Ich habe viel gehört und möchte einfach nur sehen, wo es einen Konsens gibt und wo nicht, wenn Sie alle nichts gegen die Resolution haben. Wollen Sie, dass wir damit warten oder fortfahren? Ich habe von allen Ja und Nein gehört.

The means for different things.

Well, for my part, I'm not of the opinion that I say that one of the things must be included in it when we start to assign all these means and everything. Meet us in the middle, that must also be included in the resolution. Right, if you want to do that, I'm not too enthusiastic about signing a resolution in which all this fun and most of the projects I see are assigned. Basically, we have EMS. Well, in the resolution, we are dedicating 5.3 million dollars for a project that we are currently not even sure whether we can carry out the project at all. We still have to wait for the approval of the district council and I don't know how far we are, but we are dedicating a parking lot. We are in conversation, but we are dedicating 6 million dollars for it. Property purchase, property purchase in the city center. I know that we are there to get it across the finish line and so on. So I don't have a problem. But as I said, this is another project that costs 9.1 million, which we have for procurement and everything else. But we don't show any funding and haven't put anything back for it. That's why I have some concerns.

I just needed a direction if I may. A few more detailed information.

Ja, ich würde sagen, mein Rat an Sie oder meine Stimme wäre, diese Resolution nicht ohne weitere Gespräche und Workshops zu verabschieden, um zu entscheiden, was aufgenommen werden soll.

Ich unterstütze deine Resolution. Bin bereit für die Genehmigung von 6 Millionen für eine EMS-Feuerwache mit einer Reaktionszeit von 6 Minuten zu stimmen. Ich bin bereit, bis zu 6 Millionen für Projekte in der Innenstadt zu unterstützen. Bin bereit, 6 Millionen für den zukünftigen Ausgleich des Grundsteuerdefizits zu unterstützen. Wenn Änderungsantrag 3 übernommen wird, damit wir über flexible... Tito. For which one?

I like what you said, Alison, about the EMS, because I support the EMS. I support parking lots and the future purchase of property. Because here the funds are only provided for that. Um, yes.

So to Mr. Bain's point, but I wanted to say that she didn't say that.

I don't think there's any consensus.

Ich wollte also sagen, dass ich ehrlich gesagt glaube, dass die Idee des Grundstücks, das wir in der Innenstadt kaufen wollten, in der Geschäftswelt nicht umsetzen wird. Es sind fast zwei Jahre vergangen, seit wir das genehmigt haben, und sie sind noch nicht an den Verhandlungstisch gekommen, einen Vertrag zu unterzeichnen. Daher sage ich lediglich, dass wir, anstatt dieses Projekt zu benennen, anstatt zu sagen, so viel für den Grundstückskauf, eine Zahl nennen. I suggest 6 million, but a number for projects in the city center that we would use in partnership with the CAA to achieve everything that the CAA stipulates. We have the parking lot, we have an agreement in the middle, we have property that could be bought or sold. I mean all these things. But I think this is happening in partnership with the CAA. So I suggest that we move forward and say that this is a certain amount of money from the general reserve funds that we are ready to spend in the city center. This project, it still has to be clarified. The total 6 million could flow into an agreement in the middle. And that could be decided by the council. Maybe nothing will flow into the garage. Or we sell the property we talked about in the sale and use it. But I really want to provide it for free. That's my approach. If we say 6 million for EMS, 6 million for the city center and 6 million as a reserve to anticipate losses from amendment 3, then that will probably be 5 million of our existing money over five years. And there are still about 3 to 6 million left that we would have available for other projects over the course of the year. But at least some areas are being determined for the money. That's my approach. To make it clear, if you say that you would support 10 million for the city center in the CAA, I would not support that. I think that's too much for an area of the city without further discussion. But I would do it, but that doesn't mean that it wouldn't play a role in a future discussion. I'm willing to raise the CAA to 6 million in general. That's what I said.

And I think I want to go back to what I said. We can do it. There is no need to do this in September. We can do this in January when we know that the amendment has been adopted. We can do this in December when we know whether the amendment has been adopted or not. But we have the opportunity to involve the public in order to find out for what purposes we should provide these means, in their opinion, for purposes related. Should. And I don't think we have to answer the question of the city council whether we have a consensus on what this resolution says. I don't think we have a consensus. So I hear the suggestion I don't vote for him. The mayor doesn't vote for him. And Sean, member of the council of Mayors, votes in part for it. I don't think we have a consensus to set a resolution on the agenda for the 22nd for this purpose. Why are we in a hurry to bind our claims to purpose if we have the opportunity to ascertain this, since we know how the result of the voting on amendment 3 falls out?

Well, let me think about it. And I always have a problem with adding money. Or just thinking out a random number and saying, hey, we're throwing this money in here without doing a financial analysis or anything like that to see what we're actually getting into. And that seemed to be what we were trying to do here. We just withdraw the money. No EMS. We carried out the exercise and came to 5.3. Well, I thought the last information I got from him was 5.6, but I see it was changed to 5.5.3 parking lots. We throw 6 million into the room, which were assigned for something, of which we do not yet know what the parking lot should be for or whether there is even a concept for a parking lot. So we just pull a random number out of our fingers without really going through the exercise and as Mr. Debating to ask the public what they think and where they think that we should spend this money and so on. And I fully and completely agree with that. We have to go through these exercises before we just randomly throw out numbers and big things. To answer Mr. Miss French, I don't think it's been two years since we bought this suitcase. I think we have passed the agricultural festival.

We don't give orders anymore.

We just get involved everywhere. But that's... We're nearing the end of our... ...time here. To try and...

We have an agreement that three people would like to provide money for the project. Three people said that they would like to continue with the MS. And that would give our fire department the security it needs to move further in the right direction. That doesn't mean that we have to pay every cent. But when we have projects, we think about it. And here's my opinion about it. For the public and the council. If we keep 20 million dollars in civil funds, while we take in 27 million dollars in taxes every year, in my opinion, we have to reduce this tax to 3%. Because there is no reason why we can't do that and we will simply use it as a good for the next three years while we work it out. But we have controlled the people with this money. We took their money from them. And if we keep it a little longer because we are afraid to do something, then we don't do our job, then we don't do it. We are here to make decisions. And when it comes to the rescue service, especially with the reaction time of six minutes of the fire station six, it's about human life. And I'm not willing to make any compromises, because I don't want my family to be affected. Ah, yes. I think the question is whether the employees should make a resolution. At least three of us have said that they like the idea of a resolution. We all seem to agree on the EMS. If we don't want to limit ourselves to the city center, we can also determine the rest ourselves. But it seems as if we agree that we at least want to move forward with a commitment to the EMS. Well, it will be

I will continue to stay in touch with you five.

Thank you very much. I will not support it at this time.

Not with these numbers and without appropriate measures. Is there anything else? Since we don't see anything else, we will postpone this meeting.