Budget Committee - Regular Meeting

Hi. I call this meeting to order. Has everybody had a chance to look at the minutes? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. Second. We've got Pel and Mun. Uh, all those in favor say I. I. Opposed. Minutes are approved. Now we're going to have a discussion of the budget med methodology. I'm going to turn it right over to to Zach. That was that was okay. Um yesterday I sent out an version two of the budget book with some updates on it uh that I tried to point out. There's a couple things on there u or there's a there's one thing in particular that's not on there um on page 77. It's in the individual items, but page 77, there's a $1 million transfer from the state tax streets fund into the streets construction fund. It says $500,000 in the revenue section on page 110. So that will be updated in the final version. I just want to give everyone a heads up there. So the proposed budget should be changed from a million to 500. No, other way around. Oh, got it. So on the the one that you're going to see the the 1 million transfer on 77 is correct. Got it. On page 110 on the revenue section it says 500 and it should say so I missed I missed that one when I was updating everything yesterday. Page 110. 110. Yep. And then the pay scale I meant I must have pasted in the old version of that. I need to update the pay scale as well. So those two things would be updated uh in your final version but has no real

budget impact. Yeah, the budget. You were using the right pay scale when you did the budget. Right. Right. Okay. So budget methodology. So, I wanted to have a quick discussion because the on the on the changes um page on page seven that I sent you, I think it's the first Yeah, the first item. Uh Mr. Mayor told me about this before the meeting last week and I about had a heart attack uh because I thought we were going to be uh really deeply into the red in terms of of uh paying for ongoing costs with money that that um that well let me let me give you some context on how I do this and then that'll make more sense. So the what we try to do once we so my my methodology to build the budget is put together personnel uh projections for the next year, put together revenue projections for the next year. These are all different Excel sheets, right? Um then take a look at things that we know about and then um capital rollovers. So the sheet that I build this book off of is a collection of all of those items that basically becomes a repository for everything. So, um, once that's put together, Spencer and I get together and say, "Okay, let's let's strip out things like transfers, um, any debt proceeds we might get, um, interfering from one hand to another hand, right? and let's look at what the

real amount of revenue we're going to we're going to receive next year will be. Then what we do is we do the same thing for expenses, right? So we we look at things like personnel. We we have very little discretion over personnel. Um materials and services. Generally speaking, we try to we try to match those to make sure that uh the materials and services budget is appropriately sized for for what the fund is actively spending. Uh and then things like recurring capital, so working capital uh in the public works and enterprise funds. Um the only other one that comes to mind is the patrol vehicle that we buy for police every year because that is a recurring expense. So those three are what we would consider operational expenses. So when you take your operational revenue and you subtract it from operational expenses, that gives you in essence the amount of money we could we could use to fund ongoing expenses. Um, which is why when we have this conversation about one-time expenses in budget requests and ongoing expenses, um, that's that's what is in our mind in terms of of kind of keeping things balanced. So, all of that is to say, when I when I saw the $500,000 nearly uh oversight in the revenue piece, immediately my brain went to we're very close. We're $500,000 in the red for operational expenses next year. And so, um, what I did on Thursday is went through and took a look at, uh,

what our methodology was in the past for that. And so, this, like I said at the beginning of this, it's been an iterative process this whole time. So um in the past which carried into the beginning of of this um this process we included things within that operational expenses um calculation like contingency which is not really an operational expense. Um, I've included uh last last year and into the beginning of this year rollover capital, which is not it's it's a one-time expense. So, it's not really an operational expense. So, once once that was uh removed from the calculation, it makes me more comfortable that we can absorb the the uh revenue oversight that I made. But I just wanted to when I I wanted to give some context because that $483 dollar or $483,000 item on on the first bullet of the changes is jarring if you don't know the context behind it. So So you're it is not reducing your operating revenue, it is reducing your franchise fee revenue. Correct. But so so both of those are correct and incorrect right. So um it will reduce the operating revenue as you calculate here but the net effect of removing uh contingency and onetime capital that rolled over from the previous year uh exceeds that of the reduction in revenue. And so in essence, yeah, it it both are

true. Any other questions there? Sorry, it's a very technical way of explaining it, but I wanted to make sure that we were all on the same page. Could I ask a somewhat related question for what you said? when you look at revenue projections, I recognize the size of Seaside isn't um you know huge, but but do we use what kind of indicators do we use to project revenue for the coming year? Do we is it typically just last year plus 2% and we you know sort of look at a baseline plus a percentage or do we have an economist that weighs in for us? Do we do anything? Understand? Yeah. No, I so it's not that complicated. Yeah, a couple a couple times a year I do I do attend at the at the G GFOA conferences uh every time they hold those they have the state economist come in and give a talk. So I always try to get a hold of that um to try to get a sense of what direction the state's heading and then you know by proxy what direction Seaside may be heading from there. Um we know that property tax revenues are likely to increase by 3%. In reality, the the actual collection's probably slightly lower than that, but I assume 3% because it can be on either side of it. And the counties told us just budget 3%. Right. Yeah. Because we are no our our assessed values are nowhere near real market values. And so it'll be sometime at least in theory before those two things catch up. And we No, it's going the opposite direction. Well, right now it is. But um have you ever had to revise your revenue projections during the year? Have you? Not yet. Okay, good. No. Um room tax revenue is always at the top of my mind uh in terms as it should be for all of us probably because it's it's

the number one revenue stream by a long shot. Uh, and the thing that I'm trying to pay close attention to is um travel in the second quarter of this year and the third quarter of well I guess it' be the third quarter this year but I'm just thinking next fiscal year um because of um the lack of Canadians coming down here that is a non insignificant portion of the amount of people that come down here. So interesting. Um, hotels may have to adjust room room room uh rates to be able to compensate for that and get people to come out here, which what we'll see. I don't I don't have a good answer for right now, but the feelers I have put out um have said that uh restaurant revenue is down pretty significantly. Uh hotel revenue is down. Not as significantly as restaurant restaurant revenue, but um but they're both down. So keep in mind that, you know, just like you said, the the price of the room is what drives it, not just the fact whether it's used room at $500 versus a room that's 300. That's a significant difference to us. Any questions there? Okay. Okay. So, next item on the on the agenda. So, we talked last week about all of the budget requests um that the departments had submitted. Um so what we wanted from this body at this meeting was to go through and and vote and give us some clear direction on include or don't include right um so

that we can essentially get to a if should this body decide to get to a number to be able to recommend to the to city council. Um so that's the last thing. Yes, ma'am. So, we didn't do that last time. I thought we did. Or did we just vote to include it on the I think it was I think it was clicking on there to just as part of the conversation. Okay. So, yeah. Um if if we wouldn't mind doing that, we could pull up the sheet again and just go through one by one and hopefully it's a quick process. Um but I'm going to say when we do that because I'm going to adjusted them in real time so I what number you guys need to um recommend this council sliding doors here. Hold on one second. Let me let me get in. You're hot. I know, right? Let's get this done. I'm going to talk on this. Okay. Whenever you're ready. Okay. So, we'll vote to include versus exclude. Council sliding doors. All those in favor of including I. I. I think raising hands is probably a good idea. Opposed. Okay. I Spencer count. I'm just I'm just uh I'm not looking at votes. I'm looking at what the majority wants. So in this case, majority says leave it in. Repair or replace main doors at city hall. All those in favor? There's what, nine of us. Renovate the administrative area of city

hall. Include How much is that? 25,000. 25. I can I can't see that. We didn't recommend that. Yeah. Can you make it a little bit bigger? Yeah, we're going through each one of them, not just the ones that we've wanted to include. Okay. Is that better, Nancy? I haven't done anything yet. Uh, I'm looking for something down here. Can you drag a corner? Control C. That's what I want right here. Control holy ball. There you go. That better. I need this to renovate the administrative area of city hall. All those in favor of including I opposed. Nay. HVAC upgrade for library. All those in favor of including opposed reclassified 30hour youth library assistant to 40 hours. All those in favor of including two seven [Music] opposed one two one behind you too. Oh sorry. Oh, I will say if you I do I did reach out to the library and I if only if you want this. I did ask for some followup if if uh they can provide if Jennifer could provide a little more information on what the programs were and stuff like that. So, I'm happy to

share that if it's helpful if the budget committee feels you've already voted and stuff like that. I don't need to. So is the dollar am not the same? Yeah, nothing changes there. So yeah, there's there's yeah, there's a range depending on what uh health insurance is chosen, but generally somewhere between that and 50 probably. That's the low end. [Music] Library furniture refresh. All those in favor of including opposed new patrol SUV. All those in favor of including opposed. That's nine to one communication manager pay increase. All those in favor of including opposed. Did you abstain? No. Okay. Sorry. Uh taser. All those in favor of including opposed. 91. Two firefighter positions. All those in favor of including Those opposed updated material and service budget. All those in favor of including

postgot don't know what the count was on that but I think the think the have it repeater and microwave all those in favor of including those opposed radar speed trailer. All those in favor of including opposed. Convert sweeper to swap loader. All those in favor of including those [Music] opposed. Parks budget increase building maintenance. All those in favor of incre of including opposed park maintenance mill ponds invasive vegetation program or project. All those in favor of including [Music] opposed vehicle requests. All those in favor of including opposed ICC digital control subscription. All those in favor of including Why is the generator checked, Spencer? Um cuz I think the last meeting that's what the discuss keeping the that's what the general consensus was for discussion. But um that's what we're trying to determine here is if if that's really okay. thought we had the items checked that you recommended here. Uh we started with

that and then what this represents is kind of where the budget committee landed at the last meeting. Yeah. And we said we wanted to keep it there as a placeholder because we didn't think it was going to be 80, but we wanted the placeholder so that if we remember so if we we could do something if and when we're ready. EOC backup power 30 kilowatt generator. All those in favor of including does it make sense to still leave that at 80 even though we know that's not what we would want to spend on that or we could reduce it unless something comes up that that that is the right amount and where it's basically coming out of our savings. It's if we don't spend it, then the amount we don't spend stays there. I think we're more concerned about the ongoing because that really had much more impact. Okay. Tsunami barrel cash restocking. All those in favor of in I don't remember us coming to a final conclusion on that. We didn't come to a final conclusion on anything. That's why we're Well, I know. We were talking about a different kind of restocking. We Yeah, John provided additional information. A year. Oh, do you want uh John, do you want to give an update on where we are with the school district? Yeah. Uh so there have been a couple of meetings since last week but ultimately um the state has held up that they want to award this uh type one set of conx boxes. So what it is is it's three 40 foot conx boxes that come with a lot of

materials. Um a list too big to even share in here. Um but it's a significant amount of supplies um that will help in the event of some sort of disaster. It's it's a resiliency package is what it is. And so we've had some meetings that the caveat to all of this it these were applications that were put forward but they were initially denied. And so they came back late in the game and said hey and both the school district and the city had made application for these and they came back and they said we can award one of these. we'd like you guys to kind of share in the award. But part of that is that one entity is responsible for the award and then what we'll do is we'll put together um some sort of an IG how we operate together in that the meeting we had yesterday um Susan Penrod the the school district superintendent uh basically took ownership to say we'll be the awardee. So they will be and one of the elements to that that actually I think made a lot of sense for this is they have uh an engineer already basically kind of on I don't know if retainer is the right word but within their realm of working and because we need to have some geological work done in that area before those conx boxes and this just to get a a bid and all that stuff put together would be really challenging to do. So, so they're going to take on um basically the awardee. We'll continue to work together with the goal of getting that in place um by June 30th. So, what I took away from the last meeting is since this is upcoming, we were going to potentially pause on updating the tsunami barrels, refreshing them until we figured out what was going on with this food cash, if you will. This is le I will say like this is less

about um cash. My understanding of it is it's less about cash and food supplies and more about other things that so one doesn't necessarily replace the other. It's complmentary to the other. It's a different thing and it's in a different area because this will be up at the EOC, right? Very much so. Yes. Yeah. So, and the cashes are all around town. Okay. So, maybe it's kind of a separate deal alto together. But I also we need to re label it then because if you read it and No, barrel cash is what it is. That's what we have now. Restocking though. Yeah. Okay. It was my understanding that are in the people's houses. This it's been 5 years since they've been replenished. The supplies are outdated or whatever. That's what we said last time we were going to take a second look at because they're in people's houses. People don't know where they are. There's a lot of other things. And if you just put out money and restock where they are, that's not necessarily getting us what we need for the future. That's what I thought we talked about. I saw us talking about that, too. And I just I would like to see us do some kind of analysis around the program like current state, future state, what where is it, where are they, and then what might the future state look like, what do we really need. I would prefer to spend some money doing something like that than than replenishing the barrels at this point. So, I would say this is this is a one-time cost. And so, uh, one way to look at this is does the council or does the budget committee want to set aside these funds if the council decides

to continue this program and replenish it? Understanding that we have not we have not gone through any kind of vetting or discussion yet. That is a future discussion sometime this year. The council needs to have on the program. We probably need an update on the program, how well it's working, what it's going to take, and um if we want to continue or do something different. That's a that's a whole discussion the council will need to have. I think the question is do we want to set aside funds for its replacement or address that at a later time? The budget component. Well, my question is a bigger one of do we is there a benefit to having the barrels spread out across town or do we want a central location where we keep shipping containers and food for the community? And I I I think I think that's all part of it. I just don't I just don't know if the budget meeting is the time to have that discussion as much as when we discussed you know the whole program and the way it's running and if we want to make changes because you said at the last meeting the the cash location up at the EOC was not where the public would go potentially. Okay. So then the barrel program makes sense. And just as I was able to pull up a list of some of the stuff that's included in this. So, uh the package includes um dual fuel 9500 watt portable generators. Uh it includes uh pallets of water. Um a big radio communications package, satellite access, um a 500gallon propane tank that's empty, but that we can fill, a field toilet, a toilet tank. So, um, really things that first responders would need in that initial response more than a cash full of, you know, food and water for the residents. So, I it seems to me that our decision about this is separate from this other program, but um I would be in favor of putting the money there as a placeholder like we've done

for some other things, placeholders, but the use of the money being contingent on the uh council making a decision and that there that there be a a review of what's the program we have now, where are those c those barrels, etc. etc. and the and the uh council coming up with the final decision. Does that work for you, Seth? Yeah, that works great. And just change the title to tsunami resiliency planning or something supplies. I could go for that. So, we'll include it. Yeah, we're not necessarily approving this wording. We're approving a budget number and so the council we can decide how to change the wording though when it becomes the final. Well, I don't think that I don't think you'll see that word in the budget. I see. That will just be a number added to somewhere wherever the emergency preparedness line is. And then we just need to get the topic on the council's agenda probably when um Embright is is back in office. Okay, sounds good. Okay. Tsunami barrel cash restocking. All those in favor of including opposed. Tsunami siren maintenance. All those in favor of including. Now, that one is another one that we discussed that it's really not the replacement of a siren. It's that's another placeholder because we're going to look at how do we do tsunami warning system. The previous meeting the budget committee asked us to move we had an ongoing cost of the 6100. The budget committee recommended moving that to a one-time cost and then having that discussion, having the council have that similar thing, have a discussion of

what's the current status of the program. Do we want to continue it? Do you want to make changes? And there was at least enough money in this year's budget to replace one of the stations or do some other maintenance if needed, if desired. Um, but to not make a commitment one way or another at this point. Okay. So, we're still looking at approving inclusion. Yeah. Under the same guidelines as the other ones, which is appropriating the funds but not authorizing the expenditure is how I'd say it. Sounds like Congress, but they go the other way. How dare you? All those in favor of including opposed. Okay. Okay. for those for those last three. Just a point of clarity. Can I what would what would the folks on council prefer? I can create a contingency line that that has those three items in it. And then when you want that to be released, we would then come to council and say, "Hey, here's here's the conversation." And if should you choose to release that, you can release that. or we can put it into the normal budget and just say this amount of the normal budget is off limits. I I think I would I would tend to prefer the first approach, but I just want to make sure that you all are on the same page. And those are for line the items 24, 25, 26. Is that what you're talking about? Uh 20, 21, 22. Oh, the ones we just talked about the three that we just talked about. Can you take a second? Because they because they would all be they would all be uh funded from the emergency. They would all be funded from the emergency operations budget. And so

the thought would be put that put those oh sorry uh put those three items into contingency uh so that should city council choose to fund any or all of these you can choose to release those at that time. That seems to make sense. Yeah. Best for you. Okay. Okay. Do we need to vote on that? No, we don't need to vote on that. But it it is a it is a point that that line is not currently in your in your budgets. So it it will be the end number will be the same. Um but you'll see some movement from the operational lines down to the contingency line. Okay. Increase pension contributions to improve funding percentage. All those in favor of including opposed church demolition. All those in favor of including [Music] opposed school. I want to keep it. School administration building demolition. All those in favor? Opposed? Opposed. Um, vees development strategy. All those in favor of including opposed. Skid steer. All those in favor of including opposed. That's it. Okay. So, I have a a comment going back to the library furniture. I don't know if this makes a difference, but um you there's already money sitting in that fund called the library trust and that's a perfect place to get that to take that money. We talked about that

last time. Yeah. So, we've been looking into that and I and I think if there are not restrictions or if it can be used for um furniture um that would be an appropriate place to do it. Uh, I reached out to Esther Moberg and her recollection is that was um left over from the donations that came from the construction of the building. So, how much left or how much is in there? About 80,000. Oh, 80. Wow. So, that could actually whatever's left over could go towards HVAC replacement down the road. Okay. Yeah. I think there's still some work to do to to verify. Uh but if there are no strings attached to that money, then the council can authorize it. That that fund was there before we were collecting donations for the library to build the library. That that was there, but it was it was people just donating for the library. Yeah. She says when I talked to Esther, she said people sometimes, I think Jen said this as well, people come in and just want to make a donation or in their trust or their will or something like that and it comes in and and uh neither of them are aware of any um any requirements on the use of the funds. So, can we scroll back up to the um so I can see the top column on the right that there you go. Thanks. So, we're approving. It isn't the trust. 595. It will be for ongoing. No, sorry. for one-time expenses and we're approving 47,000 for

one or ongoing expenses. You're you would be currently you'd be approving a budget with a well with a $47,000 deficit on the operation side. meeting that we will be taking in $47,000 less than u what our ongoing recurring expenses will be. Can I elaborate? Those those numbers are not current anymore. Those are those are as of the last as of the last meeting. Um that was the conversation in the beginning. So um these ongoing expenses will not put us below into the red there. Okay, great. That's kind of what my question had been. Did we figure out where that was coming from? So, we're not in deficit. Yes. Uh our our chair here, uh Kathleen, reached out to us with some of those questions this week. I did tell um tell Zach, um because I think you asked something like, "Have you been able to find the funds?" I told Zach, I don't want anyone to get the impression that there is a place to find the funds. Shaking out shaking out the cushion. Yeah. like we have a secret account where okay we'll open this up or something like that. I mean it is what it is. However, in going through updating verifying doing all that the numbers have been updated and the money is there and I think that's what you meant. My question is super simple but you'd said we need to do some recalculation and we'll see where we are then. And that's what my question was. But but to be clear, there isn't necessarily a uh we don't have a slush fund anywhere if that's if heard in any way. Yeah. So any other comments about the budget? I don't a question. It probably is out in left field

somewhere. We I want to go back to the school admin building. Um previous hospital, previous who knows what it was before and once upon a time. Does the city have a or right I don't even know the right words that it's such an old building but it is a historical historical that's the word I was looking for policy I mean I hate to see it torn down but that's my personal I've been in it and all over it. So we in in as far as I know in the city of Seaside listed as in the city of Seaside we have one house on the national historic register that's actually listed over I the other one's listed as Tilman Rock Lighthouse. It's listed under seaside for some reason claims it. We have a lot of houses that are on this other register when they did a study in 1987. There's all kinds of places that is one of them. The prom is one of but the prom itself is not even a actual protected thing. Unfortunately, we're not like Atoria. Atoria has all kinds of them, right? Because they and they have a whole another commission that just deals with that. We don't we don't have anything like that. And I think the word protected is kind of generous because it's not it's not really protected. If you get on the national historic registry, you're actually restricted. So, um yeah, [Music] and ultimately what would be the purpose of putting a building that can't even really be entered safely

You know, all we're doing with these though is all these things still have to be approved by the council, right? I just we'll still have to have those meetings and decide, okay, we're going to bite the bullet. A building I've been in so many times upstairs and it's been where we've stored seaside kids stuff for years. Yeah. And um I hate to see it, but I'm just asking have it painted for you. I don't want it painted. I just want it, you know, the the traffic lighted. No, thank my understanding is that the the removal of that is part of a parks plan, a parks expansion plan. Remember, the tennis courts were going to be moved down there. That's been proposed. It hasn't been approved. Okay. There there was a Yeah, counselor that thought we had approved the plan to move forward. That's what I thought too. There was just an option to use that area. T-ball, I'm looking for another baseball field. that property was pro was given to the city by the county uh with and it has a reversionary clause that if that property is not used for the public good uh so recreation park or that kind of thing that the property would revert to um the county and it's not just that little part of the property I believe it's everything would revert because it was all given together. I had the opportunity to do a pretty extensive tour of that building recently and I would say that it's from my perspective, it's probably too far gone to to rehab at any kind of reasonable cost, but I also get sticker shock at the $500,000 to remove it. So, I feel like we're between a rock and a hard

place on that one. And that's because there's asbestous, correct? I think you said there's that as concrete. In fact, in fact, yeah, in fact, this this does not contemplate as best this is the cost without asbesus removal. Um, but we we have a funding source through the state that we think we can get grant for that. Now, at the end of the day with a cost this high, it will go out to bid and we would go with the lowest bidder and if it's within budget, um, you know, we can make that determination. Um, so I hope our estimates are wrong, but this was our our best estimate given the nature of its construction. Before you demo it, are you going to let the fire department play? Not not if there's still asbestous in there. But um that's the that's maybe the plus side is or the downside is we would love to burn it down, but um it's all concrete. Yeah. Like the church building, there are a lot there are a lot more restrictions on those. interior stuff, smoke, you know, crawling around in the smoke and all that. I think there already is. In fact, I think our police department and other departments, the county um sheriff's office has has used it for their own tactical training and stuff like that in the past. But um yeah, part of the problem is that if we want to continue to use it like that, we need to ensure it appropriately, which has an annual cost. Just for what it's worth, I've mentioned this before, but there was an old elks elks or moose, one of those animals building in Clatsky. Very similar layout, I think, originally to what this building is. They gutted it. The bones were still good enough. It was not in a flood plane. And it is now uh partially their city hall, partially a event center.

upstairs is is meetings and that's where their city hall is. Downstairs is a really terrific uh auditorium seats about I don't know 150. Um price this is um I think it's probably close to 10 years ago now. Price then was somewhere around three to four million. Wow. To do that. So if you have ideas Well, yeah, I do. Yeah, you got to find the money too. Yeah. If there wasn't as best as, you know, get a revenue stream by uh letting people pay to take a whack at the building or something. I'm sure there's a lot of people in the school here who might like to do that. Wow. And you know, like the mayor said, there is a discussion decision that still has to be made and so we can have that and we can still vet other ideas. This again is just approving the funds in the budget so that we can take action if the council makes that decision. Okay. Comments, questions, clarifications? Would someone like to make a motion of approval? He's got to come up with a number. Yeah. All right. I've got a number if everyone wants to write it down. Uh here. Hold on. Let me actually put it in here. Ready? All right. It is 93 million. 809,000 299.

Do I have any cents? I round it up by 14 cents. 14 cents. I I don't know. Hold on. Hold on. I'll tell you exactly how many cents. You want to check that? 14 cents. There's no 27 cents. 27. All right. So, can we just make it 300? All right. Yeah. These feel safer. Except for then Zach but then Zach has to go fix the document and put a dollar somewhere. So all you got to do is put a half a cent in somewhere and round it up. Right. So I move to approve the seaside city budget for the 246. I stole that language from the last year. So apologies. 526 fiscal year in the amount of 93,89,299 Montero and McVy. All those in favor I opposed. So we have a approved budget to pass on to the city council. We have approved recommendation recommendation. All right. Well, that I'm I'll give my two seconds of final thoughts and let Spencer give his two seconds of final thoughts and then you guys may officially officially adjourn. Um I appreciate everyone's uh everyone's participation through this through this process. I hope that, you know, as we next year might be a might be a little interesting with the change of of uh account codes and and some hiccups. I I'm trying to set the bar low so that I can come in above it. Uh but um no, I hope I hope that as we've iterated this

process, it's become a little bit less painful since we've been here. Um and um you know certainly appreciate everyone's input. If if there's anything that you guys think um can be improved upon or anything that you want for us to continue to uh focus on, you know, please feel free to let me know. I'm I'm happy to hear hear the feedback. Um, oh, one last thing. There there is a possibility that we might have to call this body in in June to pass a supplemental budget. I just want to put everyone on notice um to do that. There's a couple areas that I've that are of concern that my my first uh my first um solution is going to try is going to be to try to find funds elsewhere to to patch potential holes, but I don't think that's appropriate if it's one of the enterprise funds. And so, um that forces my hand a little bit more than I would I would care to. Um, so anyways, you're talking about a supplemental budget to this year's budget. To this year's budget, correct? Um, but more to come on that at in late May. But yeah, if any any comments, please, I'd love to hear them. Spencer, anything from you? No. Thanks everyone for the process and participation and del deliberation. We're happy to stick around and answer any questions. Well, we'd also like to thank both of you as well or all of the the city staff been involved in this. This is our third year, third cycle that we've done this and it's getting to be a pretty smooth process as far as I'm concerned. Um it's great to have the interaction and the

discussion and the research and coming back with um new information for us. Um, so I want you all to know how much we appreciate that as well. We do. Um, yeah. I think there's one process that we still have kind of left hanging that I would hope that we're going to meet in say uh late end of the year and that is um the whole process for uh uh the nonprofit requests. I think we uh there's still some stuff that can be fixed on that and and could be uh smoothed out. Okay. I'd like to see us talk about getting our application process enveloped in a much shorter format. Maybe as we talked about um Darren's onepage and I did look at the form is it 990 10? Yeah. It looks to me without digging into it that it's pretty complicated. It didn't seem like a one pager. Oh, can be. It can be. Okay. Okay. So, I'm really in favor of us doing that. As in addition, I would like us to look at if you don't follow these rules, your application won't be considered and the possibility of looking at the way that so many organizations uh decide uh on funding and on grants and that is you don't make come and make a personal presentation. Everything is based on you submit your information, the committee looks at it and the committee scores and decides rather than having a presentation so it's not as random. But in order to

do the scoring well, you need to have everybody know the criteria to score by and that's something that we would need to decide what is our criteria. All righty. And with that, we'll adjourn the seaside budget committee meeting.