City Council - Regular Meeting

the uh 2026 2027 city budget uh hearings for the general enterprise and other funds. Could I have a roll call, please? Josh Bachmann here. Matt Barber here. Steve Clemens here. Crane Dudo here. David Glade here. Ricky Joe Hickeyi here. Megan Keading here. Molly King here. Gary Lillard here. Marian Meisner here. Roxy Olgo is absent, excused. Justin Rock here. Tony Smith here. And Denise Wheeler is going to just be a little late.

All right. Thank you. Uh agenda approval. Um we have a new agenda on our on our uh at our seats. Any um changes to that since we received it? There's no changes to the revised agenda.

All right. Very good. Uh the public hearings on the proposed 2026 2027 city's general enterprise and other funds budget and state revenue sharing remain open and will continue this evening. This hearing shall remain open until the chair formally declares them closed at the conclusion of the hearing process. Um we're going to change things up a little bit this evening. I'm going to ask you all to um I'm going to ask John to do review of each budget and ask you all to hold comments or questions. Let's go through the bud those out those those funds, get the highlights. When we got through that, then we'll have open the podium for public comments and then once we've through with public comments, we'll go back through each budget uh each fund and ask questions, make suggestions, whatever. Um my hope is we can get through general fund this evening and uh if that means nine o'clock then it will be nine o'clock. Um so with that John I'm going to turn it over to you. Uh give us the highlights please.

Right. So starting with police. Yes. Okay then.

Okay. Um police is up on the screen. Um, one of the most significant changes is in this proposed reduction of two authorized police department positions. Importantly, these positions have remained vacant for an extended period and are not currently filled operate um filled for operational positions uh that are being removed. This adjudgment is necessary. This adjustment is necessary to support long-term fiscal sustainability and maintain alignment with the fiscal transformation initiative while avoiding long-term structural obligations that general fund may uh struggle to sustain. At the same time, public safety remains a top priority. The city anticipates pursuing federal grant funding opportunities in fiscal year 2728 with the goal of restoring these positions through external funding if successful. The budget also reflects increased IT systems maintenance costs tied to broader citywide technology, cyber security, and operational support needs. Additionally, the budget includes capital investment for a new police patrol vehicle and related equipment outfitting to maintain operational readiness and officer safety. I also want to note that approximately $3,000 for for future replacement of code enforcement vehicle is included elsewhere within the broader budget structure under the city council and city manager budget. Ultimately, my goals are are to maintain sustainable and reliable public safety operations long-term by making disciplined adjustments early enough to avoid more severe reactive measures later.

Very good. This budget, I'm sorry. No, go ahead. I'm jumping.

This is the fire and EMS department for the fire and EMS department. Overall, the proposed budget reflects continued operational pressures associated with maintaining emergency response readiness. EMS and EMS capability and fire service delivery. Personnel costs increase primarily due to overtime associated with staffing and leave coverage. workers compensation adjustments tied to fire service operations and anticipated labor related cost increases. The budget also reflects rising medical examination and training related costs necessary to maintain certification requirements, operational readiness, and firefighter safety standards. Technology and dispatch related costs also increase, including IT support, computer systems maintenance, and adjustments associated with dispatch functions. The department is also proposing several operational equipment investments, including turnout gear replacement and approximately $40,000 for ambulance stretcher upgrades to ensure all ambulances are equipped consistently. In addition, included elsewhere within the broader budget structure is approximately $50,000 transferred into reserves for the future purchase of an ambulance. The transfer is reflected within the city council and city manager budget rather than directly within this department budget. Overall, these investments are necessary to maintain reliable emergency response capability, operational readiness, and long-term service sustainability within fire and EMS operations. Proceeding to the parks department. This is the budget for the parks department. The most significant increase within the budget is tied to professional services associated with uh the Morgan Lake Dam project. That includes engineering, permitting, and environmental compliance work, as well as representing the city's share of the FEMO the FEMA related project costs.

While those costs increase this fiscal year, equipment and improvement costs decrease because no major new equipment purchases are currently anticipated. I also want to note that included elsewhere within the broader budget uh structure is approximately $5,000 transferred into reserves for future and turf replacement needs. That transfer is reflected within the city council and city manager budget rather than directly within the parks department line items shown here. Overall, the proposed budget maintains operational stability within parks while continuing support for important long-term infrastructure and re re recreation related projects connected to community quality of life. Moving to aquatics, several of the increases reflected here are tied to ongoing maintenance and operational reliability needs associated with the pool facility. That includes replacement of the pool vacuum and pumps, rising chemical costs, increased IT support costs, and additional supplies connected to concessions and daily operations. The budget also includes capital investment associated with portions of the splash pad project, as well as replacement of the facility security camera system

filter. Additionally included elsewhere within the broader budget structure is approximately $100,000 reserved for future HVAC repairs and at the pool facility as a recommended by the parks and recreation advisory commission. That transfer is reflected within the city council and the city manager's budget rather than directly within the department budget. These investments are necessary to maintain safe, reliable, and sustainable aquatic operations for the community moving forward. Moving to recreation division. Overall, this budget remains relatively stable operationally with the most significant increases tied to professional services and fees associated with the arts commission's request to complete the signal box wrap project. The project is intended to support community beautifification, public art visibility, and activation within public spaces throughout the community. Beyond the adjustment, the recreation division budget largely reflects continuation of current recreational programming and operational support activities. Maintaining recreation and community engagement opportunities remains an important component of overall community quality of life and civic vitality. Moving on to urban forestry. Overall, the proposed budget remains relatively stable with the primary adjustment being a decrease in equipment and improvement costs since no major new equipment purchases are anticipated this fiscal year. The urban forestry program continues supporting tree maintenance, public safety, community aesthetics, and long-term environmental health throughout the city. I also want to note that funding support for the program comes from multiple sources, including streets and roads funding, urban renewal support, and other fees and charges. administration or myself. I believe maintaining the urban forestry program remains important both from a public safety standpoint and from the broader perspective of community appearance,

livability, and long-term asset stewardship. Moving on to the library, several of the adjustments reflected here are tied to facility maintenance, operational support, and long-term asset reliability. The budget includes increased costs associated with the parking lot sidewalk lighting project, including replacement of aging lights, posts, and portions of sidewalk impacted during the construction process. At the same time, computer systems maintenance costs decre decrease to better reflect actual IT usage levels and computer equipment costs decrease because the public computer replacement project was completed during the pri prior fiscal year. Additionally included elsewhere within the the broader budget structure is approximately $5,000 reserved for future HVAC replacement needs at the library facility. That transfer is reflected within the city council and city manager budget rather than directly within the department budget. Overall, these investments support continued library operations, facility reliability, and long-term community access to library services. Moving on to economic development. Several of the increases reflected here are directly connected to the city's broader long-term sustainability and fiscal transformation strategies. Um if if approved, personnel cost increase primarily due to the grade movement associated within the economic development director position. Most significant adjustment within the budget is the inclusion of approximately $120,000 for development of the new economic development plan intended to replace the city's 2010 plan and align with the broader urban renewal strategic plan and long-term community growth objectives. administration or myself. I view economic development increasingly as a long-term revenue stabilization strategy tied to taxbased growth,

business retention, redevelopment, infrastructure coordination, and future financial sustainability. The budget also reflects increased IT support costs associated with broader city-wide technology and operational support needs. Overall, these investments are intended to strengthen the city's long-term economic resilience and future revenue generating capacity rather than functioning as short-term administrative expansion. Moving on to the planning department, the most significant increase within this budget is tied to cons consultant services associated with records management and electronic document scanning. This is part of a multi-year effort intended to modernize record storage, improve document accessibility, reduce long-term physical storage constraints, and support future operational efficiency within the department. The project also supports preparation of additional office space by allowing older archived records to be scanned and relocated electronically. The budget has included continued GIS mapping services and increased IT support costs associated with broader citywide technology needs. These investments support operational modernization, long-term efficiency, and improved organizational readiness within the planning department moving forward. Moving on to building maintenance. The primary increase reflected here are tied to IT support costs and facility maintenance works associated with improvements to the city hall parking lot, including crack sealing, surface ceiling, and restriping. These types of preventative maintenance investments are intended to help preserve infrastructure condition and reduce the likelihood of larger repair costs later. Additionally included elsewhere within the broader budget structure is approximately $15,000 reserved for future major building projects, including long-term elevator upgrade planning. The transfer is reflected within the city council and city manager budget rather than directly

within the department budget. These investments support long-term facility reliability, operational continuity, and responsible asset stewardship. That includes everything for the general fund. The next would be uh per our agenda the uh public comments. Um and then after that uh deliberations and second review. So we don't want to do we're not going to do building inspection and 911. Those are part of enterprise funds. Those are part of enterprise funds. Yeah.

Okay. All right then. Um thank you for um that review. So at this point um I'll open the podium for uh and invite public comment. Uh I think last night we had a slide that that asked uh a requested that people uh limit their comments to three minutes. And uh with that I will open the podium and if anyone has public comments to make um on on general fund uh uh budgets uh line or general funds that we've reviewed not on enterprise funds. Anyone? Okay, thank you. Uh, Greg Ammer, Washington Street, L Grandand. Um, you're billing the taxpayers L Grand over $40 an hour for the city employees that sweeps the floor, cleans the bathroom in this building.

Over at the marketplace, they had a person that swept the floor, clean the bathrooms for less than $20 an hour. Why are the taxpayers of LRAN paying over 100% more than what the private sector has for the same service? I don't have that information personally to answer that question because it's not an element of the budget that I recall seeing. Um it is it is in the budget.

Any administration care to address that one? Um, I I would say that the extent of duties that that employee has far exceeds that what was described. Um, and therefore they're being compensated for the totality of what they do, not just simply those actions. Is is the hour is it is that the $40 figure accurate to to include does that include benefits and etc. This is a full-time person, I'm assuming. Yes. Give us a moment to get get to the quote.

$3125,000 a year divided by 12 / 160 he makes 3125,000. Please Mr. Amr. No, if you're going to make comments I you I hate that people should talk. He has his benefits as post. I'm talking benefits. Benefits are part of the labor pack package. Your labor cost, your benefit package is 60%, not 40. What you're talking just saw $94,480 we pay for him to do the job. Divide that by what is it? $2,000 working hours in a year. That's that's not $31.

The hourly rate with full rollups is $50.98. That's with full rollups. With full benefits, fully burdened. Yes. Okay. Thank you, Heather. Anyone else wish to speak? I I do think that the building maintenance um employee does much more than that. They do repairs. It's it's more technical than sweeping floors and janitorial work.

Yeah. It's not just janitorial work. No, it's there's and uh especially city hall is a very old building and requires some special like technical knowledge on on how to maintain it. Um it's more than a janitor for sure. All right, moving on. Any other comments?

My name is Sher Wright. Um, and I want to address the mayor, the counselors, and the budget committee here. Um, and thank you for letting me share my views on the splash pad project as part of the committee of that. If you would think with me for a minute, transferring um transient room tax from tourism promotion to tourism infrastructure directly benefiting local quality of life and creating a high visibility amenity that attracts families. This aligns with modern destination management, ensuring tax revenue supports the facilities tourists and residents would actually use. A splash pad is a concrete concrete attraction that encourages longer family stays, draws visitors from surrounding areas, and providing a higher return on the investments than um general advertising. A splash pad improves livability, taxing visitors through the transient room tax to build amenities that residents also use. involves the nothing here to do issue justifying the tax to locals while providing a tourist facility. I feel that our community is ready to make the shift to a tourism infrastructure.

Thank you. Thank you, Steve. I have a question if you could return to the podium. I'm I have a question I'd like to address. No, the Yeah. Yeah, I was just curious, you know, I think the splash pad is a great idea. I'm curious if the committee has looked at any data concerning bringing in tourists since that is primarily the the purpose of the TRT funds. What that what it would do for tourism. Yes,

I think um Stew could be put on the spot on that. We sure just keep it brief. Keep it brief, Steu, or we'll bring you back up for during partner.

Mr. Lillard, there's been no formal research done within the committee or within the department other than a similar model is used as in the in the playground project at Riverside Park. Those kinds of attractions bring people from far and wide. Um we know that anecdotally through informal surveys that people come not only to the ball fields but to the pool and to playgrounds from more than 50 miles away which is the definition of the TRT funds.

Okay. So uh these uh t the money that would be taken from TRT funds would be to the detriment or maybe not the correct word but you know what I'm after. Where would that come from? Um yes. So ultimately the chamber would end up um having a significant deficit within their funding in order to do what they're doing to promote tourism across. It would it would definitely impact their operations, possibly even threaten um them having to reduce personnel hours if not um close the shop occasionally. Well, the splash pad is a nice idea, but that's concerning too. Okay. Thank you. There's Oh, go ahead.

I think if we're going to continue the conversation, we should probably wait till deliberations. Let's finish public comment and stay on track with that. Thank you. That's okay. Yes. Any other public comments?

Hello, Mayor, Council, and Mi and budget committee members. I uh appreciate what you're doing and I have respect for it. I'm here to advocate that the city earmark $75,000 for the proposed city of Lrand splash pad. That money would come from the transient room tax that's received from your local Airbnbs and from your um hotels. I am personally aware that the city has been funding printed tourism marketing activities for the past 25 years. Research indicates that infrastructure has a significantly stronger and more direct influence on a visitor's decision to return than printed materials. The city needs to continue with building the infrastructure that brings visitors back to the ground. The city's investments in the splash pad will be a significant addition to the park system. This and city's infrastructure. I live on one of the main streets, one of three main streets to Pioneer Park. And I see the wonderful job that the parks do in bringing people with license plates that are other than Oregon to our our community. And I think that's why people come is because of the great infrastructure we have down there. The business owners and city residents understand infrastructure that infrastructure draws tourism to Lrand. Look at the many thank you boards and banners around the parks as a testament of their understanding that infrastructure is what gets tourism to return and spend their money in Lrand. Many, many businesses and private citizens donate to the infrastructures at the park. I encourage you as the decision makers for this year's budget

to focus on the concrete attractions that bring tourists back to Lrand. Thank you again for your service and the time you have given me this evening. Thank you, David. What else? How do um there was three three members of the committee asked me to read their letters into the record that you received. email. You didn't see those emails. I'm going to read those into the record if that's okay, Mr. Chair. Certainly. Part of public comments. Yep. Three minutes, it is. Thank you. My um So, three sep three minutes. Okay. It's going to

three people. Okay. The first one is from uh my name is Kate Hilter and I'm a member of the Lrand Parks and Rec splash pad committee and enjoy being a part of the process and getting this project moving forward. We have a motivated group of community members who are eager to see the new splash ped become an ex exciting community attraction. From concept to design, the community has been enthusiastic and passionate about this project, showing their support by either joining the project committee or becoming sponsors of the splashb. Community members, individuals, and businesses are delighted to see this much requested project become a re reality. Those who have been involved, those who have already shown their support and donated are eager to see the project break ground. Not only will this community attraction be a gathering place for local families like my own, but out of the area, individuals and families will be able to enjoy it as well. Several surrounding counties have already created splash beds, water areas, and great community response, and I know many of us would love to see that in the grant experience the same positive impact for local and surrounding area families. The committee and its members have been hard at work raising the funds for the splash pad project and are on track to meet the requirements uh for a grant that would cover 60% of the project expenses. And we're asking for your support and investment to not meet those requirements and lose and lose the opportunity to receive the funding could cost the city of Lrand and its citizens hundreds of thousands of dollars and would push back the project timeline substantially. It has been so wonderful to see the community come together, support such a great addition to our area, and see the citizens in agreement that a local splash ped is money well spent. I hope you consider granting the proposed funding to the Parks Rick splashed project for residents and families to enjoy for years to come. Three minutes or two.

Good job.

Take a breath. to whom it may concern. When my husband and I was deciding we were deciding to move to Lrand 11 years ago, we had no idea what we were getting ourselves into other than his family was one of the first settlers here from the Oregon Trail. We were just thrilled that Lrand had parks, a pool, great attractions, beautiful views, and a lot of outdoor family oriented activities. However, we were highly disappointed there wasn't a splash pad like we had where we were from. Fast forward to now. Once we heard that there were talks about a splash pad, we jumped right on that idea. Watching it unfold right before our eyes has been an amazing experience. All of the amazing comments on social media and the community support has filled my heart with joy and pride that is truly such a huge asset to not only my family but others as well and for many more generations to come. So, let's keep this momentum and please support the splash pad. It will allow another activity for tourists to be involved with and the community as well. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Mrs. Sanchez.

Okay, number three. Dear city manager and city council members, my name is Joanna Matson. My husband Mark and I are on the committee for the new Splash Bad project being planned at Pioneer Park. This committee has been in full swing since the end of 2025, working towards bringing this wonderful project to f fruition. We have worked diligently to reach out to the community to share the great addition this will be along with asking for financial and inind support. This has all been with the goal to raise our park approximately $200,000 by May 31st in order to successfully apply for a state parks grant that would potentially carry 60% or $300,000 of the cost. We are so appreciative of the TRT funds that are budgeted for this project. However, it has been brought to our attention that these funds are in jeopardy of being reallocated. Without these funds, this project would be pushed out to 2028 or further along with the possibility of losing the current support of our generous donors. The community is very excited about the upcoming addition. We believe the splash pad has the ability to draw families not only from the Grand, but from various surrounding areas as well. This will be a great destination providing free wholesome outdoor recreation for families and children of various ages. We appreciate the city council, city manager, and the budget committee and the time you have put in in serving our community. We know that these choices are hard, but hope you will recognize the value of this project, a great addition this flash pad will be to our community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Joanna Madson.

Thank you. All right, one last time. Anyone else care to comment?

I'm Brent Clap. Um, I just want to speak to um the positiveness of the public relations push that John has brought. Um, I know most of you very well and I know most of the people who work for the city of Lrand. They don't work just for a paycheck. They work because they like what they do. They're serving the public. People are not going to hear those stories unless you tell them. This is the same thing that I tell to companies and corporations. People are not going to hear your story unless you tell them. There are two things that you want when you're communicating. You want engagement and you want content. Content costs money because your employers your employees are doing their jobs and they don't have time to tell their stories. And so you pay for content. Engagement is something that you cannot buy. And thanks to John's enthusiasm, and I don't know, frankly, how long he'll be able to keep that up, but because of his enthusiasm, there is engagement that you simply cannot buy. I would just encourage you that this is a great move. I've spent a lot of time looking at the city of Lrand. I've spent a lot of time looking at Union County. the efforts to be transparent, the efforts to I mean I have been frustrated going to a meeting sometime and there's somebody there's something in front of somebody and there's not simply a QR code for me to scan and be able to see that. And all of that stuff takes money. It has to be assigned to a staff member. They have to make sure it's accessible. That QR code

has to be put out. But I'm telling you, all of that effort is worth it. John is absolutely right about this thing. I mean, he's he might be right about a number of things, but I'm telling you that if there's bad news down the road that the city has to communicate to the public, you are currying favor with them right now so that they will swallow that pill better down the road. That's my advice.

Thank you, Brent. Anyone else? I always like to give a little time, make sure I think we're good. All right, I'm going to uh stop taking public comments then and now we'll get into the meat of the matter. Um we did have an opportunity last night to kick around um the general fund revenue, the council manager and personnel and the finance and municipal court funds. Um I said last night that we would we would reserve making any decisions on those uh funds until tonight. So um let's revisit them but keep moving pretty quickly. Um that said the to me there's to me and I want I don't want to take much of this time but I want I want to kind of give people a framework to work on which to work from. There's the 30,000 foot view of what the budget as as a total looks like, how we feel about it, and what kind of decisions we can make about that. And then there's the weeds. We're picking on little We're picking on line items. Somewhere we we need to be I think somewhere in between. I think I don't think we can get we want to get in the weeds. I think we give it back to John and and department directors and say you figure it out because you know it much better than everybody else. So with that there any items of the general fund revenue and contingency slash unappropriated balance fund that we need to consider.

Can we go department by department? Yeah. Yes. That's what we're going to do. We're going to do So we're on police right now. So the first one would be Heather. Heather's resour general fund. Yeah, general fund resources. I went over it yesterday. Doesn't mean we have any additional questions. Well, any more? This is the general fund contingency reserve for future expenditure and unappropriated balance fund. If I don't hear any questions, I'm going to move on. Steve, I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea to revisit this toward the end since that unappropriate ending balance sort of captures everything else. So to me, this should be the last because everything else is going to funnel.

Okay, very good. And and Dave, I'm just taking them in order in which All right, so we're going to we're going to going to pause on this one. Council, city manager, personnel. That was fun. Oh, that's good. I just have a question. Any items on here that No, I just have a question. John, you kept talking the transfer. What is that? That is in each department coming out of this budget. Is that the 1,800? Yeah. Where, 486? Got my glasses. 65 or down below there says inner fund transfers only 286,

872. So I I I know all those things that you said were transferring that were in this budget. I didn't see how that could have count. Those two figures don't add up that way. Unless I'm wrong. So the 25448 do include all those event individual departments that asked to transfer into reserves. Plus, it also includes the the 50% of unanticipated cash that we had, our ending fund balance that we had plus that which is came to 72,448. Okay. So, so Heather, you just would you say 50% of it is that is is cash to go. So, that's a council policy that was established several years ago. That is correct. Um,

yeah. 50% of unanticipated cash goes back into reserves. 25% stays in the general fund and 25 goes to street reserve. Right. So, so, so this 286 covering all those things that he said he had an art in his budget. That is correct. Okay. Wow. I didn't add he had more of them that were transferred and I thought why are they transfer I mean to make it cleaner wouldn't it be easier just to put it into their fund instead of putting it into the cities and then transferring it there because it's confusing because you don't see it there. You have to go back and forth and back and forth

like in the narrative you're saying and it actually is in the narrative of the city manager. It'll it spells out each individual one, right? But I meant when I'm looking down at whatever, I'll just say uh police when you said there was a transfer into it. I had to go back up here to make sure that it's there. I mean to see if it matches. Does that make sense? Like what account it's in? Yeah. Yeah. What account? Yeah. She's asking because here it says, you know, well, here for one thing, the police say there was no inter inner fund transfer. We don't generally have inner fund transfers within each individual department. We haven't. So it's not showing in their budget at all then. No, it's the general fund budget in general.

It has it but not in each individual. They show no transfer unless they transfer money out to the reserve fund. Well, it's all general fund money. Right. Okay. So, we're just taking out of one department to make the inter fund transfer smoother and they can you can trace it because actually if you go to the general reserve fund, you will see that transfer in. Okay. As one big dollar amount from that there and I was just trying But then I was trying to think, okay, is that going to match up to this and that? It just gets a little bit more interesting. That's why I was asking.

Yep. And that's and one of the easier things to look at in the city manager council personnel narrative at the very bottom. It talks about this general reserve transfer and and lists every single one of them. Right. But the Okay. All right. Just uh just a comment in general. Um, just remember you have a live mic and if you're having side conversations that can be picked up. Oh, as a heads up. All right. Um, anything else for Heather on this it on the city manager budget?

Can I can I ask uh just referencing last year? So, we had um taken a little bit away uh from what would have been an an investment for future infrastructure in order to decrease what was anticipated to be a bit of a deficit. To my recollection, we did add that money back in at some point during the year. Is that correct? In the general fund, we just never transferred it out of the general fund. It stayed in there. So, okay. Is that reflected at any point in this transfer or no? Was that part of the unanticipated increase? No, it's not reflected with this.

So, the unanticipated increase is the 286 above and beyond. So, we after we followed that back and I I think that's good for this group to remember because we did pull that at Mount Side. We did end up 286 ahead of what we had projected. Correct. So, we we could I mean we could take 72448 put that back in the general fund rather than putting it into reserve. What we kind of did last year. Yeah. kind of like what that's the move we did last year to to soften the anticipated I don't want to call it a deficit. It wasn't a true deficit, but the amount that we would have had to pull from reserves

because if I remember correctly, the transfer that we were going to make last year was like $900 and some thousand of unanticipated cash that we had and we we dropped it down by 400,000. Yeah. Right. We had a million dollars that we were going to move. Yeah. So, is anybody is anybody considering that 724 to take it out of here? Is you know or or like me? No. No. No. I'm not I'm just I'm asking the committee. I mean, it gives us some room to play with things as we go down. If I don't hear anybody may raise a cons concern.

Can you can you explain that again? So, if you look at the uh under the comments uh very last item, general fund transfers, there's $72,448 of unanticipated increase in general fund cash to be transferred to future capital. Has no it has no identified use. Um we can sweep it back into general fund. It just gives us some money to play with. Maybe we'll keep that in mind while we go through the rest of the budget. We could do that. All right. Just keep that in mind. So I have a a question. Um with this department, we're making the decision about the allocation between the chamber and the splash pad, right? That's correct.

And so can you remind me is this breakdown the one that leaves the chamber operating at reduced levels? Yes. So if if the if we if we retain the 75K for the splash pad, the chamber does $75,000 less. Um if we if you decide to reallocate it currently it stays it stays with the splash pad. Okay. If you change it it goes to this to uh the chamber and the um parks and wreck um does without chambers asked for 120. They asked for 120. Yes.

It's a percentage of estimated TRT funds that we're in which is 36.5%. Actually technically they asked for 125. Okay. Historically, we've always put some of that TRT fund into parks. Um, there there's it depends on the years and what the circumstances of and if I say something wrong, certainly speak up. Couple years though, we put money in from the TRT. It depends. It stays in the general fund for parks use. That's so therefore it didn't all go to the chamber before either. Yeah. It hasn't for many years. Yeah. Right. Okay. So the

Heather, I have a very quick question. I was a little surprised to see the ARPA funds in in this area. I I know that we had a discussion about that some years ago when I was still on the council. I can't remember what the reason was for putting it here rather than say public works. Okay. Um that money came into the general fund and I set up a separate specific line within the general fund for better tracking and reporting purposes. Okay. That's right. Thank you. Mhm. He's those funds will be used this year. Yep. That's all we have left. Do you do you feel like we finish the TRT conversation?

I did have one follow-up question, which is it seemed like in some of the um written testimony. It seemed like someone was suggesting they would lose like some of the grant funding like if our match the city's match went down. Is that true? So, you want to speak to this? You want

Sure. In case you didn't know, I'm Stu Spence, the parks and recreation director. Um I don't know everybody in the room necessarily. Even though I'm big and loud, I don't know everybody. So um so the right the the grant match was b the 75,000 was baked into our uh goal of local fundraising. So we advertised that as a pledged amount. Um and we advertised that as essentially not needed to raise because it was proposed. However, um it was we we have this colorcoded green, yellow, red, right? So, it's in yellow because it hasn't been approved. But, um, the the trick is if that's in jeopardy, we would lose that amount of match which is required to write a grant that's due at the end of this month for an additional $300,000.

How much have you raised so far, Stu? Uh, separate from 75. separate from the 75. Sorry, this is hard to do because in my head I have the the total width of 75. I think I think with without it's around 110, we need to get to 200 by the end of this month. So that even with the 75, right?

So with the 75, we're still short. We're still actively fundraising through a variety of different asks around the community. And I'll also take this time to share that over 30 businesses so far have contributed. And I'm I'm worried about the it being disingenuous because we've collected this money from them for the splash pad with the goal that we're going to build next spring. Um if if this money gets pulled, that's in jeopardy. I'm not saying that it's impossible. It just makes my job harder. I got to go get that money somewhere, right? So, it just means there's more there's more work to do, which isn't impossible and people may step up. It's just that I'm concerned about the grant deadline at the end of this month. Sure.

That would bump it a full more year because the grant funding is only once once a year if that makes sense. My question though, what have you what are you not going to be doing at the parks that you usually use that money for? No, it's a separate account. So the money that you're talking about is already into the general fund support for parks operations. It supports parks operations. This is over and above that. Okay. So it's over and above the T because what we the city's always given before is from the TRT. That's correct. So that's that's still coming in plus this.

So a part of the park's budget is supported by TRT dollars. This is a separate capital improvement project. This money was also allocated to the playground project two years ago. The 75 from TRT dollars. Okay. which was the exact same model, the same grant. We included that in our match and it then was successful. Obviously, we have a beautiful new playground. Gotcha. Right, ST if someone wanted to donate, how do they donate? Talk to the camera. Right. So, there's a splash pad page on the city website. There's a link right there. Thanks to Karine. We make sure to put the link in there, but it's uh yeah, it's easy to give and we we need we need all that. It's a 6040. So, we're going to get 60% of the money outside. Okay,

we need to raise 200 of 500. So my question is um on this um budget summary TRT allocations is 28,000. Yeah. And chamber wants 12575 for the splash pad. That's 200,000. Do we not have enough or is it going somewhere else? the 200 it's uh on under the council manager and personnel summary TRT allocations

it says 208846 for parks tourism facilities 75k for the splash pad and 4545 it's correct that that two part of the remaining of the 120,000 between the 75,000 and the 45,000 that's going to chamber goes towards parks operations as Stu just mentioned. Right. So the the sum total the 208 is not the total that's how much go to park facility and then there's 75k that goes to splash pad and the remainder 45 and change. That is correct. Yes.

Right. So in total or TRT funds it was 328,000 and then 28 went to parks and wreck. 75 is going towards splash pad and the remaining is going towards chamber. Okay. Can I ask a different question? Do you have something like on your website that we could repost and put it on media that we can all share to try to gain that extra money that we need? Yes. Yeah. We're just on the we're just on the clock. You know what I mean? I have That's what I'm saying. 25 days or something. So, it's just stressing me out.

So, we can just go to your website and of course you have a face. Yes. Let's stay focused on the budget, not fundraising. Right. Sorry. I got one more. I got one question. Okay. If we if we aren't awarded the grant, what happens with the 75K? If it it rolls back in, I guess, Heather, and then we could reallocate it. We could reallocate it. It's budgeted to spend, so we could reallocate it to chamber. And that decision comes in about September, October of the funding. Understood. However, I'm confident that we'll get that from you. Oh, so that would be if we don't get the the grant, right? There's no guarantee yet. Right. It's a grant. Grant. Yeah. We just need to push it.

Heather, am I correct that TRT funds are are earmarked for certain? Correct. Yes. So they they must be spent within certain boundaries. Um I just I I I regret that I feel the committee has been placed a little bit between a rock and a hard place because we're either choosing to gut chamber. This is a heavy hit to them, right? As a percentage of their budget, this is enormous. um or we upset the community because they don't get a splash pad, right?

And um and it was it was poorly planned. Um I I regret that we're left with making this decision at the 11th hour u because I it's not fair to either group and um and I don't know. I mean I don't know what to do. We all want the black pad, but um it's I think it's grossly unfair to the chamber. Uh when I mean historically we have funded them at a reasonably healthy level. Um this is a very reasonable ask for them. Uh and and we're we're kind of pulling the rug out. So I I would have to respectfully disagree to an extent in what you're saying.

Um the problems that led to this did not come from the city's lack of planning. Um, this has to do with things that I'd rather not put people's laundry out. Um, and so I can speak to it more than that if you need me to, but what I can say is nobody on our team failed to do what they were supposed to do.

Um, so the situation is is not created by us. We just made decisions with what information we had after trying to get more information. Um and when we didn't get that, we made decisions and my recommendation is the the the repercussion is live with the the uh the results of what didn't occur. In my my personal view, I have to sort of agree with um some of the comments that were made that uh I think infrastructure speaks. Uh you know, hanging hanging flyers out, advertising, trying to create, you know, tourism, that's one thing. A splash pad is very visible uh to the community. It has obvious benefits. I do have questions as we're facing a pretty uh hairy fiscal reality looking at this budget. We have not spoken at all about the ongoing costs of maintaining a splash pad, but any of us who water a lawn realize that water is not free in this community and nor is maintenance and upkeep. And so can can we hear something about what we anticipate the ongoing expenditures of that infrastructure investment being?

Sure. Yeah. So the the current structure, the current splash pool is what I'm calling it. The reason it's a pool is because it has 18inch depth, which means we have to lifeguard it and keep it closed to the community unless we have a lifeguard on duty and they pay to come to the pool. So they enter through the pool, they can go to the splash pool. It has two or three small toys, which were built 25 years ago, right? Um so the new splash pad will be set up with timers to limit water use. It's a drainaway system, so it's on and off. It disappears in the drain. It does not get recycled. So, we save chemical cost, heating cost, pump replacement cost, all the filters, and all the things that go along with the the water right now because it's reusable. So, the model is much less expensive to maintain due to those reasons. So, we kept that in mind, of course, with the fiscal reality that we all have. So my professional opinion is that the cost will reduce of from all those things in the the main pool budget, the the the expenditures and the chemicals, the heating, the the gas that takes the all the things and the replacement costs. So this one is just more of a straightforward um setup and it's obviously more modern, environmentally tested and and engineered as well.

Do you need a guard for it? No guard. So, it'll be open and accessible as long as we want it to be any time of day, but it will be on timers that go maybe 3 to five minutes. The water comes on in one specific section. There's age group sections. There's a toddler section, kind of a middle age as in, you know, you know, like three to three to six year olds and then Yeah. Yeah. Then there's Steve taking a shower. No, there's the uh the old the the older kid uh section. So, each section will have its own timer, if that makes sense. and all that stuff. Push a button and it turns the water on,

right? The kid pushes a button, water comes on for three or five minutes. Um, you know, Kyle and I have been working on this for a bit with the engine on the engineer the water use side. We think that the water use on the existing is more than the new one will be because the existing runs constantly for for hours at a time. It just stays on. So you anticipate, am I hearing correctly, a net gain to the budget by the upgrade replacing the right for all those reasons. Yeah. Okay. I think, you know, we're almost getting into some parks and recck stuff. I love it. Come on. I know. I want to keep us moving through this. So, any more questions for uh council man?

Oh, sorry. Bless you. Thank you. So, so we are replacing that other pool though with the splash. That's why I think that's a big important thing that people should know. It's not doing an addition. It's replacing that script. It will be Yep. in the same location. The fence will come down. It'll be fully accessible and free instead of for a cost, etc. Yeah. Steve, will we have some further discussion on this later or we can if we if we feel like we need to come back to it and and and make take action with it with the splash pool. Yeah. Yeah. Go ahead. Just to clarify, budget as it is, 75,000 goes to the splash pad and 45,000 roughly goes to the chamber.

Yes. Okay. Correct. All right. The balance going to parks infrastructure. It stays within the general fund operation. How much did we give to the chamber last year? I guess I could have looked that up. Yeah, it's in the book. Well, you can't really tell in the budget because we also gave 119,000 to the uh Union County Fairgrounds. Oh, two. Okay. I just

approximately 103. That sounds right. That is a big I know what you're saying, John. I agree with you there. All right. Moving on now then to finance and municipal court. We went through this one last night. I don't think we had a lot of questions.

Anything else? The one I was going to ask about last night, how many people I mean, how many tickets do we have at the court? Um, it has increased drastically. It has increased drastically. Unfortunately, I'm I don't have a total right off the bat. I would say we're averaging we have court twice a week or twice a month and we're 15 to 20 tickets each court. Those are mostly parking. No, those are strictly just traffic tickets. Oh, those are traffic. And some of that money that gets traffic doesn't stay in the city.

That is correct. A portion of it goes to the state and a portion goes to county. It's not a percentage. It's a it's based on each different citation or violation how much goes to the state. It's not like a percentage and I yeah I don't know off the top of my head how much. Um but you'll see that and that's part of the professional services and fees. Those costs are in there. The money that goes to the state and the county. So and the parking tables don't go into this budget in that section. any the revenue from it that comes into the general fund in general not just because these are just expenditures. I mean is it showing the general tickets? Yeah, there is this individual line in the revenue parking tickets.

You're welcome. Any other questions? Jason, good to see you. You too, Steve. I hope it stays that way for the next He's not getting cut. always. All right, questions for Chief Hayes. All right, Steve, if I may, uh, I have an opening statement. Certainly, if you'll abide by me, please. Uh, for those of you who don't know me, my name is Jason Hayes. I'm your new chief of police. I've been so for almost three months now, so be gentle on me.

Uh, to lighten the mood a little bit, we as directors make fun of John because sometimes he is a little overarticulate. Uh, but I have a four-page uh opening statement that I'm going to read quickly so you can pass the crown to me. Good evening, budget committee members, city manager, directors, staff, members of the media, and community members. First, I would like to thank the city manager for allowing me the opportunity to speak tonight regarding the police department budget, specifically the proposed reduction of two police officer positions. I want to approach this discussion with transparency while remaining respectful to the city manager and everyone present this evening. The Lrand Police Department has a long-standing history of fiscal responsibility as reflected in our operations and communications budget proposals. Our requests this year were focused on maintaining status quo operations and addressing needs rather than wants. I would like to provide some background regarding the circumstances that led to the proposed budget reduction within the police department. For several years, the police department has requested two additional police officer positions to help address increasing call volumes and growing complexity of calls for service. Several months ago, the city manager applied for a federal grant intended to fund the two additional positions we had requested, which I appreciated. At the time, the grant application was not part of the city manager's fiscal transformation initiative. After the grant applications were submitted, the city manager learned that the grant required uh the city to permanently maintain the additional positions after the grant funding period ended. Given the city's current fiscal realities, it was determined this would not be financially sustainable. In response, the city manager proposed eliminating two currently funded police

officer positions in order to remain compliant with the grant requirements. The proposal then became part of the city's FTI, fiscal transformation initiative. I later spoke with Jessica Keys, a representative for US Senator Jeff Mkeley, and the individual responsible for submitting the grant proposal to United States Senate. She confirmed what I already understood. These grants are highly competitive and the likelihood of receiving them is relatively low. When I discussed these concerns with the city manager, I was assured that if the grants were not awarded, one or both of the eliminated positions could potentially be restored. However, my understanding is that restoring those positions would still require budget committee approval, making this approach uncertain. Additionally, even if the grant-f funed positions were awarded, it could take up to two years before those officers are hired, trained, and actively covering shifts. As a result, rather than gaining two officers, the police department could potentially lose two officers for an undetermined period of time. So, what would this reduction mean for the police department? Our department is already experiencing increased call volumes and the nature of those calls have become more complex than ever before, particularly due to the ongoing mental health crisis impacting both our community and the state of Oregon. The city manager has stated that the two positions proposed for elimination are currently vacant and have remained vacant since 2013, suggesting the impact would be minimal.

Respectfully, I disagree. While those positions have not always been continuously filled, they have been utilized periodically to offset retirements, resignations, and terminations. These positions serve as a critical relief or swing shift positions that allow us to maintain minimal staffing levels. When an officer leaves the department, we are currently able to temporarily backfill that vacancy using one of these positions. Eliminating them removes our operational buffer. Without that flexibility, staffing shortages would require officers to work significantly more overtime to maintain basic day and night shift coverage. In the last four months alone, our patrol officers have worked 726 hours of overtime. With 250 of those hours, approximately 34% specifically dedicated to shift coverage. I admit I have hesitated to discuss these numbers publicly because overtime concerns have also been referenced in discussions about potentially contracting with the Union County Sheriff's Office or moving toward a public safety district. Options that could ultimately jeopardize the future of the police department that has served this community since the 1800s. There are established industry benchmarks regarding PLA police staffing levels per 10,000 residents. Nationally, the average is approximately 2.4 officers per 10,00 citizens. In Oregon, the average ranges between 1.5 and 1.8 officers per 10,000 citizens. At our current staffing level, the Lrand Police Department operates at approximately 1.54 officers per 10,000 citizens. If the two if these two officer positions are eliminated, that number would drop to approximately 1.38 officers per 10,000 citizens, placing us below the

recommended staffing levels. The loss of these positions would likely result in increased overtime demands to maintain minimal staffing, more frequent shift coverage gaps during vacations, illnesses, injuries, training, or resignations, potentially slower response times, increased officer safety concerns due to fewer officers responding to dangerous incidents. Greater challenges in recruitment and in hiring since eliminated positions cannot quickly be restored when qualified applicants become available. Reduced flexibility to maintain continuity during staffing turnover and fewer opportunities for proactive policing efforts, including drug investigations, traffic enforcement, crime prevention initiatives, dignitary protection details, and community engagement activities. There is however positive news. We have recently updated our recruitment strategies and just a few weeks ago conducted police officer testing that resulted in three viable candidates who could potentially fill the vacant positions being discussed tonight. We are closer than we have been in years to becoming fully staffed. Although there are no guarantees, if we were able to retain these two officer positions, we would be in a much stronger position to improve shift coverage, reduce overtime and employee burnout, conduct proactive drug investigations, and other proactive efforts, improve officer safety, enhance response times, allow officers more time for training, investigations, and community engagement, and improve recruitment and retention by creating healthier and more sustainable working conditions. I have also been in discussion with the Union County Sheriff's Office and the Oregon State Police regarding collaborative proactive drug enforcement efforts moving forward. Maintaining our current staffing levels and filling these vacancies would allow us to actively participate in those efforts.

Retaining these officer positions is simply not about is not simply about maintaining numbers. It is about sustaining operations, improving service quality, supporting employee wellness, and ensuring the department can effectively meet both current and future public safety demands. The Lrand Police Department wants to be part of the solution to the city's fiscal challenges. However, I will be honest in saying that the fiscal trans transformation initiative and strategic plan as currently presented presented lack clarity from my perspective. At times it feels unclear what the long-term objective objectives truly are. I mean no disrespect in saying that. I also believe there is was insufficient collaboration between the city manager and department directors regarding proposed budget reductions. The police department is currently facing a proposed reduction of approximately 6% of its budget. While the perception exists that other departments are not facing similar reductions despite continued spending increases elsewhere, I would appreciate greater clarity regarding the goals of the FTI beyond reoccurring discussion of eliminating departments, forming special districts, or implementing drastic structural changes. If the police department has asked to make reductions, I am willing to do my part. I have served this department for more than 27 years and have successfully navigated budget reductions before. What I ask is simple. Before decisions are made regarding cuts to the police department, allow me and my staff to be part of the conversation. Provide us with target reduction amount or percentages and allow us to help determine where those reductions can best be made while balancing community expectations. staffing realities, personnel costs, and

operational needs. I also think that any reductions be approached equitably among all departments with collaboration and shared responsibility between the city manager and department directors as we address the city's fiscal realities together. If the commu if the committee ultimately feels that reducing police officer positions is necessary given the city's current fiscal environment, then I respectfully ask that you consider a compromise by reducing only one police officer position instead of two. Doing so would still represent an approximately 3% reduction to the police department's general fund budget and would save the city an estimated $150,000 annually while also assisting the city manager in meeting the objectives of the fiscal transformation initiative. At the same time, retaining one of the positions would help preserve some operational flexibil flexibility, reduce the overall impact on staffing levels, and better position the department to continue meeting the public safety needs of our community. We want to be part of the solution. With that, I'd be happy to take any questions.

Hearing none. Thank you, TP. Actually, I was really I'm glad to hear that you recommended um uh just a single reduction because I was kind of wondering if that could be a compromise. Um so I was wondering if we could perhaps discuss what that might look like. Thank you, Chief. I'm just going to jump in and and and I'm going to make a motion and then I'm going to let it sit out there. Um, I move that the two police positions be reinstated and that the city manager be instructed to find the resources and other budget items uh within the within the overall budget.

Second. All right, Jason. Uh, excuse me, Chief. It's quite all right.

No. Um you you hit on a number of things that that that that I was immediately concerned about. Um particularly when it come to the grant. Um um the first thing was the the the the possibility of not getting the grant and what the implications would be. um the if the grant was successful um the the the pr-rated amounts it it would go down over over time and ultimately that we would be back in the same situation that we have. It's you added an element that I had not realized. Um I know it's been difficult to fill those two positions for 12 years. Um, and I know they've been on again and off again in terms of having people in them. What I didn't realize is that you use them to backfill and and knowing that uh adds an element of importance for me. So, um, I've made a motion and we have a second. Any conversation about this?

Yeah, I'm really disappointed that we can't even discuss the option of a compromise. I'd rather have a compromise compromise before there was a motion based on the overall because there are things that you may not know. There Ricky Joe and you're you're right. I mean there's a lot that I don't know. Um, I I I know only about what we've been presented here and and what little uh Chief Hayes is is uh has presented

and I think Chief Hayes, I think you did an exceptional job and I think it was very respectful. I think the article in the newspaper was fairly written. Um, I just I think there's a lot more to this than what has been presented. Mhm. So, there is an there is a motion and and a second. I I respect what you guys have said. Um we we can vote on this. If it fails, then there's an option to bring it up again. Ste Steve, there may still be some discussion to be had before we bring this to a vote. Certainly. Certainly. I mean, I'm not going to vote. I'm not going to call for the motion now, but I I'm open to having conversation about this. Chief, I appreciate the data,

especially the comparative data to that what is typical in the US and in Oregon. I think that's helpful. Thank you. Agreed. I have a question. Why jump to that so quickly, Steve, before we could even discuss. I I I know that's probably your opinion what you wanted to do, but we needed to discuss that and not just So you guys can discuss it now, right? Have your opinion. Discuss it. Right. And then whoever wants to call the motion, we can go through the motion. If you don't agree, you can decline it and then you can discuss some more. Somebody else can come up with another motion. Okay. So, just keep that in mind just to keep the conversation flowing in a good direction.

I'm curious what the case is for retaining two positions versus one. We've had them positions for a number of years. They've been there, but not for a long time, Steve. But they've been here for 12 years. The unfortunate thing is that we've not been able to fill them. That's Oh, yes. The positions have been there, but they haven't been filled. Right. Right. And because they haven't been filled, you fill them and somebody else leaves and you're still back in the same position. I It's not that there's no guarantee those people are going to stay either. But I liked I mean what was the tipping point for me is when Chief Hayes said

we use those positions to backfill when we lose somebody else. We comp we have an opportunity to put put it in. It's tough enough to keep our force at a certain level. Um but but recognize too that once you if you hire somebody new, you're going to have how many months out for training? Right. Right. Going to the Right. Well, we've always got that. That's right. But right now, they're all trained. Correct. Correct. The training period is uh roughly seven months before they're solo and covering the shift. Okay. If they don't have prior law enforcement experience, of course. And the grant is for how long? How many years is the grant if we get the grant?

The one that's currently in motion and we've moved to is actually for a single year. Um, in the near term, we're going to be putting in for another one that would be for three years. And it's it's um 100% the fir on the three-year one, it's 100% the first year, 75% the second year, and 50% the third year. And what I would like to add to that is the purpose of that is to be able to give more life to the fiscal transformation initiative. So it isn't a matter of I want it to go away. It's a matter of giving us maximum opportunity for that to succeed. And no other I have not found yet. We're still looking, but I've not found any other ways that offers me this level of money that we can contribute back that we have the potential to contribute back into the the general fund. And so, um, all of the things that he said are, uh, information that we took into consideration. Um, our assessment was is that this was, um, considering the totality of the circumstances. If those positions would have been filled, never would have had the conversation. We would have just simply stopped the grant uh, application that we had because he's right. When we first put in for it, the intent was to try and get after the drug administration stuff. But as the fiscal situation worsened, I realized we that that would be completely untenable for us um for us to be able to maintain it past the life of whatever grant that we got. Um so therefore, it wouldn't make sense for us to hire somebody to have to fire them or to lay them off. Um, and so, um, uh, from my perspective, the way I see it is is the most fiscally responsible thing to do, not what I like to do, not what I want to do, the most fiscally responsible thing to do, is to pull those positions for what's intended to be one year, bring them back, and have other people's money paying for it versus our own.

And that grant is something you said was highly hard to get or unlikely to get. that the um the one that he's aware of. Um that's the indication that it gave. That being said, we made it through the first gate, which is an accomplishment in of itself. Um so we are in consideration. Um I would say in the sea of ones that made through the gate, we're one of the lower cost ones. So I would argue that that improves our odds of getting it versus the ones that are asking for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars more than we are. salary and training or is the training separate from the grant? What does the grant cost?

My understanding is the grant would only cost the personnel cost, not the training. And the training that's correct within that grant also though, we also have money for a new patrol car and uh um and there's some other miscellane Oh, then for dis communications as well. Very quickly, Josh, I don't think I gave you a full answer. If we pull the money, it's gone, right? Um I if we if we leave those put those two positions in there, at least the money is there. If we if we eliminate them, even with the grant, we're going to have to put the money back in eventually.

And and my my belief is that if we keep them, we at least have them. And if we don't fill them, the money just rolls over. Mhm. And and at least it's still there. So we're preserving flexibility. Yes. Um I just I mean I get the need to have the flexibility of having extra officers and it seemed like the one retaining one role would maintain that flexibility also reduce the overtime liability from eliminating two because it's going. Um, so I mean that does strike me as an attractive solution. Okay. Gary compromise. Yeah. Can I give a little history as far as grants because we've talked about this in the past.

Yes. You know, we have considered going out for grants to cover police officer positions in the past. When I was on the council, we made a deliberate decision not even to try for them because not only were they difficult to get, but they don't last very long. They're time limited, which is very typical of grants. So if they last one, even three years, they're gone and they usually cannot be renewed. I don't believe that they can be renewed at all. So then you're faced with having to come up with money somewhere if you want to maintain those positions and that's the reason we decided not to do it at the time. So

just just a little background. I I would like to remind everybody though that the lens that I asked everybody to look through here was the fiscal transformation initiative. What I'm asking you to do is give me time to make it work. Um and this gives me time to make it work. Um or it's a contributing factor to help make it work. Um and so um I there there is no perfect solution and there's nothing that's going to make everybody um completely happy. What what I'm what I'm trying to do is give us maximum opportunity um to be able to change our revenue reality and get relief that solves the problem that we all agree needs to be solved in regard to the personnel situations there. I'm asking them to live how they've been living a little longer. Yes, we're taking away a little bit of uh backfill um coverage. Um but we have to cut something somewhere and this is one of the few areas where I have the opportunity to bring in money to help solve the problem.

And I and that's the kind of hard decision I'm asking you to make. Are you talking about bringing in grant money to solve the problem? To help solve the problem to give us time for that revenue generating reality. Can I ask how many years now has it been that we have not had it filled? have the positions filled. Our stats through our research suggests that they have not been filled. Um let me when I say they haven't been filled for the most part since 2012, they may have a surge of a short period of time, a few months where they were actually there and then it dropped off again. So if you look at consistency, we have not been consistently since 2012. How many times have both positions been filled in that time?

Not just one. No, I'm gonna have to ask my human resource person if she's here to be if she's able to speak to that. Can you step up the mic? Yeah, thank you. Probably just come right here.

Hi, Tammy HR. Um, in my research and in running through all of the hirings, terminations coming and going, it looks like maybe twice during the last 14 years roughly have we enjoyed what appears to be a full capacity, but then people don't always make it through training. There's a whole lot of reasons other natural attrition and so then you end up back in that same situation again. And how many kids have we have we've had somebody in training? Quite almost every year there's people in training, isn't there? Yes. Yeah. Okay. So, you're kind of minus a a police officer at that point, too.

Correct. We're down two that are at the police academy right now, not felon shifts. But they're in How when are they finished? Uh, end of June, I believe. So, they're close to being closed. I know they have when they come back, they have to deal. When they come back, they're not on their own, though. For how long? Yeah, it would be another three months before they're on their own. Do we pay for their police academy training? No, they pay for uh we pay for their person just their wages while they're gone, but we don't have to pay any registration costs or anything through the academy. That's funded uh through the state of Oregon. Megan?

Yeah, John, I'm trying to follow the the long-term thinking of what you're talking about with the FTI. So, in this proposal, we cut these two authorizations. You're saying we give room for your plan to come to life. What does that look like for the police department? Is that long-term grant funding or is that the creation of a special district? Like what's the specific thinking for the police department?

So, um I'm I'm not looking at it just as the police department. I'm looking at it as a as an organization. Um that being said, the um grant funding acknowledged fully we there's no guarantee that we get the funds. Um simultaneously the plan itself is intended to be a five sixyear plan. And admittedly, when we're looking at the pressures that we're seeing on our general fund right now, if again in the plan, it gives thresholds of when we reach a point in time where we have to accelerate the actions that we're taking within that plan. Um this bringing in money by grants if they if we are successful in getting them gives us the opportunity to get three years of not having to potentially up to three years maybe four depending on how these two different submissions work. Um potential of giving us time where we're getting some relief on our general fund um to have those paying acknowledging fully that on the other side of it we're going to pay the costs completely on our own. Um, but

where does that where does that money come from in this logic? Which part? The after the three years. Oh, it comes from the general fund. We go right back to where we're at right now. And we have to re

But the but the intention by doing it the way that I'm asking for it to be done is to give us time to make the other plan solve our general fund fund problems. Um, so that then it's not going to be the same kind of pressure that it is currently. So the the admittedly it's not the it's not desirable. No, I don't I don't expect anyone to like it, but in a in a sea of difficult decisions, this to me is the most responsible thing that we could be be doing. Um because I'm not asking the police department to do something that they haven't been doing for the last 12 years. I'm asking them to bear with us one more year. Admittedly, it'll take time to hire and get people into those positions again. Um, but I'm asking them to bear with us and help us make this fiscal transformation initiative successful.

John, what if the grant funds aren't forthcoming? What What's your plan then?

Then the intention would be for us to revisit that again in the budget season. One way or another, we're going to be revisiting this topic again next year. My hope is is that we're going to be revisiting it with um with grant funding. that's going to make this conversation a whole lot more simplistic. Um, if if we are um more successful than I wouldn't even say um like I think we have the opportunity to get a lot more grants or at least be moving towards grants, but again I can't guarantee anything. But if everything unfolds successfully the way that we want it to in the first year, we could start seeing evidence that's suggesting we're moving the right direction. That gives us optimism. and the optim the ability to make different decisions. But I as much as I would like to say it's a perfect and guaranteed plan that's going to give us the results that we want, um I'm optimistic in regards to it. But I also realize I could be failing this organization completely. But I can tell you I'm not doing it because or making the decisions what I am because I'm trying to fail. I'm doing it because I believe this is the best path to solving the problem that needs to be solved. What about the proposed compromise of removing one position?

What I can say is we can do that, but then I can never get the relief that we would have gotten if we'd have gone with two.

But one is better than than two. And I would support that. What whatever the decision is made here. What I can say is the threat is if you if you don't do it, you're you're accelerating how fast we have to ask the community to increase their taxes. you're accelerating how fast we have to ask the community to be willing for us to cut services across the the the city. And the majority of our community right now through these engagements that I'm doing has indicated that they're already not happy with our services. So if we accelerate to the point in time where I am now just simply cutting those services in order to balance the budget the way that we would prefer it to be balanced, well then we can do that. That's that's a way to do business. What I can tell you is what I'm lining out for you in the path and all that I've that we have written and that we've developed is a path that protects and gives us maximum amount of time to get to a place where we could possibly achieve this without even having to increase taxes. But if we get there, the community is going to be able to know with confidence that we've done the best that we can. to include what comes up regularly is why aren't you getting grant monies to cover these costs? Well, I can go back in all these civic engagements and say we've done it, we went after it, didn't get it, or we got it, and here's how it's helping us. So, my my perspective on this, we're we're looking at what could potentially be um spending $6 million more than we are bringing in

and eating through the vast majority of the amount that we have in reserve and we're talking about adding staff positions. I think the conversation should be around hiring freezes. Hopefully not, but the only way I possibly see that number getting to a reasonable level is probably involving a reduction in staff. And so I think we've lost sight of what we're actually doing here. This is the tune of a third of a million dollars is what we're talking about. That's the impact on the budget of these two positions. We're already You saw the number. Yeah. You see what we're facing here.

I think this is crazy. that we're talking about adding 300,000 to that. And I understand what it means to the police department, but there are hard decisions that are going to have to be made in this room and by every director within this organization because this is not sustainable by any stretch of the imagination. And if you look at the what the whole reason that we've been able to maintain the funding we have is precisely because those positions haven't been filled. the majority of the of the dollars that we have, you know, we we budget this and oh, hey, look, we spent less. Why did we spend less? The primary reason, Heather, you gave it to us because we've had unfilled staff positions. Had those staff positions been filled, we'd have been in this hole a lot sooner than we have. So, um I I would suggest that we maintain sight of what is actually happening here with the dollars in this city before we go and pedal about one position, two positions. That's a third of a million dollars. So, please keep that in mind. Um it's not going to be easy and and I appreciate what you're talking there is fiscal responsibility that has to happen and that may very well come to the tune of it. This is not going to be about who are we going to hire. what positions are we going to maintain? It's about can we even maintain what we have without having to lose city staff positions and maintain the the the fiscal. I mean, we have to pass a balanced budget. That is Oregon law. We can do it because we have reserves. Otherwise, we couldn't pass it. We would be looking at $5 million to carve out of our expenditures if we didn't have these reserves. This buys us one-year time if we pass the budget pass state. And next year now we're talking about finding millions of dollars somehow that we can cut out of the budget. You know what that means? That means personnel cuts. Period. There is no other way to do it. So please keep that in mind. I I beg of of the people

around this table. I agree with you, Dave. When and and the council in our retreat, our top priority was fiscal responsibility. I'm just going to remind everyone of that. Um we've got we can't spend the money. We have to keep some of it in reserve.

Yeah. One one other point that I had um with several of the budgets but on the police um is you know we're paying so much in salaries they I think they earn what they make but um in benefits FICA pension unemployment medical dental we're paying $53,000 per year per FTE um that is part of their package and the city is is very generous and and I'm proud of that but I think that um we also need to understand uh that that it's quite generous just uh medical dental and vision is 23,000 a month or 23,000 um per FTE per year which is 2,000 a month um just just for perspective.

So, I'd like to call for the question. Okay. I'd like roll call. Roll call vote. So, do you want to repeat your Repeat it back? Yeah, I would repeat your motion back that you have. You want me to repeat it back? Yeah, because you have it. I I I think the motion was that uh we restore the two police positions and that we direct the city manager and budget officer to uh find the resources and other line items of the budget. Okay. So, we're going to start with a roll call vote. Josh Bachmann, no. Matt Barber, no. Steve Clemens, yes. Dudo, no. David Glae, no.

Ricky Joe Hickeyi, no. Megan Keading, no. Molly King, no. Barry Lillard, no. Maryann Meisner, no. Justin Rock, no. Tony Smith, no. Denise Wheeler, no. Motion fails. Conversation starts over. So, so what do you want to do? You want to leave it in there? Leave it the but leave the budget the way it is. Or do you want to consider Chief Hayes's compromise of eliminating one position? You can put the I like to leave it the way it is. I like the idea of a compromise. Do you want to put that motion up?

You want to put that motion up? I move that we make a compromise along with Chief Hayes's letter that we reinstate one position and look for cuts elsewhere. Second discussion. I think we still same we've still fallen to the same issue that we had now. There's no guarantee that next year will be cut again or more. So I am going to still say no. I don't know where we find $150,000 to cut. Right. So, can you find that in your budget, Chief?

You give me an opportunity, I'll find it for you. I have not been given that opportunity. And and that I mean I we should consider that if you know if you can find it before we we actually vote on the budget next year, next month, we might consider it. So, how would that work? If if the budget committee votes to reinstall reinstate one position and we direct Chief Hayes to find the money within his existing budget. How how does that work? Um he does it and that's the budget that's presented.

Can I throw something into the conversation? Yes. Um, I think asking him, we actually did have some limited conversation about the opportunity for him to find an alternate way for him to pull this money from the uh um uh from the budget. Um, from that conversation stemmed a reminder from Heather um that what we should do is come together as a team to um to discuss what that overall cut would look if we're not going to do it with FTEES. So, I would propose that if you're expecting that to be cut, that we share that as a city, not just as a police department. I agree.

Yes. And I to chief's point, I don't want any department to feel like they're targeted as we look at

what we have to do to balance the budget in the city. And and I would I would hope that no director feels like, oh my gosh, we've been singled out. And so I I yes, we're dialed in on what the police department's budget is, but we have to view this under the whole umbrella of the the general fund. And so I would suggest that instead of of doing this in isolation, it would be reasonable for this council to say we're not comfortable necessarily cutting two positions. Maybe we want to say, okay, one, we understand some of this, but we now need to go and talk about this. And I guess my other question is, you know, how many other departments do we have that have unfilled staff positions? Because one of the hard decisions that we may have to make is putting a hiring freeze out at some point.

Um, we have to balance it. Are there are there any other staff positions open? Yes, there are. Are we putting a freeze on them? Um, well, I've placed a freeze on the organization and that they all have to come submit requests to me before making offers. Um, and then I make decisions based off of where we're at at the time and what I understand the the circumstances to be. I'd like us to keep focused on beliefs. I know, but that might go into the the equation of how we feel. Yeah. I I certainly feel like it's a lot more equitable to kind of share the burden a little bit rather than Right. Giving it all to the

if we can maintain one position for him and and find the cuts throughout the whole organization. U might make it a little more unbearable for everybody. We do have a motion. Correct. We have a motion. And it was seconded. Yes. But this but we're discussing the motion. Really? Right. And I feel like we're just going in circles. I feel like I think it should come to a vote. So we'll call the question. Ask question. Yeah. Yep. Roll call, please. Okay. Josh Bachmann. Sorry. What was the motion again? Uh to reinstate one position and without that the whole question, what I'm uncertain about is

the additional cuts. Are they coming from the police department or broadly across the city? Um I didn't specify that in my original motion. So I can put forth I don't know. Can I put forth a different You could amend your motion. So the amended motion would be that we reinstate one position and the organization finds cuts for the second position elsewhere like to cover the cost of the second position elsewhere. Got it. Thank you. I mean I would agree to second that one position. Great.

I'm sorry. I'm I'm unclear. Are you saying we're going to agree to fund one position in full and allow the organization Yeah. to if you know if they can find other cuts elsewhere? I mean I don't know that the this committee doesn't I we don't we decide a number on the budget. We don't it doesn't we don't decide the number of personnel that a department gets. Right. Like I mean that I I want to be clear about that. That's not what this committee does. No. So we don't say whether the that number applies to personnel or other things. We have to pass a budget at the end of the day. Right.

So I I'm not sure that that motion is relevant to what we're doing as much as we can say, hey, we're not comfortable. You know, we passed this budget on the on the contingency that we retain a a police officer position of these two. I would I would have to also add to that that if we agree that that's the requirement that you want us to go with which we can do it actually negates the rest of this process because now we have to go and relook at everything you we've given to you and it's going to change everything that we've given to you. So then we just keep it simple as in we reinstate

I just because it's simple doesn't mean it's necessarily the right thing to do. Um well I hesitate to tell you what you think is right. My preference would be that we stick with the what was proposed the proposed budget. But in all fairness, if you're going to give us direction to do it, um then I think it's most fair for the organization for us to all get together and discuss that and whatever answer we come back with is going to change everything. Yes. So then the motion needs to be I just would like to rein I move to reinstate one position and that's it. Keep it simple.

Keep it there. Okay. I move that we reinstate one position. Who had the second? I I did. Okay. That's the motion to reinstate one position. Call for the question. Josh Bachmann. No. Is that Did you say no? No. Matt Barber? Yes. Steve Clemens? No. Green Dudo? No. David Glae? No. Ricky Joe Hickeyi? Yes. Megan Keading? Yes. Molly King? No. Gary Lillard? Yes.

Maryann Meisner? No. Justin Rock? No. Tony Smith? Yes. Denise Wheeler. No. Motion fails. All right. So, we are back to where it was presented to us. Um I think we need a bit of a break. Um we're going to take five minutes. We're coming back at a quarter of doesn't give you much time. Um, and then we're gonna we're either going to move through this one and go to the next fund or we're going to hash this out. Right. Five minutes.

You know, that's what I promise. How would you say one thing? I don't like the way you're talking about. Okay. All right. You ready? Nice.

Okay. So, the question I have now is, do you want to talk about the bud the the police department fund anymore or do you want to move on to fire and EMS? Move on. I'm hearing move on. Yeah. Thank you, Chief. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, everybody. fire and EMS questions, concerns. He's got a 10page uh

Yeah, I was going to say I I don't know if I can outdo Jason, but I do have a statement if you if you would uh listen here. Okay. Good evening, mayor, council members, budget committee members, and city manager. The L the Grand Fire Department's mission is to protect the lives and property of our community through emergency response, fire prevention, public education, and community assistance programs. Guided by the values of service, compassion, integrity, teamwork, and courage, the department provides fire suppression, ambulance support, transport, rescue response, inspections, training, mutual aid, severes throughout the area. Our firefighters, paramedics, and EMT staff work every day to provide reliable emergency services, help keep our community safe. The proposed budget reflects the department's ongoing effort to maintain a high level emergency preparedness, improve firefighter safety, support employee wellness, and address increasing operational demands. This budget also focuses on maintaining reliable equipment, enhancing training opportunities, and preparing for f future service needs while remaining fiscally responsible. As the department continues to mature and staffing levels stabilize, we anticipate seeing more static costs and potential reductions in some budget areas over time. We will continue to actively look for opportunities to reduce costs, improve efficiency, and responsibly manage public funds while maintaining the service level levels our city council and community expects. Operating a

24-hour allhazard emergency response department is complex and comes with significant operational challenges. But it is also a responsib responsibility we take seriously. As fire chief, it is an honor to lead this dedicated staff and to serve the citizens of our city and county. I can address uh John talked about uh there our increases and decreases and if you'll allow me I'd like to expand on those a little bit um and just talk about each one. I know I answered some questions uh that you guys were able to read. So hopefully this will just confirm what what we talked about in those in those questions. So overtime planned leave as it is referred to in the narrative is additional overtime funds because we know protected leave will occur in the upcoming fiscal year. While we cannot predict the exact timing, we must plan for it for its impact on staffing. This protected leave combined with our regular planned leave creates a staffing need. Like I mentioned before, we are staffed at six firefighters per day and allow the group to drop down to five. While this is not the best for the community, it softens the overtime burden. With protected leave, we have to allow our staff the time off regardless of any other leave already on the books. Preparing with extra overtime dollars is a responsible way to maintain service levels without compromising our workforce. The overtime budget reflects the need to maintain minimum staffing levels so we can continue providing emergency services to our community every day. A large portion of the overtime is required under federal law as part of our regular firefighter schedule. While

additional overtime is needed to cover vacations, protected leave, staffing shortages, and positions that still require paramedical paramedic or officer level trained people. Although we have recently added positions to help with increasing call volume, it takes time to fully train and certify new staff. And our casual EMTs cannot fully cover firefighter shiftings because they are only EMSON personnel with limited availability. We currently operate on a 4896 shift schedule which helps reduce overtime opportunities and improve staffing efficiency, but overtime still occurs when we need to maintain safe firefighter and paramedic staffing levels. Changing the shift schedule is not the answer to reducing overtime. The best long-term solution is improving retention, stabilizing staffing levels, and continuing to develop more paramedics and acting captains within the department, which will help reduce our reliance on overtime as the organization continues to grow and mature. Workers comp, we had an increase there. Um Heather can probably talk more to that, but it's just a a increase in the um fire fire services uh workers comp.

Yes, the fire service specifically had a rate increase and that's happening pretty much everywhere. Um I think it's due I can't tell you for sure, but an increase in workers comp claims in the fire service, not just for us, but in general,

right? uh legal uh lab labor negotiations. We're starting to wrap those up. So, we will not need any legal counsel. So, this budget item will decrease by 11,000. Uh there medical exams. The increase in the medical medical exams line reflects the rising cost of required employee medical evaluations and health screenings. These exams are essential to making sure firefighters and EMS personnel are medically fit to safely perform their duties and continue providing quality emergency services to the community. This funding helps support the health, safety, and long-term wellness of department personnel. Uh the computer system maintenance and repair. This is part of the cost that uh is throughout the city that each uh department has. Uh, ours was about $8,900 in there. Uh, training, travel, and meetings. The proposed increase for training, travel, and meeting expenses represents a strategic investment in building the department's long-term operational readiness and internal staffing capacity. A significant portion of this funding supports paramedic education for current employees, which is essential essential due to the ongoing difficulty in recruiting certified paramedics and will help reduce overtime costs as more personnel become qualified for shift coverage. And then we also have the acting captains that are uh responsibilities that fall into that. This budget line also includes all required fire and EMS certifications, reertifications, specialized training, and associated travel necessary to maintain compliance and service levels. While this

represents a temporary increase, the department anticipates these costs will decrease in future years as additional personnel complete certification programs and the department gains greater staffing flexibility and operational efficiency. The increase from 65,000 to 75,000 also includes a $5,000 forcable entry prop and 5,000 lifetime simulator agreement for the I simulate training program which enhances hands-on EMS and scenariobased training opportunities for department personnel departmental supplies turnout and this uh revolves around the turnout gear. I think there was a question on that. Uh turnout gear is mandatory protective equipment with a strict 10-year service life. To stay compliant and ensure firefighter safety, we must replace a set number each year so gear does not expire in service. Turnout replacement are not discretionary and cannot be postponed without risking safety and operational readiness. We have one of our captains who's in charge of of the uh um uniforms, medical supplies, turnouts, and he makes he has a schedule for these turnouts to be to be replaced. Facilities repair. The increase in facilities repair reflects the ongoing maintenance needs of a facility that is now more than 25 years old or right at 25 years old. Funding is included for required fire sprinkler system upgrades, parking lot asphalt, and concrete repairs, and other routine but necessary maintenance projects that help ensure the safety of the department, personnel, and the community. This line item also

supports annual unplanned maintenance needs that are essential essential to preserving the functionality and reliability of the department's facilities. Equipment and improvements. The equipment and improvements increase which is $40,000 um which is what a striker gurnie cost which is a lot. It it's amazing what they cost. um includes funding for a new Striker ambulance stretcher to ensure all four ambulances are equipped with compatible equipment and operational leafy. This purchase will allow the department to maintain a rotating reserve stretcher system similar to what we do with our ambulances where we rotate them uh out and we can do the same with these stretchers. This will improve reliability, reduce downtime, and allow the reserve ambulance to be placed into service quickly during vehicle maintenance or unexpected breakdowns. The this investment supports responder safety, patient care continuity, and overall operational readiness for the community. included with this budget, but not shown here, I think we talked about it earlier, is the $50,000 for uh the uh goes into the general fund for uh future ambulances, which we try to do that every year so that we're not caught off guard. As you know, an ambulance is upwards of uh 275 to $300,000 now. So, um it's a it's quite a cost, but it does uh help us the community brings in revenue, and we need to to do those things. Um the other thing that uh is in there is a a part-time receptionist that we've requested. Uh the proposed part-time receptionist position is

intended to improve customer service and operational efficiency within the department. This position will assist with daily administrative functions such as answering phones, assisting walk-in visitors, scheduling appointments, filing and supporting billing and payroll processes, allowing administrative staff to remain focused on higher level operational responsibilities. This position will also support data entry and records management efforts helping the department capture important metrics that improve reporting, planning and organizational uh organizational decision making which we need right now to help help us. So as uh that's all I have. I just wanted to touch on everything that we um I can entertain any questions that

question for chief. I have a question. Uh, do we still operate under third ambulance out? Uh, like do we can we we have uh two that are staffed to uh go out. We try to keep uh two paramedics on staff at all times and uh send two out. We call back for for uh a third one. If we have six people in the station, we can staff three ambulances depending on if there's vacations, sick leave, uh people off. So, consistent we can do two two consistently. Y and then sometimes we can offer that third one. Yes.

Are there any um private ambulance services in Union County? Uh no private. Uh there's a ambulance service in Elgen and there are BLS uh ILS BLS service and then one in Union which has the same like for transport. I'm thinking like transporting to Boisey. Do we do anything? Uh we don't have anything. We do have uh there are companies that do come in you know if if we can't fill one they might get one from another city. But um do we do that?

We do if we can if we can staff it. We try to do whatever we can for our community. Um and that's part of it is getting our community members to higher level of care if needed be need be. Um just it depends on how many it's uh how many people we have staff for that day, right? Um part of the whole fire department ambulance service is just and our captains, our acting officers, uh acting captains do a great job of protecting you but also helping get uh people to where they need to go. So, and I have that you anticipate on bringing in 1,378,000 through

through ambulance billing. Yeah. Ambulance and there were like three or four line items med the um medic one so as we look at this number it is offset somewhat. Yes. Yes. But we do we do bring in revenue. That's one of the reasons why we're looking at bringing in that part-time employee as well to help make sure that that revenue gets achieved. Regarding that though, what why are you estimating that the ambulance collector be um that is something that I would have to get you more information on just

some of it has to do with personnel reasons that are kind of private. Um, and so, um, we I would rather not put people's business out there. Um, and but it's had an effect on our ability to be able to, um, process in the way that we need to. And also, we did have a delay in, excuse me, GMT collections. Um, we didn't know that we were going to get them. So, that estimate may be a little higher than what we're estimating, but um, it's taking a while. I believe it was the 23 24 GMT dollars that we just got. What are those?

Can you explain here? I figured that might come up and I want to I want to read it to you because it it's GMT. Yeah, it's it's so it is it's called the ground emergency medical transportation or GMT is a federal Medicaid supplement payment program that helps ambulance services recover the true cost of trans transporting Medicaid patients. Medicaid reimbursement alone does not cover the actual cost of tr of providing emergency medical care and GMT allows us to claim additional federal dollars to close that gap. Federal funding. Yes, it's federal money.

And is that still happening or being cut? The state has to are the ones that run the program. Yeah. They get the federal money and then it it takes a while as most federal dollars do to get to us. But yes, we're continuing to apply for those. Yeah. And we have to pay administrative fees to the state. Um and uh so uh these funds are essential to maintaining our staffing equipment and emergency response readiness. However, GMT payments often take several months to be processed and received. I would say year year

could be more than that to process the payments. Uh because of this delay, we budget um the expected GMT revenue in advance each fiscal year to ensure we can sustain operations while we wait for the reimbursement to arrive. Uh GMT does not increase co increase costs for patients or require additional state or local tax dollars. simply allows us to access federal funds we are already eligible for, helping reduce pressure on the general fund and supporting a stable EMS system for our community. So, it's a good program. It just takes time.

It's for perspective. I think uh Medicaid pays about 50 cents on the dollar for what it costs us to deliver at the hospital. Yeah, it's you know it's it's a big deal. So, um, one thing I wanted to point out, um, training, travel, meeting expense, it's, um, divides out to over $3,200 per in FTE. Um, when we, um, when we have a new hire and we pay for we pay for their training to a point. Yes.

Uh, yeah, we do most of the training in house. Um if you talk we they they do go for paramedic training. We require them to be paramedics in a certain amount of time in uh three years. And so we help them go to school if they so we do. It's 18,000 about 18,000. If we do that, do they have to sign a contract to stay with us for a certain period of time? That is correct. How long is that? Y uh I believe it's four years. Okay. Four. Yeah. And then that's reasonable. And it's pro it's prorated. You know, if they decide to leave at a certain time and they pay us back very hard. They do have the option to pay for it themselves.

Sure. Um and we give them the time to go, but um if they pay for it themselves, then that then that obligation is no longer there. That makes sense. Yeah. It's not rare. It's not taken very often that option, but it is taken occasionally. That's not that unusual across different industries where you pay to train that you need to make sure that they

It's a good program. It uh it's we're uh we just had one pass his test. He's a new paramedic. He's out there tonight uh providing service and getting his training going. Um it takes um oh six three to six months to get them released. We don't let them go out there and provide service till they're ready. And that's important for uh you us them, our crew members, and also the community they serve to make sure they're released, ready to provide the care that you guys expect. So, and how many of our our firefighters right now are paramedics?

Paramedics. We're down to uh we only got four, six, so 12 12 of them out of the Yeah. and then 13 with me. So, you have a couple

Yes, we have uh uh one that's currently in training. Uh there's one that is about ready to take his uh state test. Uh so, and then we have two that'll go in September and then we're we're there. So, we need to I ask that we just stay the course. uh retention, the stabilization of our our staff is going to help to bring some of that overtime down and just we got to retain people. Um we cannot every time one of them uh quits, goes somewhere else, resigns, we have to start over every time.

I agree with the overtime because I complain about this every year. $190,000 in overtime. Mhm. Yeah. Yep. It's and it's just some of it's you know the FLSA we have training that's involved in that. You know sometimes we have to mandatory training uh so we can get the proper training. We do all kinds of training. Um but then there's the stuff that's not planned that we just it's part of doing business running a 247 um emergency services agency. So it's it's we don't like it, but it's it's it's uh how we how we have to operate. So

this is a conservative estimate on your overtime. Yes. We we plan we plan ahead. It's a worst case scenario. Worst case scenario. Yeah. So you look at that number. Um it it's it looks high. We don't want to get there if we don't have to. I don't want to come back here and ask you guys for money. I think David brought that up. That's a process. He's he's he's actively working to mitigate that constantly. Yeah, we'll find ways to be more efficient and uh we'll get good with our staff.

All right. Any more questions or concerns? You you do still How long is the contract with um Lifellight? We Oh, with Lifelite. We have a contract with them and it's I think it renews each year constantly. Is there another uh service here too? No. Or was the one that was trying to come in? No, we don't have any that I know of. Yes. Okay. Do you get any reimbursement from them or anything? Yes. Yeah, we get reimbursement from them. We actually signed a contract, so we get uh

$500 per per transport. It's a guaranteed amount. uh before we did it before without a contract and then you run into the Medicaid Medicare thing that uh this is a guaranteed amount that we get. I know lately it's been very busy. Yeah. Yeah. They go over our house. Yes. Very busy. Oh yeah. Yeah. They stay No, not at our house. Stay very busy. So um So you you ambulance the patient to the helicopter or Yeah. that they um we we take transfers from the hospital to the airport. Okay. Yeah. Like if they need a fixed wing,

they do and fit with for fixed wing. Um there's also, you know, that a lot of that is in the winter time when they can't fly. Uh because they do have a landing pad up there that they can go and do uh you know, there's certain restrictions they have that don't allow them to do that. And that's when we step in to help out. We also uh they can't fly in the winter time. We'll take get their crew. It only takes one of our crew. So, it keeps us in that minimum staffing. We can allow one to go get in an ambulance, go to Walaw Wala, Cadillac, Boisey uh to help uh the citizens of our community. So, Oh, so you go with them and

Yep. We just drive them. Yeah. It's that's the nice thing about it. So, this is all interesting. It's not necessarily germaine to the budget. I want to keep us moving. Any other questions for Chief? All right, we're moving on to parks. May I interject? Parks, uh, aquatics, recreation.

May I May I interject? And I and I I don't mean to subvert this process in any way, but I'm sitting here just throwing I'm really uncomfortable with the overall budget process here. And we can go through and we can listen and go through all of this, but in my mind, um, if I've just crunched some numbers here, we're we're proposing essentially $5 million that would be spent in excess of the revenues that we bring in, which would dramatically deplete our reserve funds if that budget was filled. uh and leave us in a very poor position to have only one one year where we could do this provided that there's no you know unexpected revenues that come in in the next year and change the math. It gives us one year basically to make things happen before we have to make serious course corrections. So I I just crunched some numbers and I thought, okay, our staff budgets conservatively as as we've heard, they have generally spent a pretty reasonable amount less than what has been proposed in the budget. I've looked over some of those numbers. If our city manager were to go back to each general fund department and ask for a 10% reduction in the proposed budget, we would shave $2 million off of that amount and put us in a a little more of a safety cushion, buy us potentially another year, maybe more depending on how things happen. It would take a 23% reduction across every department in order to make this neutral and not dig into reserves. That's unreasonable. I I do think it would be reasonable potentially to ask our our city manager and department heads to go back and find room to shave 10% off of this. We dropped that number by $2 million. they reconfigure the numbers and this committee can reconvene and look at

what's been done and and see if we're comfortable with this. So again, I I'm not trying to subvert this process, but that's what's going through my mind as we go along. And we can spend a long time going through each of these, but at the end of the day, personally, that's what I'm going to be looking for is we've got to get back to a number for me to say yes to this. And if we can't arrive at that number, I'm a hard no. I don't know how others feel. David, respectfully, I think I'd like to hear the rest of each individual budget. I'm I'm with you that we are not where I could vote yes for it, and I think we need to um look at uh pairing it down, but I think I'd like to hear from from every other

department part department. Yeah. Yeah. Is that reasonable? I'm I'm absolutely okay with that. I just, you know, I just I'm thinking really what it's going to amount to is if if I'm at that number for me, I can listen to all of this and it's great, but I'm not going to tell our department heads how to shave that back. That's something they're the experts at. They can choose. They know what's important, what's not, what they can work with, and what they can't. And so I I can go through this and we can provide some guidance, but at the end of the day, it's it's going to have to come back to me with with some new numbers in it before I'm ready to really I think it'd be beneficial to go through it so we can provide that guide. Great.

And that's one thing I I'm really concerned because I our reserve and everything. I mean, I because I was questioning how we go through this if we keep saying, "Okay, we're going to do this department, this department." But we've got to cut it across the board or like David said, freezes or something because I don't want to lose personnel, you know, or services. But we've got to be fisc um conservative here and and stay within our budget. We can't be like other counties that or other cities that will just spend and spend and then we're in a major deficit. You know, that is something that we need to avoid. We do that in our own homes, in our own families. We can't do that either as a city.

So, so excuse me, John,

I think Dave's got a reasonable idea. I think that and in all due respect, we could we could listen to the rest of these budgets, these funds and and still be back where Dave is. Um my question is for John and Heather. If this budget committee gave you a direction to that nature, we go back to your department directors and find 10% across the board. How long would that take you? And then for Stacy procedurally, what would that mean for us? Could we come back tomorrow night, do enterprise funds, get that one done, and then go into um a recess

for a week. I actually spoke with uh legal counsel in regards to this topic um last week. Anyway, um what you just described is exactly what we would do is go into recess and then reconvene on an agreed date. And I would argue that I think that we could accomplish this. I'm I have an opinion, but I'm going to let you speak, but I notification to send out and publish. We don't have to if we recess. So, the LB1

the one Oh, with the LB1. So, we'll Okay. because there's the legal document of the LB1, she'll have to probably double check. Um, as far as that goes, I know that we've already got public comment over with. So is that piece is done for the general budget and I know we don't have to republish for that piece but have the LB1 which is the actual budget approval hearing process an adoption excuse me adoption process I have to have that notice no later than 5 days prior to our council meeting to approve adopt the budget which is June 3 right and I have to give a week's notice to the paper prior to doing that So, we're looking at a tight timeline.

Correct. Could there could there be a special session called to adopt the budget later in June? We've done that before where we have you. Yeah. Where we don't adopt it till like the last week of June. Do you not feel that our we can come together as a directors tomorrow? I think we could get it done tomorrow. I feel we can too. Oh, so we could convene tomorrow night. But it's how fast can we update the paperwork? Oh, I can do that. Okay. Sorry. I think we can get it. We can get it done tomorrow. And if 10%'s the goal, I think um while we were sitting here, Heather's already come up with some ideas that I think we could get there pretty quickly.

Okay. So, Dave, do we need a motion to do this? I think procedurally it's not a bad idea to do a motion and then we can move forward with direction. Think about a motion though. so it's not all over the place. I I I have a question that out there. Okay. Before, you know, before we jump to any any motions, just uh Josh, I appreciate what you said there, David. Yesterday, we talked about the potential for about 800K in additional labor costs, right? So, the the numbers you were quoting, did that include that 800k?

Largely inclusive. Heather, you can correct me on this. I saw about 4 and a half million. This is ballpark. It's about four and a half. If we look at that, I just I put it at a million. So we're we're between five and six. I used I used 5 million. Does that sound reasonable, Heather? I think I had those numbers pretty correct. So it was about four and a half. You add 800,000 onto that. I I said 5 million. Got it. But to me, I this is just me personally. Again, other others may feel very differently,

but I I just noted that a 10% reduction would take 2 million off of that. Again, if we look historically, the city has actually spent pretty substantially less than the budgeted amount. But so if I say, okay, we take two million off of that, then we're allowing them to spend three million. Let's say let's say they come a million or 500,000 short or something, to me that gives us a very nice comfortable buffer. We are eating, we are depleting reserves out of the general fund, but we're buying time. And John, you you talked about the need for some time to put elements in place before we make major course corrections that are that are necessary. That's what my goal is. My goal is to give the city time that that we can do that. I I think again a budget neutral pos I don't want to say neutral tech. We have the reserves, right? We could full we could do this thing in full because we have enough reserves, but it dramatically depletes those reserves. So a neutral position that would not require depletion of reserves is a 23% reduction across the board. That is grossly unreasonable in my position. Uh so I I think or from my perspective so I think 10%. Okay. I I imagine that that's doable.

Would it be easier to do like a range? What's that? I just like throwing out a range. I don't know. Like how about if we have a goal of 10 to 23% and then we'll come back to you and tell you what we're able to do. I think 10 I don't think we need to go over 10%. If they can, why not? But what if because that means cutting a lot of services depends on what they're proposing, I suppose. But if they if they're willing to go, if they can find a little bit more, you know, do it. But if not,

so we we may we may if we how about we just agree at least 10%. Um, and then, um, what I can tell you is is that when we built this budget, we baked in a somewhat of a little bit of an increase in regards to what we thought was going to come out of the collective bargaining negotiations that I think is actually going to come in a little bit less than what we originally put into this. So, that's going to give us a little bit of wiggle room. Um, not to mention a few other things that we have that we can look at that could be potentially cut. So, but we're we're you're speaking ambiguously right now. I we can get more specific tomorrow if you just if we could agree 10% um and then we'll come back and try and give you that and then best case scenario we'll come back with better.

I I do want it. It seems like department directors have been less uh of a participant in the process and this is just my sense that I really think that they're the subject matter experts and they they know what they do and the the most efficient way to cut and other places to cut that uh might be really detrimental. So, I think they are the they're the subject matter experts that we should go to. I think we have a really great leadership team that can work together to come up with what you guys are looking for. So, Stacy, do we need a motion for this effect?

I think if we just if you guys are all in consensus with that and we just want to pause where we're at with the general budget right now tonight, just put a pin in it and we can work on it and come back tomorrow with this discussion starting here. Is it worth moving into the enterprise fund tonight at 8:30? Yeah. Well, let's look. Yes. Yeah, we're here. We're here. You guys, you can at least go through the review, which is theformational piece that John can go through the slides again, hold all comments and questions. He can go through those. Okay.

And then we can invite public comment and get that done depending on how much review is and then we can theformational stuff. That should be just comments and questions. Yeah. No comments, no questions. Informational stuff. We'll start tomorrow night with public comments on I would suggest doing public comments tonight if we can get through this in about 10 minutes or less. I I don't think it's going to take that long. I So, we're starting with building. And remember, the more we can get done tonight, the less time we have to be in here tomorrow. Well, right. You can hope. I'm trying. You can hope that.

All right. So, um, continuing forward, we're in building inspections. I have a slide up. Um, several of the changes reflected here are tied to increased operational activity and service demand. Revenue increases are associated with expanded electrical plan review services being provided for neighboring jurisdictions, which continues supporting regional partnership activity and workload growth within the department. Personnel costs increased primarily due to the proposed reclassification of the building official position reflecting the complexity and responsibility associated with the role. The budget also reflects increased IT support cost and capital investment associated with replacement of aging vehicles to maintain operational reliability and field inspection capability. This proposed budget supports continued service delivery, operational readiness, and long-term sustainability within building inspection operations. Moving on to building inspection reserves fund. This fund exists primarily to maintain reserve capacity associated with building inspections, operations, and future operation or capital related needs. There are no significant expenditure changes proposed within the fund for the upcoming fiscal year. The increase reflected in in unappropriated ending balance primarily represents continued reserve accumulation intended to support long-term operational stability, equipment replacement, and financial flexibility within the building inspection program. As discussed earlier regarding enterprise funds, these resources are re are restricted to purpose to purposes associated with the building inspection function and cannot simply be redirected for unrelated general fund activities. I apologize. I skipped over a section that would have referenced that. If you have any questions, I can go back to that. I was just trying to be be quick. I'm moving on to 911 emergency fund. The primary increases reflected here are

associated with IT support costs and planned replacement of dispatch consoles within the communications center. I believe maintaining reliable emergency communications infrastructure remains critical to public safety and operational continuity. Funding has been secured for the dispatch console replacement project through a combination of general fund reserve support, available 911 communications funding, and surplus funds within the 911 services program. The total project cost is approximately $55,000. Overall, these investments are intended to maintain dependable emergency communications capability, operational readiness, and long-term systems reliability. Moving to public works personnel services. The primary increase reflected here is associated with projected labor related cost increases and ongoing contract negotiations impacting public works operations because public works supports multiple essential infrastructure and utility functions across the city. Personnel stability and workforce readiness remain important operational priorities. Beyond those labor related adjustments, the fund remains relatively stable overall. Maintaining appropriate staffing capacity within public work remains important to supporting infrastructure reliability, utility operations, and long-term service sustainability across multiple enterprise fund functions. Moving to water, several of the changes reflected here are tied to rising operational costs, regulatory requirements, and long-term infrastructure planning. Personnel costs increase due to projected labor related expenses and ongoing contract negotiations. While IT support costs increase as part of a broader city citywide technology and operational support needs, the budget also reflects increased professional services associated with anticipated regulatory testing requirements and rising chemical costs tied to water treatment

operations. Transfers to reserves increase as the city prepares the future, prepares for the future. Um, well construction and long-term water infrastructure needs. At the same time, transfers to the street and road fund decrease to better align with anticipated operational activity and past performance levels. This proposed budget supports continued water system reliability, regulatory compliance, operational readiness, and long-term infrastructure sustainability. on the water reserve fund. Now, the fund this fund exists primarily to support long-term water infrastructure planning and major capital investment needs. The most significant increase reflected here is associated with funding preparation for construction of the new Basalt well project um which administers which I view as an important long-term investment in water system reliability and future capacity. The budget also reflects increased interest revenue tied to recent investment performance. Maintaining strong reserve capacity within the water fund remains important to supporting long-term infrastructure s sustainability, operational resilience, and future utility reliability for the community. Moving to motorpool. Several of the changes reflected here are tied to operational adjustments and ongoing fleet maintenance needs across the organization. Revenue increases are associated with anticipated changes to the internal fuel fee structure and projected equipment sales activity. The budget also reflects increased IT support costs consistent with broader citywide operational technology needs. Fleet maintenance costs decrease slightly due to restructure restructuring within the maintenance and shop supplies budget categories. Capital investment within this fund includes planned purchase of a

replacement truck to support continued operational reliability within the city fleet system. Overall, this proposed budget supports continued fleet readiness, equipment reliability, and long-term operational sustainability across departments supported through the motorpool fund. Moving to street and road. Several of the adjustments reflected here are tied to anticipated workload levels, operational planning, and transfer alignment between related utility funds. Transfers in from both the water and sewer funds decrease to better reflect anticipated operational activity and projected needs this fiscal year. The budget also reflects increased IT support cost and implementation of street of a street inspection software agreement intended to improve infrastructure tracking planning and long-term maintenance coordination. At the same time, road maintenance and bike and pedestrian path expenditures decreased based on projected work levels and current project estimates. This proposed budget maintains operational readiness while continuing efforts to improve long-term infrastructure management and transportation system sustainability. Moving to street reserve fund. This fund exists primarily to support long-term transer transportation infrastructure planning and future roadway related capital projects. The budget reflects increased interest revenue associated with recent investment performance while transfers from the general fund decreased to better align with actual anticipated transfer levels. A significant portion of this fund remains committed to projects already identified and planned, including approximately $500,000 for existing fund exchange projects and another $500,000 associated with the underlevy project. The budget also includes funding placeholders associated with potential local improvement, district opportunities,

including sidewalk and roadway related projects should those opportunities advance during the fiscal year. Importantly, administration does not anticipate new projects moving forward unless matching or supporting funds becomes available. Overall, I believe maintaining reserve capacity within the street reserve fund remains important to supporting long-term transportation and infrastructure sustainability and future capital planning flexibility. Moving to public works street maintenance user fee. This is the budget for the public works street maintenance user fee fund. This fund is intended to support transportation maintenance and roadway related infrastructure work funded through the street maintenance user fee program. The budget reflects increased interest revenue associated with recent investment performance. The most significant increase within this fund is tied to projected professional services and engineering costs associated with planned roadway work on on Second Street. The budget also continues maintaining reserve capacity and operational contingency funding to support future transportation infrastructure needs and project flexibility. This fund remains an important component of the city's broader long-term transportation maintenance and infrastructure sustainability strategy. Moving to storm utility fee. Several of the increases reflected here are tied to long-term storm water infrastructure planning, regulatory coordination, and anticipated project activity. The budget budget includes increased consultant costs associated with flood plane mapping updates and development of Floyd flood plane remapping adoption work. Transfers to the storm utility reserve fund is also increased to help prepare for the future construction and infrastructure related projects. In addition, storm water maintenance and rehabilitation expenditure increase based on

anticipated project workload and operational needs this fiscal year. These investments are important to maintaining storm water system reliability, regulatory readiness, and long-term infrastructure sustainability. Moving to storm utility reserve fund. The fund exists primarily to support long-term storm water infrastructure planning and future capital's construction needs. The budget reflects increased interest revenue associated with recent investment performance along with increased transfers from the storm utility fund intended to build reserve capacity for future infrastructure projects. The most significant planned expenditure within this fund is associated with future storm water construction related capital planning and project readiness. Maintaining reserve capacity within the storm utility system remains important to supporting long-term infrastructure sustainability, regulatory readiness, and future operational flexibility. Moving to wastewater treatment. Overall, this the proposed budget remains relatively stable with the primary primary increase tied to IT support and system maintenance costs associated with operational technology and treatment facility support systems. Wastewater treatment remains one of the city's most critical infrastructure and regulatory functions, requiring continuous operational reliability and compliance readiness. The budget continues supporting personnel treatment personnel treatment operations, capital infrastructure and interfund transfer obligations necessary to maintain system functionality and regulatory performance. Overall, this proposed budget maintains operational stability and supports long-term wastewater system reliability and sustainability. Moving to sewer collection, several of these increases reflect here reflected here are associated with operational support, staffing adjustments and infrastructure maintenance needs within the sewer system. IT related costs

increased due to expanded software utilization within public works operations and broader citywide technology support needs. Department supplies and small tools also increased to support staffing and operational needs associated with the division. At the same time, transfers to the street and road fund decreased to better align with anticipated workload and historical operational performance. This budget continues supporting both sewer collection and wastewater treatment operations, which together represent critical infrastructure functions necessary to maintain regulatory compliance, operational reliability, and long-term utility sustainability. These investments support continued sewer system readiness and infrastructure reliability moving forward. Moving sewer reserve fund. This fund exists primarily to support long-term sewer infrastructure planning, capital replacement, and future utility system investment needs. The budget reflects increased interest revenue associated with recent investment performance, while transfers from both the water treatment and sewer collection funds decrease to better align with anticipated operational and project activity. Capital expenditures within the reserve fund decreased compared to prior years largely to completion of earlier projects and updated cost projections associated with future work. At the same time, the fund continues maintaining significant reserve capacity to support long-term infrastructure reliability, regulatory compliance, and future construction flexibility. Moving on to grants and donations. This fund can fluctuate significantly from year to year depending on grant opportunities, donation activity, project timing, and external funding availability. Several grant supported projects are reflected within the proposed budget, including library grant funding, urban forestry grant support, planning grant activity associated with

the Lrand shore grant, the public safety grant funding tied to FEMA and wildfire related programs. The budget also includes economic development support associated with the economic development plan, park improvement funding connected to the splash pad project and pump track um completion and Morgan Lake related improvement funding received through Idaho Power. Additionally, the budget includes placeholder funding associated with potential future DEEQ air quality grant opportunities. We will continue pursuing external funding opportunities where possible to support infrastructure re recreation, environmental planning and public safety initiatives while reducing pressure on local operational funding sources. Moving to the general fund reserve. This budget is for general fund reserve. The the general fund reserve fund. It's ex exists primarily to support future capital replacement needs, operational resilience, and long-term organizational stability. Several planned reserve allocations are reflected here, including funding associated with emergency vehicle placement, replacement, dispatch console upgrades, future ambulance replacement, pool HVAC replacement, library HVAC replacement, turf replacement, and building maintenance related capital needs. The budget also includes approximately $300,000 reserved for potential future capital improvement projects um should the needs arise. Importantly, many of the reserves transfers dis discussed throughout the department presentations are consolidated with this fund structure rather than reflected directly inside individual department operating budgets. Overall, I believe maintaining reserve capacity for future capital needs remains important to reducing long-term operational risk, preserving service

reliability, and avoiding increasingly reactive infrastructure decision later. Good job. Sorry.

No, no, all right. So, we've had a review of the enterprise fund. Um I'll ask anyone who has um like to make public comments step to the podium. I have three minute limitation. Right. Not seeing anybody coming forward for public comment on enterprise fund. So I'm just looking at my notes. Our agenda is somewhat modified from what we started out with. Um, so we've had information on the on the enterprise funds. We've had uh public comment. I don't think we'll start the detail fund information tonight.

Yeah, I think the full review with the department directors. It might take long. I don't know what you guys have for questions. So that might take us over time. So I guess you guys can discuss how long you want to be here. We can see how far we can get until until then. And then we'll make sure we recess. Yes. Not a journ. I have that on my notes. Good job. Okay. So, um, back to the top. Uh, we're at building inspection. Is that correct? That's where we are. All right. Um, any questions on building inspection? Could you introduce yourself because I don't recognize you? Oh, yes. My name is Joe Sloan. I'm the building official.

Thank you. Any questions for Joe on either building inspection or building inspection reserve?

That's easy. Thanks, Joe. Yep. 911. Thank you so much. You again. You again. It's me. Okay. Yeah. Question for Chief Hayes on 911 emergency funds. So, is this a hardware upgrade? It is. This is a system that we purchased in 2003. Usually, they have a life of 12 years, right? And we've extended it to 23 years. And it's the command center for dispatch. So we're I remember going in there a few years ago and it was like this is kind of arcade. So yeah, chief needs to be done.

Are you fully staffed? Oh, go ahead. Are you fully staffed by dispatchers? We are not. We're down one uh as of two weeks ago, we were down one dispatcher. Hard to get and a lot of training. Yes. And you have two consoles you're replacing? Uh, I've been down there, but or two. Just two. It's two. I remember seeing it. It was just dark and a lot of stuff going on. Kids love it. It's a great for a tour. Any questions on 911? We should start with this one next time. Thank you.

Kidding. Public personnel services. Wow. This is a new phase. Yeah. Uh, Kyle Carpenter, public works director. Yeah. I didn't I didn't see making it tonight, so I apologize for being underdressed. You look fine to me, but appreciate it. Personel just like an engineer. I forgot my slide rule. Personnel services. This is basically where they pay everybody.

Questions? You're actually going down in FTE by a smidge. Yeah, I think it was seasonals. It wasn't It wasn't a major deal. There is no actual full-time employee drop off there. Actually, we are actually filled the assistant public works director for the first time in I believe around 20 years. So, we are for the first time in 20 years fully staffed. Okay. What position was that? The assistant assistant public works director. Oh, nice. He does everything the child doesn't want to do. That's his hope. You know, yeah, I'm good. Any questions?

Water. Let's Can we do uh the water and reserve at the same time? Sure. We can do whatever you want. I will say this. Um, and it it's always been uh a a pleasure to see this happen. You're building a new well without having to go out for a bond or ask for a large fee increase. Correct. And that is commendable for both uh sewer and water systems that we have. You do a good job and now we got a new well.

Yeah. Um, you know, League of Oregon City does an annual study on rates for water and sewer. Most of the people in Eastern Oregon are seeing double digit increases due to the inflation is the main reason that they point to. We have not raised rates in water since 2017. We have not raised rates in sewer since 2016. So, um, we're pretty proud of the way that we run our systems and, uh, we're still able to grow our reserve funds and as you said, we're able to fund a well off of that reserve fund. We not to say we didn't research other methods. So um like the community community block development grant which Lrand just became uh eligible for would fund a well construction. Uh the problem is to qualify to utilize that grant for infrastructure. We would have to raise our rate by over 30% 80% in over two years. Uh probably not widely acceptable by the citizens of LRAN since we have the reserve funds we do to work with. So,

and our water reports are always good and we have great water. We have not had any failures this year that I know of. Usually when we hit something, it is um our our treatment process sometimes gets a hit because of um one of the chemicals in that that forms in the pipe. It's not generally a a problem healthwise. It just gets a hit. We run our additional tests that show us that that's what it is and then we're fine. But those will all come out on our water study that we do every year or sometimes they lose one of our samples and that counts as So questions on water or water reserve. Why would a grant require rate increase?

Community block development grant basically is helping to fund lowincome areas. So they require that the city show that they're doing everything they can to fund those improvements themselves. So they have uh requirements on how much you're charging your citizens before they will allow you to use their funds to construct your infrastructure. Right. So in other words, we have so much money they don't want to give us any. Correct. Okay.

No questions. Motorpool. No questions. All right, streets and road money is just about spent. Yeah, I think we projected spending 900,000 before the end of this budget year in June. I think that leaves us a balance of just under 700,000 to spend next year. Okay. And that's that's within the the the grant, whatever it is, period. I thought it was like three to four years. Yeah.

Yeah. Heather did some magical financing that we've met all the requirements for the ARPA funds. So there is no longer a time limit on those. Okay. So they're they're basically free funds that are now just obligated to street projects. Nice. Good. Are we doing this all inhouse or are we hiring uh contracting like last year? I there there's one project we're throwing around that we may take out of house. The majority of it we're keeping in-house but um this summer we are doing an immense amount of utility work actually. So uh to keep the progress moving forward of getting streets done we are looking to have going out of house with with one major project. So

the ARPA funds you're going to be doing the same streets you originally planned on or no? Yeah, we finished all of them except for two short stints on Monroe and Walnut where we ran into some problems where we're going to have to do some full reconstructions on one. The other one we were waiting for the Safe Routes to School to finish a sidewalk that connected Spruce to Island Avenue. So, the the sidewalk connection has been completed. So, we're looking to do a a grind and inlay on that portion, which is from Greenwood to Island. Well, the railroad tracks. We're not going to go all the way to Island. The one on walnut's going to be a little more intense. So, um, at this at this point with the ARPA funds being freed up to be just general street project funds. We're still tracking for public purposes to show where that money is spent, but the walnut piece of the major reconstruction depending on where it falls in workflow might fun fall under a different funding source, but it will be completed.

So, it'll just be those two projects. That's Well, no. We've we've funded, let's see, YXZ um and one other that it's not coming to me right now after we finish the ones that were designated by council. I hope that magical financing is legal, but um

it is completely legal. I promise. Kyle, uh, can you speak to the positive impact that a the proposed gas tax, if passed, would have on this budget for the second half of that, January 1? Certainly. So, um, as as many know, we're kind of undertaking an educational outreach of the intention of placing a gas tax on the ballot this coming November. Um we the educational outreach is kind of to get a taste from the public of not only the palatability of establishing a gas tax but also taking in the different suggestions of how we could mold that gas tax to make it acceptable to the public. Whether that's uh you know attaching a project list that would be completed and then the gas tax would sunset. Whether that is making it seasonal, whether it's just establishing it to certain um what was the other piece you know the amount I guess is another one. There's a lot of different variety that can be set in that gas tax. Uh I would point to like the street user fee as one of those one of those funds that augments what we get from state gas tax that helps us complete some of our projects. The state gas tax would be another one where it comes in as a funding source that would help us to not only maintain but we control what that money is for. So you could set it for maintenance dollars, you could set it for capital projects. So when you look at the street user fee is only allowed to use on capital improvements which means a 2-in overlay or greater. So I can't use it for crack sealing. I can't use it for polling. I can't use it for chip sealing. So it's very targeted. With the gas tax, we have the opportunity to provide flexibility to those funds to fill the needs that we have inside our community. When you look at the cost upfront, the street user fee delivers us about $420,000 a year and it

costs everybody $8 a month on your water bill. So about $96 a month per meter. A gas tax when doing the calculations is probably around under 20 bucks a year for each of our citizens which and it would deliver more money. We're estimating that it would be on the range of 500 to $600,000 based on previous fuel pump volumes that were pumped inside the city of Lrand. Those numbers were provided by ODOT. Three cent rate

and that's at a three cent rate, 3 cents per gallon. So, um, of course you could increase that, decrease that, whatever it is. I think at this point, you know, the city's just moving forward saying, "Hey, here's an opportunity where we can provide additional funding for our streets at a lower cost per citizen out there and provide um more services."

5 to 600,000, if I read this right, would be about a 25 30% increase in the budget that we have available for roads. Does that look about right? Um, I would say it would probably, so the state gas tax, if we hit 500, you're at a 50 to 60% increase for just our maintenance dollars. The downside of that, um, it's probably actually higher because your state highway tax is is not just paying for street maintenance, that's paying for your street lights, that's paying for striping, that's paying for a whole lot of associated fees um that surround our transportation system, signs, sweeping. Um, the good thing is is that when you look at most of our overhead costs, including all of those items, those are covered with what we currently, so all of the money that comes from the state, a local gas tax would be applied straight to pavement maintenance.

Okay. Any other questions on streets, street reserve, street maintenance? Just a very quick, what is the difference between street and road and street maintenance? Is it the funding source? Yeah, street maintenance is your street user fee. Street maintenance is uh gas tax. Okay. Street reserve is basically where we run all of our large projects out of. So this would be your grant funded stuff. This would be your state uh delegated money that came down from ODOT and where the transference from the general fund of that 25% of unexpected increase would come into.

Okay. Questions on streets, storm utility fee, storm utility reserve. So you budget a lot for storm events, but you don't necessarily spend it all. Yeah, this year was exceptionally low. I think we brought the plows out one day. Yeah, we had a It was It was pretty low. So you can see that reflect in the storm events line. We programmed 200,000. We've spent 50. Most of that was sweeping up gravel. Yeah.

So um Yep. same thing next year. We actually increased it to 250 just because the the fund is healthy. So we want to make sure that uh greatest amount spent in the storm events line in the last 10 years I believe was 269,000. So um 250 adequately reflects the upper bound. I don't imagine based on climactic trends that we're going to see that anytime soon. Okay. Any other questions on storm utility?

Can I talk about storm utility reserve for two seconds to to our horn? So, one of the things that you'll see that uh the capital outlay did increase by more than what we generally call out. We fixed that during our uh budget reviews. Uh we were informed that we were awarded a grant through FEMA for uh $550,000 to replace the covert on 18th Street to mitigate some local flooding impacts that happen every every time we get large snow melt offs. So, that will uh take place this year. So, that was kind of exciting.

Okay, good. Sewer, sewer, water, wastewater treatment, sewer collection and reserve questions. You're changing out some of the pumping system out at the treatment center. It's like they've got floating

Oh, the airators. Yes, we're switching the type of airators we're using. We use some Mars 5 airators. They are. So, it's technical speak, but we have like a 2% dissolved solids in our preerated basin for a while, which means basically the bugs are underfed and they're not treating as well as we'd like them to. So, we're switching to a different type of airator uh large coarse bubble that um we installed two of them. It's already increased it by 1% uh the dissolved oxygen inside the plant. So, it's pretty exciting. And you have the primary I I the primary treatment facility that that filters out a lot of the the headworks building. Yes. Yep. That's that's in full operation now.

It's in full operation. We have two screens now instead of just one. So we have some backup uh higher capacity usage. So um as many know the the biggest detriment in sewer treatment today is adult wipes. They are not flushable. So please do not flush them. Uh most of the time we can catch them with the screen. They do get by. If you'd like to see, we have some very large conglomerated chunks of them. I have pictures if you'd like to see them. Uh the crews have gotten very talk about sewer reserve. All right, let's go. Sewer reserve. Keep on track. Those on the website. Just found the key to get through this faster. That's that's an incentive to move along.

Sue reserve. Any questions on sew reserve fund? Thank you, Kyle. Thank you. Um, and just as a reminder, I don't think we necessarily need to talk about the grants and donations funds. Simply placeholders for the possible money. All right. I'm going to recess the meeting tonight. General reserve, you want to go over general reserve?

Um, yeah, sure. Let's do that real quick. That's the last one. Yep. General reserve fund. That's where money gets collected and stored, carried forward as needed to lessen the impact of large purchases in the future. I think all of that is a reasonable way to to do it rather than having to take a big bite out of it at one time. Questions here? Okay. Now, um I'm going to recess the meeting uh until tomorrow night. Um I I anticipate coming back to the general fund.

You want to finish out the general fund first, right? And and that we will uh review whatever changes you have recommended to us tomorrow night. Now, just a quick clarifying question because I know Karine had asked about going through starting I think the parks with the question. We didn't get Stu up here to talk about the parks, aquatics, recreation going off of the agenda, right? So, I don't know if you guys wanted to start there or you just want to go right into what the team comes up with tomorrow.

I I think and I'm open to hearing from other members of the the budget committee. I think we probably need to restart because my guess is that there's going to be some changes throughout the budget. Um I would I recommend that um John give us highlights for the changes and then go in a little bit more depth. I'm going to honor what Dave brought up. Our goal is not, I think, to pick and choose. The directors, I think, are better suited to that effort than we are. Um, we've asked them to do a 10%. If they come back with more, great. If they come back with 10, you know, my thought is we take what they've given us and and we we understand what the impact is going to be.

So, okay, with that, you need anything else? I think we're good. All right. I'm going to uh reset us until tomorrow night at 6:00 and hopefully he can wrap this up.