Remarks by Cole Stanley
414 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 8 of 17
- Play at 37:53
“Okay. But built into the budget as presented? Correct. Okay. Yes, sir.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 39:10
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 39:26
“So some of this CIP is funded on rates. So let's say solid waste is a good example, right? Right. You increase the rate to be able to go spend $1 million to replace trash cans, as an example, right? Correct. The utilities, that $13 million, is that mainly sewer and water?”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 39:46
“Not to be confused with utility billing, correct? Like this is all infrastructure, $13 million?”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 39:53
“And those monies aren't from available fund balance. You're saying those are monies that are from where?”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 40:14
“So some of your proposed rates, you have an 8% increase proposed? that funds one time, even though that would be a continual rate as we push it forward. So you're going to build into that rate CIP one-time funds in perpetuity. Yeah.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 51:09
“Can we go to page seven? So I want to make sure I'm following along. What is the TIF, captured value? What is T-I-F? That's tiers.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 51:23
“So that's our allocation that goes to those three zones. So it looks to me like when they do that NNR calculation, they remove that amount. I noticed down at the bottom of the page, if you go to the far right over there, you see you have a less. Tears taxes of 1.2 million. So because they take it out up at the top and they don't calculate it, I understand it not to be a deduction in the end. So like essentially what I would ask is. The NNR no new revenue rate is a rate that a municipality shall pass. That will bring in the same amount of revenues as the previous year. On the same taxable…”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 53:00
“Well, I'm not sure, though, because like the taxable value rate sets that rate. So the seventy nine total is everything put back in. So those tax ceilings are added back in plus the NNR rate of seventy million. And it's already factored in. So if you take a 1.2 million line item deduction off the bottom line, you're reducing. So that projection there is 57 million. And I'm curious why it's not 60.5 million.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 53:58
“So the rate itself should vary in order to produce the same revenues in the calculation.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 54:59
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 58:02
“So no new revenue. You're saying if we pass that after we factor everything and we take out for tears again, we'd end up with 57 million, right? Plus, then we would add back in our debt service. And I believe the debt service has been stated as 20.903. So we take 21 million, add it to 57 million, right? 78 million? versus what our projections are of 82.3 for this year? Where are you getting our projected numbers for this year? From her second worksheet, City of Amarillo Tax Estimates here. Oh, she didn't give us that one. Oh, I'm sorry. Go to City of Amarillo Current Levy. So once again,…”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 59:29
“Mm-hmm. And that's your vater, which is, according to what you guys presented last, $700,000 additional from the no new revenue rate, the way I now understand it. There's a $700,000 difference in passing the no new revenue rate from passing the Vader. Right, correct. So you've got 61.9 in your budget workbook at the Vader. You would be projecting in my budget roughly 61.2 at the no new revenue rate.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:00:08
“Yeah, I'm just taking the $700,000. So I'm just looking at what you've presented. You guys have presented in the budget.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:00:16
“So $60.5 million, which is right in line with where... I understand we're going to land if you run her numbers. And these are projections. So, you know, Christina McMurray not responsible for what people do and don't pay. And we still need to factor conservatively, right? But there's a $3.5 million difference here, roughly. Let's call it a $3 million difference. 1.2 of it, I believe, is when we're deducting the tiers after it's already been factored in the calculation. So I would say we could look at that 1.2 million, maybe that doesn't need to be a line item deduction.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:01:20
“Dr. O, right now, I'M JUST TRYING TO RUN THE REVENUE SIDE AND I DON'T WANT TO MUDDY THE WATER WITH EXPENDITURES. SO IN CALCULATING OUR TOTAL REVENUES, LET ME NOT BRING IN EXPENDITURES YET FOR LIKE DEBT SERVICE OR PAYING TIERS OR POLICE AND FIRE.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:01:55
“OKAY. CAN WE COME BACK TO THAT ONE? BECAUSE I KNOW I'M JUST ASKING THE QUESTION OF DOES THE $1.2 MILLION NEED TO BE A LINE ITEM DEDUCTION? I KNOW YOU'RE ESTABLISHING THAT YOU BELIEVE YES BASED ON THE FACT THAT IT'S AN EXPENDITURE. BUT RIGHT NOW, YOU'RE SHOWING ME MY REVENUES.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:02:14
“Okay, so we don't pay into the tiers. The tiers is paid into from the tax assessor? I mean, it gets distributed through the City of Amarillo, or it gets distributed directly to the tiers? It gets distributed by the City of Amarillo, and then we bill the other partners for their share of it. Okay, so if that's the case, it's being deducted in our calculations for our no new revenue rate.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:02:45
“So they capture the amount of tiers value that's increased, they tax that separate, they put it back in. So you're saying it's up in the $79.2 million total? Right there, if you look at your page on page 7 up at the top, total taxes, you're saying $79.2 at the no new revenue rate?”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:03:06
“Okay. So I'm just asking a question. I don't know whether the 1.2 needs to be paid out as an expenditure from the city. I'm learning here, but then the 70.2 million is still below what I mean, I guess that's probably the percentage, the 98.5%.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:03:52
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:07:23
“Yeah, so bond council doesn't show that in two different areas. And I may just not have asked the right question. So I've got general obligation tax supported debt here that let me double check it and make sure it does not show that fleet.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:07:43
“Yeah, so it's not included in his total. So Bond Council's total payment is $19,700,000. We are stating the total payment as 20.9. $1.2 million difference. I was hoping the difference was we've pulled over monies that are getting paid from fleet transfers into our general obligation. So when I asked bond counsel, do those two notes belong here on my general obligation bond debt? He said no, they're excluded in that $19.7 million. Can we get clarification from Bond Council? Maybe it is, like you're saying, Katrina, there's another payment on that series, and it comes from both. You know, a lot…”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:11:17
“And I'm sure the numbers probably add up. I just can't see them. Sure. And then on that, we have a little bit more money. I guess as proposed from what we're paying out, if that was the case.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 1:11:35
“Yes. Then the goal would be to treat the NNR rate of, let's say it's 79 million for NNR, less the amount of the 20.9 or the 19.7. Now he shows the 19.7 as general obligation. So can you tell me why we would back off the 20.9 if it is the 19.7 from debt council?”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026