City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, I will call the meeting to order. Welcome everyone to our Williamsport City Council meeting. It's Thursday, December 11th. We're in trade trades the 23rd floor. Please rise for the invocation by Councilman Randy Allison followed by the flag salute. [snorts] Heavenly Father, we thank you tonight as we gather together to uh close out the fiscal year, of our city, of our budget. Lord, we thank you for what we've been able to accomplish this year. We're grateful for that. And as we enter a new year, Lord, I pray tonight for my colleagues at the tables here, Lord, that you'd strengthen them throughout the year. Lead them, guide them, give them wisdom, Lord. Let let it next year be a prosperous year, Lord. And Father, I pray for our administration that you help them, Lord God. They have so many responsibilities that make this city run. Help this city to be safe. Father, I pray for your hand upon each and every one of them that's here, Lord God, and those that couldn't be here tonight because they're out doing their jobs. Lord, I'm grateful and we're all grateful that you've kept us and you lead and guide us through every obstacle that comes. Lord, we thank you in Jesus name. Amen.

Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Item three, approval of city council meeting minutes from November 17th, 2025. Is there a motion and a second? So move. Second. Any comments, questions on the minutes? Hearing and seeing none. Mrs. Franklin on item three. Mr. Allison. Yes. Mr. Mackey. Yes. Mr. Pizzy. Yes.

Mrs. Catz. Yes. Mr. Vder. Yes. Mr. Yod. Yes. Motion passes six to zero. Uh before we jump into item four, um I'm going to invite um some representatives from Senator Yaw's office to the podium and Representative Jamie Flick who are back here for a uh presentation for one of our uh members of our team here in Williamsport. Welcome both of you. Thank you for being here.

Thank you, Councilman Yoder. We are here tonight. I'll wait for Representative Flick to get up here, but we are here tonight to recognize somebody who has dedicated a great deal of their life to service, not only of the city, but of our country. So, um, Senator Ya was not able to be here tonight, but he asked me to come as I have done some work with him in the past to recognize Chief Samst for his service um, for his upcoming retirement from the city. Yes. Yeah.

Now, Liz, we're government, so we each have a citation. That's how we waste days in Harrisburg. But, uh, Liz, if you'd be so kind to read part of it.

All right. So, um, it goes on. It's quite long, but I'll read the most important part. It says, "Whereas Chief Angst began his career with the Williamsport Bureau of Fire on March 16th, 1992 as a firefighter, he was promoted to firefighter journeyman in March 1995 and rose through the ranks to serve as engineer, fire engineer, fire inspector, and platoon chief. Named acting deputy chief in March 2020. Chief Enst was promoted to deputy chief in July of that year and accepted the role of chief in January 2022. During his tenure, he furthered his education by earning a bachelor's degree in fire science and a master's degree in leadership with emphasis on disaster preparedness and executive fire leadership. A recipient of the Lycoming County Rescue Technician Award, Chief Ang served as chair of the North Central Division for the Office of the State Fire Commissioner and is a member of the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the Pennsylvania Career Fire Chiefs Association, and the International Association of Fire Investigators. To his great credit, he served this country with honor and distinction as a member of the United States Naval Reserve from 1997 to 1998 and the United States Air Force Reserve from 1998 to 2006. So on behalf of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the Senate of Pennsylvania, and the State House of Representatives, we are here to congratulate Chief Samst on his retirement.

Yeah, please. Please.

Um, I appreciate everything and uh everybody's um help along the way. Um th this last four years I I never truly wanted to be fire chief. I really didn't. Um but the need arise arose and um myself and my best friend. [snorts] I'm sorry. It's okay. we stepped up and, you know, we did what we thought was best for for the men and women of the Williamsburg Bureau of Fire in the city of Williams. So, I appreciate it. Thank you,

Sam. If I can just say um thank you very much for your service to the city, to the community, because your service has not only been to the city, you've served Lycoming in a number of capacities. Um and uh just very grateful for it. It's been an honor and a privilege working with you on council. Um and I uh just thanks, brother. I appreciate that. Any other comments for members? All right. Um, item four, limited courtesy of the floor. I don't believe we've had any requests tonight. Um, we're going to jump around here for a little bit. Um, we will jump down to item 13, Mrs. Frank. Resolution of the city council to approve substantial amendments to fiscal year 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2024 annual action plans for CDBG and home investment partnership programs.

Is there a motion in a second? Second, Miss Fesler, good evening. Yes. Good evening, President Yodor, members of council. Jamie Schrodder from SECOG is on Zoom and she's going to um explain this resolution. [clears throat] Thank you very much. Can you hear me? Okay, we can. Welcome.

All right, great. Thank you. So, tonight we just had a couple things to go over. So, there was a couple of repayments that had to be accounted for and some funds that were not expended that had to be accounted for. So, we are asking for council's approval to submit a substantial amendment to HUD for 2019 for um a repayment of 19275 and then in 2020 a repayment total of 15,38063 which will go towards the fire department rescue boat and then in 2021 a repay a rebudgeting extra funds in the Willow street design to the rescue boat and to owner occupied single family rehab which is the emergency rehab program. And then 2024 we had leftover funds in the little or I'm sorry in the um little league boulevard program that we could reallocate to the sojourer truth ministries. So I'm looking for approval tonight for those amendments.

Thank you Jamie. Um, are there any comments, questions for Miss Vessel or Miss Schroeder on Zoom related to the amendments? Okay. Um, hearing you see none. Mrs. Frank, item 13, please. Mr. Allison, yes. Mr. Mackey, yes. Mr. Pelizzy, yes. Mrs. Catz, yes. Mr. Ber, yes. Mr. Yoder, yes. Motion passes 6. Thank you, Jamie, for joining us. Thank you so much. You're welcome. We'll move to item 14, Mrs. Frank.

Resolution authorizing a professional and administrative services agreement between the city and Cedakog of government for professional and administrative services to the legislative pre- disaster mitigation 2023. Is there a motion and a second? So moved. Second. Miss Vesler, floor is yours again.

Great. Thank you so much. So, um, this resolution actually represents a really exciting time for us because we are kicking off the levy reconstruction projects with the $8 million earmark that we have been allocated by the federal government. And what this resolution authorizes is for CEDCOG to assist us with a compliance and professional administrative services to manage that grant funding. So, it is not Jamie Schrodder at Cedakog. This is a different division of Ceda Cog. Um Betsy Kramer who is not able to be with us this evening. Um but I do have some extensive information about her credentials and her work with Cedakog if you are interested in that. Um she is currently working with the county to administer and u manage compliance for their EDA grant which is the $5.5 million crosspipe project that has kicked off with the levy. So this is a recommendation essentially to pay a 2% administrative services fee to Cedaka Cog for each reimbursement that we do for this project. And I'll just note that one of the reasons why we feel having Ceda Cog represent us through this project is because this project is reimbursement based. So we're going to be doing about $10.7 million worth of projects and we get reimbursed for the funds that we spent. So, we have to make sure that we cross every tea, dot, every eye um when it comes to bid docs and every single um compliance item. So, we're really excited to have the opportunity to have Cedar Cog alongside of us to make sure that we're doing that so that we don't face a repayment and also um they have really extensive project management skills with this type of project and we know that they'll move this project really fast for us. um the work that we have scoped with this money um will be right up against the deadline of spending it even with an extension. So, we're really hopeful to work with them and have them move the project for us.

Thank you, Miss Fesler. Are there any comments or questions on the resolution by members? Adam, I do. Go ahead, Mrs. Gats. Um the question I have is Okay, this is the $8 million that was allocated. It has to be five, six years ago. Is that the same eight million that I'm thinking it is?

Um, this $8 million was allocated in the uh I believe it was 2023. Mayor Slaughter, correct me if I'm wrong. Um it was to be expended by well it would have been 5 years from to be expended um in September of 2026 and we're working on an extension with them to extend it through September of 2028. And really um just to speak to that a little bit there wasn't anything on the city's end that that held up the project and the allocation. We are just now under contract with FEMA and this funding has just been released. So, um there's been nothing on the end of the city that has held this money up. The second that we received the contract and it was signed, we reached out to SEDCOG for this professional services agreement and here we are. So, it wasn't until after the shutdown was over that we received the final contract.

That's what I kind of uh remember. And uh I was just wondering if it was the same allegation. Uh if I remember correctly, it pro Senator Yaw was part of that also. I think I think I you know maybe I'm thinking of something else but it's about time we shoveled some dirt here. Yes, we are ready. Okay. Thank you. Yes.

Mr. Ber, do you have any examples of other projects that Cedakog has worked on of this magnitude? Sure. As I mentioned, um, they're currently managing the $5.5 million grant that Ceda Cog has from the EDA or I'm sorry, that the county has from the EDA for the Cross Pipe project. But I asked Betsy just to submit her credentials to us. So, if you would like, I could read us a few sentences. Would you like me to read that? Okay, great. Um, Betsy Kramer, Cedar Cox's program manager for community community revitalization and resiliency, has extensive experience managing complex state and federal projects across an 11count region and has secured or advanced more than $34.5 million in grant funding for local governments. She is supported by a highly skilled CEDICOG team specializing in labor standards, federal and state grant compliance, fiscal management, project administration, and ensuring thorough oversight throughout the life of the project. Betsy has been working diligently with Puma on the city's extension requests and reports positive indications that the grant period may be extended through spring 2028, which will provide an appropriate timeline for the successful completion of this 26-month project. Thank you.

Sure. Miss Mey, want to hit your mic? Ah, yes. I assume that the not to exceed uh $215,000 match or payment to SEDCOG will be coming out of the um emergency and reserve fund. That's correct. Okay. Um and which [snorts] strikes me as a totally fair and appropriate place for it to come from. That was the idea behind it, right? [laughter] You gave me that sharp look and I was like, "Wait, I can't be the only person who thought No, no, no, no. I I had to think I had to think for a second. I've got like three different things running through my mind and that was not what that was. [laughter] Um that's what that's what we designed it for.

Um are there any other monies for this port for this levy project coming out of that um emergency reserve fund? Yes. So the overall project is 10.7 million and the grant is 8 million. So we were required to put up a 20% match and that was uh the money that was put into the emergency fund. Um so I guess the following question is is there still that much money in the emergency and reserve fund? Yes, there sure is.

Okay, [laughter] good. Um we had moved some things around and there was the payment to the FTA and I wasn't positive there was still that much funding. Good. Okay. All right. Thank you. Any other comments or questions? All right. Hearing seeing none, Mrs. Frank, item 14, the vote, please. Mr. Allison, yes. Mr. Mackey, yes. Mr. Pelizzy, yes. Mrs. Catz, yes. Ms. Mey, yes. Mr. Ber, yes. Mr. Yod, yes. Motion passes 70. Let's jump to item 16, certificate of appropriateness, 124 East 4th Street. Is there a motion in a second? So moved. Second. Mr. Nar. Good evening, sir. Welcome to the podium.

Good evening, President Yoder, Vice President Ber, members council. What I present to you tonight is a certificate of appropriate request from McCarish Realy for the location of 124 East 4th Street. It is currently occupied by Sweetspire Coffee and Bakery Shop. Because it does reside within the CBD requires a certificate of appropriateness. Um, what I can tell you is the front part of the building has mountain stone at the very bottom of it. It has wood siding going up top of it with a black roof. Uh, the back building actually has about the same type of thing. It has the mountain stone at the bottom. It is um gray siding that goes all the way with a black roof. The balconies will be made up of rowd iron as well as some wood trim to match the front part of the building. Um, and I can answer any questions. And I do have a representative here.

Are there any comments or questions from members on the certificate of appropriateness, Miss Mey? Um well, first and foremost that the the business is a um a terrific addition to that part of town and I think they've um they already seem to be doing very well. Um and uh and the the renovation um interior wise is certainly a success and exterior wise I think is is a good thing for the building as well. Um the one question I would have of course Gary is um that the renovation is completed.

It is not completed. They're actually they're actually still working on phase two which will be some apartments up over top as well as across the street from the alley. They will be basically refurbishing that building as well. So it is a quite an extensive uh renovations um brought to by design by Visco Architects and McCaris Realy. Got it. Um, so we will see a certificate of appropriateness for the flip side of the alien. Okay. Um, got it. Thanks, Gary. Are there any other comments or questions for members? Okay. Hearing see none, Mrs. Frank, item 16, please. Mr. Allison, yes. Mr. Mackey, yes. Mr. Pizzy, yes.

Mrs. Catz, yes. Miss Mey, yes. Mr. Ryder. Yes. Mr. Yoder. Yes. Motion passes 70. Thank you, Gary. Um, and then let's jump up to item 10, Mrs. Frank.

Resolution authorizing the transfer of certain real property for River Valley Transit Authorities. Is there a motion and a second? So move. Second. Motion a second. Sister Grimes. Welcome, sir. Good evening. I'll turn it over to you.

Thank you, President Yoder. Members of council. Wow, that's loud. Um, this is something that the city has been dealing with since March of last year, I believe, in what to do with certain properties that were built with federal transit authority money um, owned by the city since the separation of RVTA in the city. Um, after negotiating in March, again in the summer, um, we've come up with a resolution that we feel is in the best interest of all the parties involved here. And essentially what this resolution does is it authorizes the city to transfer three of the buildings that were built with FTA money to RVTA. Those buildings are Trade and Transit 1, Trade and Transit 2, and Church Street um parking deck. And there's some offices and and whatnot there. Um this was originally approved actually March of last year. Then with certain things coming up with the FTA, that resolution was pulled back. Another res resolution was passed to say that two of those properties were not being used for essential transit purposes and this resolution pulls back that resolution and transfers these three buildings. Now with that transfer there's a certain number of um considerations for the city. The first and probably the most important being that if those properties are not used for transit purposes as the FTA intends or they become in disrepair or they attempt to be sold then those properties come back to the city. And the reason for that is it wasn't 100% FTA funds that were used to build those properties. It was about 80% which means if those properties are ever sold 80% of the money has to go back to the FTA. Um and that doesn't matter what the sale price is. because it doesn't matter how much FTA put in 80% of the assets theirs. So in the future if those assets

are sold or are not used appropriately then the city still has that reversionary interest to where they then would be able to protect that 20% equity in the in the properties. The other thing that it does is it allows the city for at least two years to continue to operate out of the buildings that they're operating in at a reduced rental price than what they're operating out of now as part of the consideration for that transfer. Um, RVTA still needs to vote on this. So, right now it's anywhere in a range from $5 to $10 per square foot. Um, but that's less than the $11 per square foot that's currently being paid. Also, as part of that, there's a consideration that if the city would ever need it, a certain number of parking spots could be negotiated and reserved in the Church Street parking deck for the city. This has been reviewed by RVTA's solicitor. It has not been reviewed um it has not been approved by their board yet. and um FTA was in the discussions to make sure that everything that the city and RVTA is doing is in compliance with their needs and their requirements and I'm certainly happy to answer any questions on this.

Thank you, Mr. Grimes. Are there any comments or questions on the resolution? Mr. Ber,

just a comment. Uh Mr. Grimes, thank you very much for all the work you put into this. I know also uh Mr. Kenyon put in a lot of work as well. Um the folks at RBTA, thank you very much for being patient with us through this process. Um it was uni, it was a very unique situation uh that we were all very unfamiliar with and wanted to make sure we had the best equitable solution for not only RBTA but also the city of Williamsport since these were um funded partially by the city as was said um 20%. So I appreciate your willingness to come to the table at this point um for again an equitable solution. Thank you, Mr. Ber. Are there any other comments or questions for members?

Adam, I do. Mrs. Bonnie, go [snorts] ahead. Mrs. Gats, go ahead.

I'm sorry I let go of the mute key. Uh, what you're saying is that we will still be paying rent at a lower rate, a lower rate. Um has we have asked I know I have asked for a breakdown as far as what uh funds were used for these buildings for trade and transit one and trade and transit two. Um is this so hard that you can't pull up a spreadsheet with showing where the funds came from? Uh to me I've been asking for that for a long time. Well, Mrs. Katz, I mean, I mean, fair question. You know, I I think at the end of the day, um, if that's something that we're interested in, I think RBTA could certainly probably still get that for us, right? Um, but I think more importantly, um, you know, yes, we would still be paying a cost per square foot for the space we're occupying um, for for rent um, as we should because we will be continuing to occupy them at least in the short term. Um, and at the end of the day, you know, um, frankly, that situation is a little bit more in line, I think, with what we've been operating under. They will actually own these properties. Now, I think the important thing to remember, uh, Mr. Grimes really I think kind of hit this point. Um and I think this is important for the public to realize as well when you look at the um stipulations in the deed that we have put in there um in terms of um it coming back to us should they not need it or they wanted to sell it that kind of thing. At the end of the day, you know, the the equity that the city has um the 20% is protected and at the end of the day when you think about these properties and the investment that the city at least has made with all due respect to RBTA and the investment that they have made in the feds have made um that's protected I think um which I think at the end of the day is what a lot of us were trying to figure out um

how we do and and and what we do that um what that looks like. So, um I I think like I said, I think RBTA can probably get that for us if we still need to see that. But it's kind of how I'd answer your question, Mrs. Katz. Um are there any other questions for members? All right. Can I see none then Mrs. Frank item 10, please? Mr. Allison. Yes. Mr. Mackey. Yes. Mr. Pizzy. Yes. Mrs. Catz.

Go ahead. Miss Millie. Yes. Mr. Ber. Yes. Mr. Yoder. Yes. Motion passes 6. Thank you, Mr. Rimes. RVT. Thank you for your uh collaboration as well. We appreciate it. Um, all right. I'm going to jump up to item seven. Mrs. Frank. resolution honoring Councilman Randall Allison for his distinguished service to the city of Williamsport. Is there a motion in a second? So moved. Second.

All right. Um so everybody is aware we had a municipal election this past year and for the first time in I think a few cycles there was an unfamiliar name not there was a familiar name not on the ballot and that was Councilman Randy Allison. Um and with with tradition of um departing members of council, um it's been our tradition and a good one to, you know, honor them with a resolution. Um and we're doing that here today. Um and for the record, I I'll read it in so that the public um and all of our attendees here can um hear what is in here. Um and uh we can do some recognition of Councilman Allison. So this is a resolution honoring Councilman Randall J. Allison for his distinguished service to the city of Williamsport. Whereas Councilman Randy Allison has faithfully served this the residents of our city with dedication, integrity, and distinction on city council from 2010 through 2026. And whereas Councilman Allison served with exceptional leadership as council president from 2019 through 2022, a period that encompassed unprecedented challenges including the CO 19 pandemic. And whereas during a time of significant transition with both the mayor's office and city council membership, Councilman Allison provided steady, reassuring leadership that guided our municipal government through changeable times. And whereas his calm presence and thoughtful approach to governance during the pandemic helped ensure continuity of essential city services and responsive decision-making when our community needed it most. And whereas throughout his tenure, Councilman Allison has been known for his wisdom and deliberation, his cander in discussion, and his gracious disposition in all interactions with colleagues, staff, and constituents. And whereas his commitment to transparent collaborative governance has set a standard that current and future council members will continue to

emulate and aspire to achieve. And whereas Councilman Allison has earned the respect and admiration of his fellow council members, city staff, and the residents he has served through his unwavering dedication to the betterment of our community. And whereas his contributions to our city's progress and his example of public service has left an undeniable mark on our municipal government and will continue to benefit our community for years to come. Now therefore, be it resolved that the city council does hereby express its profound gratitude to Councilman Randy Allison for his outstanding service, commends him for his exemplary leadership during challenging times, and extends its best wishes for his future endeavors, and be it further resolved that this resolution be spread upon the minutes of the city council, and that a certified copy be presented to Councilman Randy Allison as a token of his appreciation for his dedicated service to our city and its residents. um if I can just you know maybe offer some um comments um and and really thanks and gratitude to you Randy um because you're really somebody as I look back in serving with you for six years um you're really somebody that has impacted me um personally and professionally in a monumental way um because you've always really been in my corner Um, I when I when I moved back to the area, I got involved with the local committee. I remember sitting beside Deb, actually. Um, I see her grinning back there and nodding her head. Um, and and um, getting involved with with the committee. You were always really there as a resource for me and um, supporting me and, you know, a lot of things I was interested in trying to do. when I reached out to you to talk about running for city council, you were always there as a um as a resource and um as somebody

who was very supportive and insightful in the process. Um my first couple of years on council um where I will openly recognize that I probably wasn't the easiest to work with at times. Um you No, I I I mean I mean that um you handled a um a young upand cominging whippers snapper maybe um with with a lot of um poise um intelligence and grace um and I really never thought much about it until um I was fortunate to succeed you in in this seat um and and understand you know how impactful you have been and how valuable your approach to leadership was and what I when a lot of what I've tried to do in my time as council president has really been modeled after a lot of what I learned from you. Um and so I just I'm extremely grateful to be sitting here beside you for six years. Um and to have had you have my back for beyond six years. Um I I can't thank you enough. Um and I thank your family as well because you've served city council for 16 years. Um I I have no idea how you've done it. Um because it's No, this is this is hard.

Well, this is hard. She's sitting at the back of the room [laughter] and you served three terms on the school board before. Um your your dedication to this community is unmatched. Um and this community is better for it. So, thank you very much for everything you've done for the city, for the community, for me. Um I will not forget it and none of us will. You're very gracious. Thank you for those. Hey, Randy, you don't get the floor until the rest of us say something. You know how that goes. Said you don't get the floor until the rest of us say something. You know, [laughter] um up the floor for other members. Ma, please. You You have uh

Randy is allowed to have the floor first if he wants to do this on time. Don't expect it to happen on the budget, though. [laughter] Go for it. No, I I don't want to butt in. [clears throat] Go ahead. [laughter] Um, all right. That I'm that I'm taking the floor next because I'm usually the second biggest mouth on council after Adam, I think. Or maybe or maybe it goes the other direction. It's really hard to say. [laughter] Um, but I am the only person here who has served the entirety of her city council career with Randy

and will be continuing for an additional four years without him because somebody punked out early. [laughter] But he picked a good time because it means we got donut instead. But um I um I remember back when I first got on council that a nobody could have been more surprised than I was that I got elected. Um and it's possible that there were some people who were more dismayed than I was, but I'm not positive about that either. but that um for a brief time um actually no for quite a while after I got elected I was the only Democrat on city council

and I looked at uh everybody else on city council as kind of an entrenched Democrat from a from a a liberal family from for for generations. Um, I looked at everyone with a certain degree of suspicion and [laughter] um and uh and and some of them deserved it and but uh but I remember um thinking after getting to know Randy a little bit that I realizing that I had known his son Adam when we were in elementary school. Um and that Adam was one of the first kind of friends that I had in elementary school. We used to kick each other under the table at lunch. was a a really sweet relationship we had and and [laughter] uh and I thought, well, Randy, you know, um maybe maybe I should give him a chance even if he is a Republican. [laughter]

[gasps]

And um and it has turned out [sighs] there's something kind of remarkable about learning to to really love and respect someone with whom you share both everything in common and very little in common. Um Randy and I come from most of the same places. We have a lot of the same goals and we cherish um I think pretty much all of the same things as truths in our lives. Um and yet um there are there are very few things more different than in in some cases the way um the the way that those um inform our political views. And yet I have come to have uh more respect for Randy than anybody else I've ever um had the good fortune to know. And it has altered the way that I think um not just about Randy um and not just about um other uh people of of opposing political views on city council, but frankly everybody in in Williamsport and and sometimes even nationally. It it makes me give give pause and and take second thought about everything that I would have have leapt forward and judged in my life. Um, and that, uh, um, frankly, Randy, may not sound like the compliment that it is, but, uh, it it it takes a it takes a lot to make someone rethink the some of the bedrock, um, things that they held to be true in their lives. And, uh, and it takes someone who is thoughtful enough and kind enough to not jump in and call you a jerk. Um, or many of the many worse words that I use on a regular basis, despite the fact that I know that Randy doesn't like swearing. [laughter] Um, and I I uh I don't think that I could have been as as good a council person even as I have been. Um, and certainly not as good a person as I have been if it hadn't been for um getting to spend so much of my time with Randy over the last 16 years. And for the fact that uh poor guy had to have uh had even had to spend a couple of years, I think, with me as vice president in the middle of the pandemic when I had multiple children and was doing absolutely nothing. [laughter]

Um, anyway, I I I don't know exactly what I'm going to do without uh I don't know what any of us are going to do without Randy to hold us on an even keel and make us take a step back and stop leaping to conclusions and having strong opinions that aren't um based in the thoughtfulness um that comes from a a a sort of a radical approach to treating other people like decent human beings regardless of what you might be inclined to think of them at first. But um but I am going to attempt to not be so much of a hotthead moving forward, Randy, and to bring a little bit more of you into my daily interactions. And if I fail, Debbie is going to remind me, right, [laughter] that I have failed to take a step back because I I know she's capable of that. Thank you, Randy, for everything you've done for all of us. And and now uh I'm guessing that everybody else wants to also say those things, but you can steal the floor whenever you'd like.

Thanks, Liz. Don't know what to say. Uh Adam, if I could put my two cents in. Please, Mrs. Scottson.

Randy, you have been my rock. you I think you know every time I was ready to jump off the cliff with my what I wanted to see and do you were able to calm me down and also talk it out as far as what we were looking at and what we were doing. You have done that so graciously over the years. Um, that's what I would love to take away that I that you are the the the calmness, but you're also the intelligent one who has gone through an awful lot through through uh ups and downs with council and the administration. Uh, you know, how could we I don't think we can let you go. You're going to be here. I'm sorry, Randy, but I don't know how we can say goodbye to you because you have been the force behind that the table there. Um, please don't be a stranger, okay? Uh, stop and see us, okay? And um, also give us your hand on the shoulder and say, "Okay, it's going to be okay." And that and that's what I look for. I look for that we're being told that it's going to be okay, Randy. And that's how you've always handled it. So going to miss you sitting there, but I don't want to miss you. I would like you to still be there. So So take care, Randy.

Thank you, Bonnie. And [clears throat] we will stop by and see you as often as we can. If I may, um I think now it's going to be hard to follow up everybody else's statements, but um Randy, in the short shorter term and time that that I've had the privilege of, um sitting up here and serving with you, um you've taught me an awful lot about the person that um I I would like to be and the servant to the city that I would like to be. Um, up here I'm usually pretty quiet, but behind the scenes I think I'm pretty loud and pretty hotheaded and we all know it. And usually when that happens, Ry's the guy that I always call and um he is the steady, consistent rock that we always lean on. um his experience and his wisdom, his demeanor and have always helped kind of rain me in and bring some clarity to my to u my approach which is not always the uh the best one. But uh Randy, I'm going to miss you truly. I think um if everyone in this city aspired to be a little bit more like you, we'd be far better off. Thank you.

Thank you.

I'll go next since I'm right next to Vince here. I'm I'm going to follow up with what Vince said. Um calming. I think that's the the best word that can be used. And much like Vince, um, I've found myself the past six years. When I've been worked up about something and, you know, you have to make some calls and talk to people, you're the one that I would always feel better after I got off the phone with. And there's a a lot of times I'm not even sure you said much. You just let me vent and spew all the things I wanted to say. and and I I'm not even sure I ever asked your opinion, but so I apologize for that. But getting off the phone with you, I always felt better. Um, so I I just want to thank you for that. Um, unlike President Yodar, I know I've been very easy to work with the last six years. Um, and you're a Republican. I didn't realize that. Uh anyway, but just thank you so much for kind of quietly showing us all, especially us, Adam, myself, Vince, Eric, Dave Banks, previous, you know, all of these new

people showing us quietly how to do this job. So, thank you so much for that. And you will be missed, but uh I'm going to come see you at the grower market as much as I possibly can. So, You know, we're going to talk him into some kind of service. Oh, absolutely. Yeah, [laughter] we'll see him. That's actually a condition of his retirement, right? Talked him into that.

Um Randy, I've unfortunately had the least amount of time to serve with you on city council, only four years, but we've known each other a little bit longer than that. Um, from my mayoral run in 2019, you were extremely helpful when I came to you for advice just about how the process works and what issues were facing the city at the time. Um, and when I got elected to council, um, in 21, um, my thought was, what would Randy do? Um, again, as everybody has said, with that calming mentality that you have had throughout, um, you've been a great example for all of us, almost as a father figure on city council. Um, but just taking the moment to take a step back and not necessarily comment, but just give an opinion as to where you see things from and then letting us stew over things because it was almost like you were trying to pull us your way uh as you did that and it was greatly appreciated. So, thank you very much for that. And I will say that I am jealous of all of you that you've gotten to spend more time with Randy um as an elected official. Uh but as I said, a condition of your retirement is that you're not allowed to go away fully. And also the other thing that's very nice is the young man that got um elected in your seat has the same exact haircut. So we won't miss you that much.

[laughter]

I'll just everything is need needed to be said has been said, but I do just want to, you know, my first uh few years on city council, the two years I spent there, uh I had the privilege of sitting next to Randy. Uh that was an honor and a joy to sit next to him as I was learning uh sort of the uh the ways of city council. And then as President Yoda alluded to, uh Randy was president of council uh as I took over as mayor. And so we had uh I also had many many phone conversations uh with Randy during those during his time and I still do. Uh and it's been said that he's calm, he's measured, uh he's pragmatic uh and reasonable. Uh and I think in today's political climate uh we could probably use a few more Randy's. So that was appreciated over the years, I guess, uh, eight years now that I've worked with Randy uh, here in local government. Uh, and so I appreciate all the the words of wisdom and and, uh, listening here that he provided to me as well. And, uh, thank you for your service here to the city and uh, getting to know you and Dev over these these last eight years or so, a little bit more than I knew you a little bit before and uh, uh, getting to know you a little better now. It's been it's been a privilege and an honor. Uh, and like Councilman Mackey said, I'm sure I'll still see you around and see you at the market and other things that you're involved with. So, thank you.

Thank Thank you, Eric.

Um, I should just quit while I'm ahead here. So, um, yeah, I'm kind of overwhelmed here cuz I don't see myself like that. But, um, I'll take your words for it. Um, [snorts] it's it's been [clears throat] it's been a great experience. I mean, I I'm so thankful that I had the opportunity to to serve on city council and and be a part of of this our city and and the things that we've we've had to uh to work with and and do it. It it just uh kept confirming in my soul that it's it's really about people. It it's how we treat them, how we uh respect them and um and how we can reach out and help those uh that need it. And and I know that's the spirit of of all the the people on council and and in our administration. Um, we want our city to thrive and [clears throat] it's in great hands with with this group here. Um, I can say I love each and every one of you and I have felt like a dad [laughter] cuz I am a generation older than everybody else except Bonnie. and Bonnie and I are are uh com compatriots in all in all of this. Um and uh

it's been great. But uh in the words of um Kenny Rogers, the uh there's a time when you hold them and a time when you fold them. And there there's a time to walk away, walk away, and there's a time to run. And uh I really I know it's it's a song and we all probably wouldn't sing along with it, but um I I I felt in my spirit and soul that it it was time, you know, I I served here. I'm grateful for it. It it was uh enlightening in a lot of ways, but um it was time. I held him and I knew it was time to let go and uh I knew it was time to walk away, but I knew it was time not to run for city council again. [laughter] So, um nothing stays the same forever and and there has to be transition. Um there has to be uh new life come forth. I think it's in in public service. I think it's good to be cognizant of that that uh it's a privilege to to be here and it's a privilege to be a public servant. Uh but you don't own that. You you hold on to that and and try to to make things better for your city and for the people in it. But that doesn't mean you should be there forever. And I think uh we've seen some of that [clears throat] at at higher levels of government, but um I

like the way that that this group functions. So um I just thank everybody and God bless you all. Uh everyone I've u met in um in the administration has been just great. They're upstanding people. Uh we don't always agree on everything, but that that's how it should be cuz iron sharpens iron. Uh you don't get better if you don't get challenged. So um I'm just uh grateful for for everybody out here who's given their lives in time in uh times in in ways that that we don't I don't even imagine uh [clears throat] the stress and strain. So, uh, I thank you all and, uh, God speed.

Um, if you'll allow me, Randy, Janice, I want to give you an opportunity to, um, say a few things to Randy because I think you wanted to. Well, Randy, I've been with you 15 years here and known you forever, and I just I'm going to miss picking up the phone and going, "Randy, help me. They're making me crazy because you've been here so long with me." So, I'm going to miss that. But I know that you and I will keep talking. And I know we share a long history and our love and worship for Christ. So, I thank you for everything you've given me, too.

Yeah. Janice, you're um you're irreplaceable. the I think everybody on council would say that um the knowledge and uh and the research that you've done over the years um not just things that people on council or the administration have asked of you but the way you've embraced the position that you have. Um, but you've also embraced uh the people that you interact with and um I'll never forget that and but we will be crossing paths. Um I am half Italian so we have that together too. But um thank you so much Janice. You've meant a lot to everybody up here.

Very much so. Um, and if you'll allow me, if um, there's a few members of your family that are back there, if if uh, if you are so motivated, um, would love to welcome you to the podium if there's anything you any of you would like to share. But if not, it's it's all good. as well.

I think. Okay. All right. Okay. Here comes the law. Nothing prepared. I wasn't expecting to say anything, but um [clears throat]

I'm not an emotional person, but man, give me an opportunity [clears throat] just sorry. [clears throat] Having an opportunity to learn everything that they talked about that everyone has said something. I I was front and center for all of it and I'm so thankful for that. Um, I don't know if he would agree, but I think perhaps his years on the school board were sometimes at least as intense um and rough. And I was a K to2 student along with Liz in those years. And um seeing it unfold in my own classroom with my teachers and as as difficult as that was at times, I I loved it. And I'm I'm just thankful for the um [clears throat] the opportunity to be there and learn what service is. And um I mean I can only speak from my perspective as a public school teacher um I know that when you go to school to become a principal, one of the first things they teach you if the program is good is how to serve in order to be a good leader. And I I always just that always stuck with me with my dad and the people he worked with and continues to work with. He's very thankful to have the opportunity. He speaks very highly. So many people I'm seeing for the first time. It's pretty neat. Shame on me for not coming here as more often, but I read about in the paper every day and ask him as many questions as I can and want and I don't even live in the city, but I mean I was born and raised here as he was. Thank you for just the opportunity to be here and everything that I was able to do tonight and

thanks Adam. Love you, buddy. All right. Um any other um parting um comments before we um take our vote on our honoring resolution? We love you, Randy. I'm gonna abstain. [laughter] Mrs. Franklin want the vote for um for item seven, please. Mr. Mr. Allison, [laughter] Mr. Mackey, yes. Mr. Pizzy, yes.

Mrs. Catz, yes. Miss Millie, just to be clear, would a no vote mean he has to stay? [laughter] Unfortunately, no. Yes. Mr. Ber, yes. Mr. Yoder, yes. Motion passes 6 with one abstension. Let's give him a round of applause. And now in typical fashion for Randy, he has to sit around for another hour while we debate the budget [laughter] instead of getting to actually just leave and go have a fun somewhere.

I can do an hour. Let's keep it under if we can. Let's go. Um All right. Um, let's I I I don't know that there's anybody else from the public on an item. Um, so we'll try to go through order here. So, um, let's jump into item five. Mrs. Frank, ordinance adopting various operating budgets for the city of Williamsport, including the general fund, emergency and reserve funds, capital projects fund, city hall operating fund, liquid fuels, debt service fund, and act 13 in final reading. Is there a motion in a second? So move. Second. Miss Livermore, good evening.

Good evening, council. Um, as Janice just said, this is the final reading for the operating budgets um for 2026. Does anybody have any questions or comments?

Um, if the group would allow me, I I'll kick this off. So, um, this is the second reading of our um, our annual budget. Um, this passed um, unanimously in first reading. Um we we kind of hinted at I think a few conceptual changes that we wanted to discuss tonight. Um and so members of the administration just bear with us as we kind of do this and try to have a little bit of a dialogue on kind of where I think a number of our heads are at um as we kind of work through a few concepts. So um there were really I think two categories that a number of us had interest in exploring to kind of further position ourselves going into 2027. Uh both of those categories are in line with recommendations that PFM has publicly told us. Um the first is um changing contribution limits for um healthcare contributions for um employees that we're able to do and that's at will employees. Okay. Um and um there's a few dynamics related to that. So um I I was able to obtain some um guidance from PFM on what else do they see in other areas. And this is as much for the administration as it is for members of council here. um you know I I think in the municipal marketplaces I would say um the the contribution um uh areas are much different than I think what we're seeing generally um with our union and non-UN employees um I think it's anywhere from 10 to 15 level percentage contributions we're we're at I think um correct me if I'm wrong Jamie are um 135 range across non and unionized.

Correct. Yes. Some pay from $0 all the way to um 5%. Yeah.

So um in looking at that concept um there are a few different ranges that um were kind of floated to me through PFM and that we already kind of have established from a precedent that I thought are worth discussing in that um that realm. um PFM, you know, had suggested or or at least validated the concept of like a 57 setup or a 710 would be a really good balance in getting closer to where I think their recommendation in spirit is and not getting so far as to where we're creating this massive shock um to employees in getting closer to the open marketplace. Um the other thing for us to remember um is our elected officials are already contributing more. Um so mayor, controller, treasurer, council members until January 1 when insurance is no longer available are doing a 510 5% individual and correct me if I'm wrong Nick and Jamie 10% family or is it 10% of the difference? It's 10% of the difference between family and individual coverage, which is slightly lower than 10.

So, there's a few different um levels that I think you could we could make an argument for in in doing that. Um and then I'll [clears throat] I'll open the floor for thoughts from members after this one as well. So, the way that um I I it took me a few days to understand this a little bit better. So, Jamie, thank you for your help in that process. Um, and I, and again, I'll reiterate, thank you for your help with this overall budget. It's a lot of work. Um, I know you're putting in a lot of late hours, and I I think I can confidently speak for the group. We're very grateful for it. Um, so, um, the way that the budget is set up, um, the cost is reflective of the overall actual cost. the actual is where we actually would see the savings and the contribution. So, um I think we could implement that a couple of different ways. We could actually make line item changes. Something more cleaner I'll throw to the group as well is we could pass a resolution um noting and setting a policy for at wills to start. that's what we have control over um to be contributing more in this budget as well. So, I'll I'll kind of open the floor and just gauge a couple different things. Is there is there um is there a consensus on a level um as well as is this something we want to pursue now or in January if at all still? Personally, I don't I I don't uh feel like I would pursue this just yet. I think I would rather wait. You know, we've we've worked pretty hard on the on

this budget, making changes, trying to um find savings, working on equitable contracts. I mean, we're working on everything all the way around. Um, and I just uh it's my personal feelings that even with the PFM recommendations, which on paper in theory sound, they're they're very sound right now and will work toward fiscal equity across the board. I just worry about the financial impacts that this could have on some of our atwill employees. Yeah. At least at this current time. Fair. So,

um, any any other feedback from the group, Miss Meing? Um I I I think because I um to return to the PFM recommendations, uh the vast majority of city employees can contribute significantly less to their health care than most um public employees across the state. Um and so with that in mind, I think that it is only appropriate that we begin moving toward a higher level of health contri healthcare contributions from individual employees. That said, um I'm with Vince in the sex in the sense that it doesn't strike me as the world's best Christmas present. [laughter]

And um so uh I would suggest that we work on passing a resolution in the beginning of the year implementing a change like this perhaps mid year next year and that we uh that is to say give ourselves a six-month grace say this is something we want to work on engage in some discussions with employees who will be impacted and say this you know um but give people a little bit of time for it instead of making it something that that hits on the 1 of January and and completely modifies what you thought who understood about your your upcoming year. Um things like, you know, vacations have already been planned that might be impacted by um healthcare contributions.

Certainly. Um so um in part because I think that it will improve our ability to negotiate with um our unions moving forward on this issue and in part because um I think that it is one of the more equitable ways to help our employees understand the cost of health care to um to the city and give them a level of buyin in the in the insurance coverage that we're purchasing and the the kind of coverage that they want and the kind of and and what is cost effective for them. I I I think that it's a wise decision, but I think that we should,

like I said, begin discussions on that in the new year, do our resolution, and look to have it land sometime in June or July as something that's a bit more equitable equitable to give everyone time to adjust to the proposed change.

Certainly. Um and and and look to be candid, I mean I I I appreciate both of the feedback on the the employee side of it. I mean and and look at the end of the day um you know this this is really the difficult part of this process, right? When we're looking at trying to fix some systemic things um and trying to um build as big of a as as good of a bridge as we can um between now and hopefully getting into a better position in a couple years. like this is the kind of stuff that is really hard to to go through and discuss. So I um I I certainly appreciate that perspective. I I agree. I I could be on board with

trying to d because frankly this is of the two categories. This is the a much more of a moving target. There's a lot more to this, right? this is a lot larger scale of a change um compared to um the the attrition concept that um PFM had also said that we can discuss here in a minute as well. So um any other comments from from other members? Mr. Ber, I just have a quick question for the administration. When was the last time that our healthcare has been put out to bid?

Um I think it was two years ago. I think it was when when Molly was here, but um I think we discussed this in the last meeting. Donna and I have talked about um she plans to do it beginning to mid year next year. Okay. An RP would be put out. There's time restraints when it comes to the healthcare. So, you have to do it I think before you have to have some sort of something before June 30th in order to make sure you're compliant with your current provider.

All right. So, a resolution with some six-month lead time would actually coincide with that plan very well. So, then employees, they would probably see a change in health care costs anyway. The city would because typically when you shop that around, you might see a lower rate um for the first two years if you sign a 5-year contract with that. So, it might be a net neutral uh for those employees and then it would be a much slower ramp up for that. Any other comments? I like that.

Okay. Um, so get into next year looking at middle of the year is where do some more ground work leg work on that in collaboration with the administration and revisit that late spring of next year. Yeah. Is what I'm hearing. I think we should try to revisit it earlier than that. Well, I mean I mean with the idea of getting it through sometime late spring, early summer, right? Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. Um any other comments on that item? All right. Um so the other broad category that PFM had noted um is the concept of attrition, right? Um and and again this is also a difficult one. um that I don't think any of us like I don't like at all, but um it's something that I think we need to talk about and discuss and see um if it makes sense. Uh and with the concept of notably um positioning ourselves as best as we can for 2027, right? The bridge strategy that Gordon outlined was a two-year strategy. Um, and with what I expect to pass later in the meeting with home rule, getting us to a point where we can hopefully get that implemented and provide some revenue flexibility to where we can then make up some of these things we've had to do to get from point A to point B. Okay. So, um, these are a lot more um, black and white from a technical budget perspective. All right. All right. So, I'm going to make a motion, a couple motions here, and I don't want to freak out anybody in the administration because like if if the consensus is to not do anything, I can resend the motion, right? Uh I'm making the motions just to start the dialogue. Okay. Um so, I'm going to make a motion um to reduce a firefighter first year by 0.3 impacting the salary, FICA, health, life, workers comp line items. It will only impact salary and FICA.

Only salary and FICA. So for now, yeah, that's all we we do because the others would pass on. Is there a second to that motion? I'll second the motion.

Okay. Um, so Chief Unst, I believe there's a potential retirement coming in 2025. No, 2020, sorry, 2026. So next year. Um and that three was the conceptually meant to try to backfill that potential retirement, right? Um and so by removing that.3 of a staff member that would eliminate um the replacement should that individual retire enacting the concept of attrition in your department. um from what I've kind of gathered throughout the week from um some feedback I've gotten from other members of council um and indirectly through the administration, I think we can manage in the department by making that move. I I mean and again I I recognize it's not not not optimal, right? But um that's a little bit of the background on that. Okay.

I think uh doing so yeah if you don't mind popping up here. Yeah. Thank you chief. I appreciate it by the way.

So I think uh eliminating that position is going to have an impact on the regionalization efforts that we're trying to make. Um we we're already trying to do it with limited manpower now. So I mean if if we eliminate that position that is going to create significantly more overtime as well. So um I I I will stand here and tell you um I understand where you're coming from, but I I think it's a huge mistake.

Okay. Um the the mayor has uh since I've been chief uh the mayor has increased us by three personnel which has been a tremendous help. Um so losing anyone is is very detrimental especially right now when we're entering into these regionalization talks and efforts. So um I I would hope that you would uh definitely reconsider and find other sources. Yeah. No, and and look, I I I appreciate that again, like we're not voting on the motion yet, right? And again, these changes are a lot more concrete from a or straightforward from a technical perspective in in how they work in the budget compared to the earlier piece that we talked about that that's a lot more um has a more complexity from a line item, you know, budget composition perspective, right? Um, are there any comments or questions on that motion from members? And and and look, I mean, I'll say this as well, like again, I when I don't know that I I I I understand where you're coming from. Um, and I mean this truly, I I I don't like it. Okay. Um, and I know that you recognize why we're talking about it. It's about hope hopefully it's temporary, right? Hopefully, it's a temporary two-year um strategy to help us solidify that bridge to where we get the revenue flexibility to where we can hopefully not only bring it back, but as that regionalization effort takes off, staff it as the way it should, as the way it would need to be, right? that that's the that's the root of why we're discussing this.

Sure. So, if I can ask just one question, why is it always the fire department that is is faced with layoffs? Um, obviously in 96 we were laid off, they laid eight firefighters off, never replaced them. In 97, I believe it was, they laid eight more off, they were never replaced. Um I believe it was 2008 2009 somewhere in that area 2010 um there was threats of not threats but um possible elimination of two firefighter positions and and that now uh this year we're looking at not replacing I mean no layoffs but you know elimination of a position. Um if you could just answer that I would I would greatly appreciate that. No, certainly. I mean, and look, so I I I don't have the the institutional context that you do to start off, right? Um so I really appreciate where you're coming from and understand, you know, the the frustration, right? I I can't really answer those questions um about history, that kind of stuff. What how I would answer that question is um first off, you're not the only department that we're going to have a dialogue about. Okay. Um secondly, as I mentioned, I I I think in my mind and I think in everybody else's mind, this is really a temporary measure,

right? um to and and this is a temporary measure that does not um we're not I don't I don't know how to say this the the appropriate way. You kind of alluded to it, right? It's it's attrition which is we're not firing or or cutting people we're we're not replacing and temporarily, right? Um and and like I said, I I mean this um because I've voted to hire new new firefighters. Most of us have, right? [snorts] Um

and and I think that vote reflects, hey, like we we get the challenge that your department faces from a staffing perspective. Um, and I think that reflects the desire of this to be a temporary measure in getting us to as good of a position we can be in going into 2027. And if we can get to where we want to go with the revenue flexibility, we backfill that position. And again, as the regionalization effort, that is excellent that you should be commended for, you should be commended for, and your department should be commended for. um continues to take root, we can be in a much better position to staff that as it needs to be and as we want it to be. So I I don't know that that addresses the frustration that you have that I understand and sympathize with, but um I I mean it it it's it's a hopefully a temporary measure to better position us as we go into the 2027 budget because at the end of the day, the feedback that I got from PFM when I talked to them about a couple of these concepts is look what your budget looks like today is um this is a great 2026 budget in the bridge concept compared to what we thought it was going to be, right? However, we're using a lot of one-time things or reserves that we don't want to continue too long and get too far behind, right? capital. Um we're going to be limited in being able to dip into our emergency reserve multiple years because of the good work that we're seeing with the levy, right? So, it's really a balancing act of trying to put this together. And frankly, in the 2027 budget, um I'll be shocked if we don't see more of

these things. And if we don't do some of these things now, it's going to be harder in 2027. um for all of us and that includes your successor, right? It includes all of the firefighters in there. So, I I I don't know if that addresses your question, a legitimate question, but that's how I would answer that if that helps. Chief, it it helps me understand, but it it absolutely like it's a stab to the heart. I understand. And it's it does us, too.

Yeah. I I just I I think that there are other ways that we can we can uh come up with be creative and come up with other uh other ways to handle that. So, Mr. Mr. Ber or Miss Mill?

Yeah. I I I think what all of us are hoping, Sam, is that we can um we if and when we know that we can make the leap to becoming a home municipality and implement some of the financial reforms that come along with that as a possibility, um we can begin to look at reforming the budget with an eye toward having enough funding to um to not that any of this is excess. We all know that the city has always has been bare bones for a long time. But I think the point is that we can't deplete our reserves to the point that we don't have enough bridge funding to pay, you know, our um to pay our employees the first couple of months of the year that we have to take out a loan. We we hemorrhage money that way. Um, so the the the best approach that we can come up with is to try and be maybe not draconian but but close to it right now with hopes that in um hoping that by May of 27 we we find ourselves in a position where we can begin adding positions back in because we know where we are financially and we know that we are

more comfortably more comfortable financially. But if I I think that Adam's right. I I I mean I am the the council person who's been preaching increasing taxes for the last four years to to a room full of nos. Um but we have to do one of two things. We either have to raise taxes to meet our um financial needs in the current government system that we're in or we have to cut um we have to cut positions until we find ourselves in a better financial position. um if the will is not there on the part of the administration and on the part of my fellow members of council to increase taxes above what's proposed, then we have to meet um we have to meet that by by cutting back on staffing until we get to a point where we're more secure financially. Um and I think that is the the genesis of this. That is what we we there there were multiple things that we heard and um sorry, for some reason I just keep getting sicker right now. [laughter] So if I sound grally, I'm both it's both gravitas and then also the fact that I that I came here with a cold. Um but uh um the recommendations of PFM were for attrition in a handful of city departments um for increased contributions to health care um which we can only make a possibility in specifically in Atwell employees because the rest are negotiated through contractual agreements with our unions and for an increase in taxes larger than the one that's proposed in the current budget. Um we have uh taken we are working to take as many of those recommendations as we can because we need to position the city hopefully in a couple of years time to kind of leap back into the fray with um with a with a solid financial footing and we can't do that without adopting as many of those recommendations as possible.

Yep. Yeah. So what I would like to ask you from a level of understanding um with the regionalization efforts that are going on, how do you see this? Obviously manpower and overtime you see an increase in that, but how is this position integral to this the success of that? Is it something that it's a third of a person? Yes, it's zero. It's 0.3 assuming that correct me if I'm wrong, chief. the the individual retires um at some point mid to late next year and that person would be going through the academy and would not be a like come on to be operable correct

until the end of next year. Correct. Correct. So I I believe that the the individual who is retiring retire actually retires January of 27. Okay. Okay. Okay. So the third is hire. What we have been doing for several years um is when we know somebody's leaving early in the year or late in the year, we hire for the preceding. So whether it's the spring academy or the fall academy, um we hire for that academy so that they're there and as soon as um that person retires, they're on the floor, they're already working. we don't miss a beat. Right. So, so you have the overlap right

there. Um, so really what we'd be looking at is an issue in 27 with our regionalization efforts and staffing efforts and so on because we would be down at that point with having somebody at academy. Correct. So, like I was saying, uh, this individual who is retiring in 27, he retires, I believe, right around the same time, I believe, January 11th, same as me, um, of 27. And then we would not hire probably until February until they get out of the academy. It would be closer to mid to late May till they get out of the academy. So there would be um several months there where there's that position isn't filled.

Okay. So all right. Um I appreciate you explaining that just a little bit more so I could understand how that works for you guys specifically. Um the next question that I have is with regards to the academy. Do we get any kind of reimbursement from from the state? No. For the academy? No, not for the fire department. Okay. So the fire department's footing the whole bill for that. Correct. Okay, Adam. Adam, it's Bonnie.

Chief, you've been working on this regionalization for several years at this point. Um, I'm hoping that Okay, you're you said your your retirement is going to be January 2027. I hope the person that is going to fill these awfully big shoes uh is going to be able to take the you know what you have started and and go full force with this because I think this is where the smaller townships are going to be going as we have all talked about that is with regionalization. So, you know, hopefully that's the way it's going to be. And I don't want to lose the the education, the everything that goes on with you, chief, because you've, like I said, you've worked your tail off for this. So, uh, and that's all I have to say right now. So, Mrs. Katz did make one one comment about the the local uh, rural smaller departments. Um it's not just the rural smaller departments, it's every department. Every single department um volunteer fire department in Pennsylvania, they are leaving by the droves. Um so when we used to when when we were reduced by 16 back in the '9s, um we did there were volunteers that would come in and help and kind of ease that burden. But today, um, we're there there's around 13,000 volunteer firefighters who are certified to go into a burning building and put the fire out. Okay. Um, as opposed to back in the 70s, there were 300,000. So, it is a massive decrease in the number of people who are volunteering. And it's not just the volunteer fire service, it's it's organizations as

well, as many of you all know. Um but they rely on us more than what we rely on that but we absolutely rely on our volunteers as well. Um it's common place now for seven or eight fire companies to be dispatched to a fire, you know, and if we can't re, you know, and that's on a first alarm, that's a working box. um if we can't provide that to ourselves, we can't expect them to to come in and and help as well. So um to to that extent, I should say. So I I I would really hope that you would you would look at it, reconsider and and find alternative means.

Um thank you for that. Thank you for the dialogue so far. Um Mr. Mr. Ber, Miss Millie, thank you for the questions, comments. You have another one?

Um, I do. And this is more of a question for the administration as a whole, specifically the mayor, obviously. Um, Sam, you've got um 30 days. So, it's more of a question for whomever your replacement may be. But the fire department, nobody questions what you do. Obviously, you only have 13,000 people in the state that do the job that you do and are qualified to do the job that you do. So, you're a rare breed of individual and we thank you for that. But is there a way from the administration standpoint that we could look at getting some value added from the fire department? We've talked a little bit offline, but I'll say this publicly now about potentially having the fire department assume the role of codes in the future so we can look at how we can, again, tough pill to swallow down the road, but how can we do that and then have the complement of officers that we need in the fire department, but also get other things done? And I know you you've said to me before the amount of calls that you guys go on throughout the course of the year continues to increase, but the number of fire calls decreases. And that's a testament to the job that you guys are doing going out doing prevention um rental inspections that get done and so on. But um again, how can we see that value added potentially in the future? Open-ended question. I'm not looking for an answer right now, but it's something that I think we should seriously consider going forward.

Any other questions, comments on the dialogue in the in the in the fire staffing? Mr. Pizzy, please.

No, not not necessarily. Um well yeah I would put a question out there but it's a very broad question that um you know I encourage all of us to think about right now and I've said it several times as we are encountering you know these tough financial situation and we are trying to better prepare ourselves um as we look a couple years down the road to be successful when we consider what we're asking for right now in the back of our heads and again I every department. Is it necessarily a a a need or is it more of a want? Um, and sometimes it is difficult to really think about what we can do without until we actually do without it for a little bit and then we realize, hey, you know what? It's not easy. It's going to be a struggle, but we can get by, at least for now, until we can get things fixed, right? Um, and that's kind of my approach at least with everything, Chief. So, um, obviously we all, again, we all voted for your for your firefighters. We all recognize the value that your department brings to the city and to the services and to the safety and everything. So, the decisions that we make right now are purely just we understand what we want. How can we afford it, right? So, it's it's it's purely us being 100% objective. And again, to Councilman Yodar's point, your department isn't the only one that we will be looking at,

but we're the first one. [laughter] Sorry. I I that that wasn't I mean, to be honest with you, it was the it was the first thing [clears throat] on my phone that I could reference. That's why we're talking about you first. It's not intentional at all. So, Um, any other questions? Mr. Mackey, please.

Um, well, Councilman Ber, thank you for your question. That was going to be my question is could you give us a little more information on how this might affect the regionalization effort and you did answer that. Um, but to go a little bit farther, um, I'm assuming there's more to come. Is is there a a a broader plan outside of what we've seen already in terms of regionalization? Um and to Councilwoman Cat's point, you're you're going to be gone soon. Is there a groundwork laid for whoever follows you to continue the the amazing work that you've been been doing in that in that in that vein? Yes, there's there's a lot more um opportunities um for regionalization efforts. Um I I think that um ultimately uh we may be bringing back I don't know if many of you remember the Galisa concept um which included several municipalities meeting together. Um, for some reason I wasn't involved, but for some reason it it fell apart. I I don't know why, but um, you know, I've talked to a lot of uh, chiefs from surrounding departments. uh Chief Kenny, myself, Chief Keith, when when Chief Keith was working, um we we talked to several fire chiefs and one of the things that I heard the most was about this Gleasa concept and how that was so beneficial and they wish that they could that could be brought back in in a concept. Um but as far as uh my successor um I know Chief Kenny is is

very wellversed on it. Um and I know um a few other candidates are also uh wellversed in uh the regionalization efforts. So um well thank thank you. Um I think again to the thing the things that are giving me pause right are you we all respect you. I've had the opportunity to work with you side by side to help plan some events and sat in the mobile command unit with you at several events and um so to hear you stand up there and say I think you're making a huge mistake that has a a big impact on me because you're in a position um an important position and I think we all have a lot of confidence in your abilities to perform the job of chief. So when you say something like I think you're making a huge mistake that that has a a big impact on me, right? Um but then what Councilman what President Yoder said too is also true. Like we we hired PFM, they came in, attrition was one of the things on their list. Um and and yes, this this bridge this idea the bridge has been passed and has been talked about, right? that this bridge is being built to get us to hopefully to home rule, but there's no guarantee that that's going to happen. Um, and if it doesn't happen, that's what Councilman Yod is talking about. Then things really could get worse on on a lot of different levels. Um, so that's also my fear. Um, so I think that's, you know, and to just take, I guess, take it a step further, you know, it's unfortunately these kind of conversations

that probably should be happening much sooner, and I'll take credit for that. I'm not calling you and talking to you about this until now. Um, Captain Ataviano, you you mentioned that in the email that you sent today. Um, and I I really appreciated that email. It was a um, surprising email to get um, in a good way, a good surprise. Um, and and that email is also giving me pause because I look at you guys as the same same way. You know, we we trust you that you're doing the right things, not only for your department, but for the city. So, these these type of things are are really easy to talk about on the phone when you're just looking at a spreadsheet, but that when you get here um in a situation like this and not because people are watching you, but because you're actually talking to each other um you know, I just I wonder um much like the health insurance if this is something that we maybe hold off on. um to to let the idea of regionalization maybe come to fruition and maybe see, you know, with item 15, this push towards home roll, you know, see where that goes

with with the understanding that if it if it doesn't work, then these are conversations that we're going to be having again this time next year. Um and and there probably won't be a Hail Mary that that can stop the things that we need to do. So that's that's kind of where I'm at right now. So um I don't I don't think I would vote to to eliminate this.3 position tonight. Um, and that's just that's again that's just the things that have been going through my head. So,

yeah. And look, if I can piggyback on some of your comments, John, like again to to bring this back to how I tried to kick this off, like I I don't want anybody to think that any of us think that this is just a black and white easy decision here, right? It is not. Um I think all of us at one point or another um in the past few years have when when we when we individually talk regalization everybody's eyes light up right like we all have been passionately supportive of the concept right um and that's not the only thing that makes this dialogue hard and this decision hard um and and frankly six years into this this is the hardest part of this job it is every right? Um for a number of reasons, but um we're operating under I would say a pretty flawed process, right? Um with timing and when it all happens and that's really driven by the the the third class charter, right? Um and so and honestly, it's also hard having these conversations, but it's good that we're doing it like this, I think. think I mean look it's it's hard to to do the homework behind the scenes on these big things right each of us only have limited time right um and and frankly doing the homework on your end takes away from the other big stuff you need to be doing too so like all of this is difficult and hard so um there's there's a lot of things I think macro level that make it hard for us make it hard for you all like I it's I I completely get that. Um, so, um, yeah, this is this is this is tough. I don't like this part of the job at all, and I know you don't either. And, um, we're we we're in we're in the trenches together on that one for sure. Right,

Mr. Ber? So, a point that I'd like to just bring up to my fellow members, um, and then also to you, Sam, should we leave this in the budget and we're presented with the opportunity to approve a new hire later in the year, we do not have to approve that new hire. So, leaving it in may not be the worst result at this point because again, it's it's the idea of it. Um, however, what I will say, and I mentioned this before when we talked about the regionalization with South Williamsport, um, should we leave it in, I will say that the reporting and the tracking of that process must be done for us to have those hard numbers come uh, September or um, whenever the hire would come before us. So we can actually make a very informed decision, an educated decision as to whether or not it is in our best interest to go ahead and hire that individual so we can see that value. [snorts] Miss Millie,

I would suggest the opposite actually that if we cut this position now, it is an issue that we could return to later in the year when we may have a higher level of certainty, at least some slightly higher level of certainty about our funding situation in a couple years time. Um, I would never feel comfortable with the fire department coming to us with someone in hand to hire and us saying, "No, I'm sorry. You can't hire that guy. Like, you went through the whole interview process. You figured everything out." And uh, but we're sorry. We actually don't have the money to to do that right now. Um, but I think but I would feel comfortable with the idea of the fire department coming and saying, "Hey, now is when we would move forward on the idea of a new hire. Do we think that we could um amend, you know, our our budget for this, you know, um and and permit this new hire, that we could shuffle some funds, that we could um find a find a way to fund it? Um, that's I don't think that either one of those is a great option, but I would feel more comfortable, I think, uh, cutting the position and perhaps returning to it later in the year because that to me is is better than than them going out for a hiring list and and bringing names in and going through the process of betting someone and then we shoot it down because we don't have the money after,

which if I may add, under Mayor Campana, that had happened twice. uh like the Friday before the guy was supposed to start on Monday. Yeah. Yeah. Let's not do that. [laughter] Well, I mean, I think to Miss Mey's point, um it it forces all of us to revisit the the idea, the concept, what's the data telling us earlier in the process? Um and that's all of us. That's not just the administration, that's council, right? Um, there's a better level of mutual accountability through what you're saying, Miss Millie. I probably lean your way, but

yeah, hats off to both on on one on one. I I I don't have any ideas here. I don't have any beef with the idea of us looking at this in six months time and saying, "Ah, we screwed up. Sam's got some numbers." We very well could. Yeah, we very well. Um, like I'm, you know, cuz I think that there is a solid case to be made in both directions, but I think I would rather, no offense, Sam, uh, that the onus was on the fire department to prove to us why they needed the new hire, [laughter] um, rather than rather than it getting to some nth degree and us looking like real jerks on on a bunch of fronts by saying that we actually can't afford it after all. Yeah. Okay. Mr. [clears throat] Alice,

just uh briefly, Chief, um [snorts] could you just uh explain what effect it would have uh like immediately or soon after if that position isn't filled? Well, number one, um, when that position is vacated by the the firefighter who's retiring in January of 27, um, that position would, like I had explained earlier, that position would go unfilled for several months.

Um, during that time, uh, trying to bring, uh, we maintain seven on duty at a minimum. Now, seven is more than ha or I'm sorry, less than half of what the National Fire Protection Association recommends um for a regular house fire. Yesterday, we had a house fire on Rose Street

um which had burnt back on July 4th of 2020. um that was very labor intensive back in July of 2020 because it was a very hot day and we had several uh personnel going down because of the heat stress. Um so the this year we've had two two of our firefighters who have um who have had shoulder surgery. We had one go out on military extended military leave and at the beginning of the year we lost one of our lieutenants who passed away. Um and that we weren't we didn't account for that person. So you know we didn't account for losing that person. So on on the immediate side of that of of not hiring um you know it's going to increase overtime because you have two guys off. there's going to be one platoon with um seven guys and if there's two guys off then every time they will need to to hire overtime. Um when I say two guys off um for vacation they can only take two I'm sorry only two individuals can be off at once um for vacation. So you know it it's definitely going to increase the overtime just that one person. Um, and if I may add, there was a study done, I believe it was San Diego, this was several years ago. Um, but one of the study, this study compared hiring new personnel versus maintaining and paying overtime. At some point, that that hiring somebody is less expensive than um paying the overtime. So that please just keep that in mind as well. So uh

does that answer your questions?

Yeah. Yes. Yeah, that gives me more context. Um I I tend to [clears throat] uh to agree with that. Um I I just see it as uh more of a necessity. Um because our our long-term goal is to have regionalization and and that's going to answer problems uh financial problems I believe. Um that that we're looking for. So um yeah, thank you.

Welcome, Chief. The one thing that that hasn't been brought up uh is that since we are helping uh townships and other other areas, they don't have the amount of training that our firemen have. So therefore, uh from what I understand, I don't know if that's changed. If you could tell me if it's changed or not, but you know, uh not having the same training could also be uh a challenge.

Absolutely. Um, so I I'm not going to sit here and say that, you know, all volunteers have more or have less training than what our paid staff do. Our paid staff, uh, like we had talked about, goes to the academy and they get uh, several months of training um, that's pertinent to their their position. The volunteers, it takes it can take several years to get to that point. the same point that it takes our guys seven month or several months um to reach. But uh ultimately um we do this on a day in and dayout basis. Every day we are doing it. Um and that's a lot different than as a volunteer. When I was a volunteer, we my department ran 186 calls a year. you know, we run 186 calls probably in about two weeks. Um, so there there's a huge difference in in a volunteer department and a paid department. And you know, like I said, we utilize those volunteers. So, um, yes, there there is a difference in training. Um, but there are several volunteer firefighters out there who go out and get that training. Um but ours our personnel they get that training right up front right away. So that that is a huge difference.

I said it's a big difference and someone's life can depend on that also. Absolutely.

Mr. Pizzy, thank you. Chief, if I may ask, um I forget which which one of my colleagues asked you if there was a plan in place to continue on the efforts of regionalization after you're gone. Are you able to expand or elaborate a little bit more, talk to that a little bit more? Because quite honestly, I'm kind of I'm on the fence right now where I'm at. I recognize where we're at financially. um if this is a want or a need. Uh but I also see and recognize the work that you've done um to begin the regionalization process. Um we we desperately need to to regionalize our public safety services. It is it needs to absolutely happen. Um and I know you began that process. I also know that your department did um uh come to uh some some hard truths and to some realizations this year with your department's bargaining agreement that they came to uh work as a partner with the city realizing where we are where we are at financially and I greatly appreciate what you have done. So, um I I kind of want to allow the uh the position to stay in the budget right now just to see what happens. Let things kind of of um continue on to see the the fruits of the labor, but for me to really feel a lot more confident in that position. I'd like to hear a little bit more from you. Who's going to continue on the efforts of regionalization and what does that look like a little bit more?

Um so, I right now I I can't uh speak on who would be doing that. Um, I think it would be a concerted effort on behalf of the whole department. Um, whe the the next chief, the next deputy chief, um, the union itself, um, they're all part of it. Every single member of the Williamsburg Bureau of Fire is part of the, um, regionalization efforts. Um, we we have several members who, um, are involved in the the east end of the county. We have members who are me up in the west end of the county um all over um the northern tier.

So um like I said, every member is is working diligently on on opening those lines of communications with the other chiefs, the other departments, and the other firefighters um you know outside of the Williamsport Bureau of Fire. Okay. Thank you. And just as Councilwoman Mey is is more apt to fall in line with Council President Yod's perspective, I'm more apt to agree with Councilman Ber's approach um in that

we can keep it there and that later on if you if we see we have the need we could still take that we could do that if we have to but that would definitely uh we would have to make sure that we are having constant and effective communication. I I think that uh whoever my successor is um I do believe that that person along with our administrative aid Renee um Smith, she or they would be able to put together a monthly report that would be able to show you exactly, you know, how many times um South Williamsport is staffed um their squad truck. um how many times we've been over there, how long we've been over there, you know, the number of hours that we dedicate over there, those kinds of things. Um [snorts] whether we're over there for incidents or we're over there for um pre-planning buildings and hydrant familiarizations, road uh familiarization. So I I definitely think that that's something that is absolutely doable. So, uh, we we can definitely do that and we can, um, share that with, uh, we'll send it over to Janice and then she can distribute it to you guys or, um, we would be able to send it out, uh, individually.

Thanks, Chief. You bet. Any other comments or questions or just Yes, please. Sorry, I know. Just one. Um, I [clears throat] just I just think it's important to for me personally just to note that, you know, uh, Council President Yod and I have had several conversations about this on the phone. Um, and I I I generally was in favor of of both of the things that we're talking about right now or the one that we're going to be talking about next. Um, and I just I I didn't think it was I don't want to I never want to leave you out on an island. Um, and I don't want anyone to think that this is Liz's camp or Vince's camp or Adam's camp. And

we're we're all in this together. And and Adam, I I you you you specifically um put a lot of time into this to this job and and um I have a lot of appreciation for that. Um I don't want you to think that I don't. I think that you know that I do. Um, but I think the thing that you another thing that you said is that yes, this is a part-time job for us. Um, and this to me, you know, this conversation is has brought to light the fact that we need better conversation. We need better lines of communication between ourselves and the administration. And um, but you know, these these are the times when I really feel like um, we need to trust in the people that are doing this full-time. um and and know that they have the city's best interest um at hands and you know so anyway I just I just wanted to say thank you for bringing this conversation to to light because it's not an easy conversation to have and nobody likes to have the finger pointed at them as the as the the person or the group of people that that want to pick on the fire department or pick on police department because that's not what we're here to do. We're all here to try and accomplish the same thing. So, um anyway, yeah, thank you.

I appreciate it very much. So, any other comments or questions? All right. Um we have a motion and a second to make Go ahead, please. Could you re refresh what the motion? Yeah. So the the motion that we're debating is doing a reduction of a of a of a firstear firefighter by the value of 0.3 and it reflects attrition, right? Not eliminating an an existing employed today staff member.

That is the motion. So a yes vote would be a vote to reduce. A no vote would be a red a vote to stay. Yep. It's been a little bit. So, that's a fair that's a very fair point. Um, all right. I'm gonna call for the vote, Mrs. Frank. And I'm just going to call for the vote, but I also recognize that it may not pass, and that is fine. That's part of this process, right? Um, so, Mrs. Franklin, the uh motion to amend. Mr. Allison, no. Mr. Mackey, no. Mr. Pizzy, no.

Mrs. Catz, no. Ms. Millie, yes. Mr. Ber, no. Mr. Yoder, yes. Um, motion fails 52, right? Um, and as much as we debated that one, um, I'm going to make a motion for another one.

Mhm. Because while I expect the debate to be a little bit shorter and more streamlined because there's some carryover what we just talked about, we also need to explore um the other opportunity in the budget. Um and so I'll make the motion um to reduce um a a one full um police officer first year um impacting by one impacting salary FICA. Correct. Right. Um is there a second? Second

motion and a second. Um and again so um similar route as to that motion, right? Um it is a recommendation from PFM. Um and not an easy one by any means. And the idea is to see if it makes sense to help position us just a little bit better for the 2027 budget. Um, and so, um, same background, same concept. I'll open up the floor for comments, questions. Um, and I'll also, um, Captain Otavio, thank you for the information as well. Um, valued, appreciate it, very insightful, notably as we have a dialogue tonight about that particular motion as well. So, thank you very much for that. It was helpful and and welcomed. AB:

Absolutely. Um, are there any comments, questions from members on the the motion? Uh, please. I mean, if if you would um the information you provided in the email to city council. Yes, there's a lot of good stuff in there. Could you for the record just kind of summarize the thoughts in that email just so it the public has that information as well?

Absolutely. So, in the current budget, um I give you the figures. We eliminated $136,000 over $136,000 from that budget by just making some changes um less administrators eliminating a position and uh some retirements. But I comb through the budget and uh when we factor the budget in, we there's a new hire. They have that new hire rate, but that's very inaccurate. So, I broke it down and uh kind of like Chief Sam explained, we hire and they show a full year, but by the time we hire an officer and they go to the academy, that's that doesn't start till May. So, they start the academy in May. That's six months of no pay for for that new hire. And then for the next six months, which takes them all the way up until the last six weeks of the year, they're getting a cadet rate, which is about $14 an hour. So our our total there in the budget it shows a 59,000 cost for that new hire when in reality it's just under $20,000. Um unlike the police department or excuse me unlike the fire, our academy is fully reimbursed. Uh I had a conversation with MOP last week and they said yes, the grant was approved. So, our $5,500 per officer for the academy is reimbured. That would go back to the general fund. 45% of that salary is also reimbursed. So, for 2026, it's a little over $11,000. So, hiring two officers because we already have we're down one. We're budgeted for 51. Um, we have 50 right now due to retirement we had in November. We'll have another retirement coming up that we know of likely early in the year. So, we would need to hire two officers. Those savings right there is over $100,000. We also have a um deployment that we should know next

week. Well, excuse me, we should know the first week of January. Um we're we're only entitled to pay him his contractual military leave and then his vacation time. So, that's almost a $72,000 savings. So those those figures right there, that's $172,000 in savings, which is more than two officers in salary. Even if you add uh medical benefits, it it's still more. So without reducing our force, we're still saving that money. Yeah.

Um thank you as well, Mr. Ber. So, a couple of number one, a point. Um, obviously, if this is something that we decide not to do, um, feedback for us is going to be paramount to make sure that we know what is exactly going on within that department. Um, but what I would ask you just from a pure ignorance standpoint, um, should you get somebody, let's just say that somebody who works for a local, um, police department decides that they want to come work for the Wayneport Police Department and they don't have to go to the academy, then that that just takes all that and throws it out the window. Is that correct? They don't have to go to the academy, XYZ.

Yeah, they don't need to go to the academy. So most likely we get young people who don't have families. They're just starting off and they want to come here to work. They they have to go to the academy. Every once in a while we'll get an officer that comes from another department, but I have that figure, too. So if uh if we were to hire, let's say, one new hireer that needs the academy, and then one that comes from, we'll just say South Williamsport, he wants to work here, that savings is almost $81,000 still over the cost of a new officer. again, keeping our force where it's at without reducing anything. And the decisions like the $72,000, and that's not including the $72,000 for deployment because that would take it to 152,000. Obviously, we wouldn't make any decisions right now for the fact of we don't know if he's going to be deployed. 95% chance he he will be in the first week of January. That's going to take him the whole 2026. But we would know those figures so we can decide, hey, yes, we're going to save this money or we're not going to save this money.

Okay, thank you very much for that. Yeah. Um, are there any other comments, questions for um our police administration, other members related to the um main motion? Miss Mey. Um I think your main motion was to reduce the number within the salary detail. Correct. Yeah. To reduce the um yeah to reduce it by a year one officer by a full officer. That's correct.

Um because one of the observations that I would make is that the the deployment to me radically changes the idea of whether or not we reduce the department staffing by one. um would there be a way that we could instead reduce the salary line within the budget by um a number of dollars equivalent to the amount of money that would be saved by the deployment and consequently if someone is deployed then um we know that we have that money and we can proceed with the two hires that we're discussing. Do you see what I'm saying?

Yeah. I mean we we could um I mean if that's the group the consensus of the group that's fine. I mean this is a starting point for it. No, I I I I'm just I'm just asking because I because to me that that that is a radical difference in the way in which you look at police department staffing. If they're if they've got a guy who's overseas all the 2026, then that then we're effectively reducing the staffing the department by two um by cutting a new hire. But and um and I'm not saying that that is or is not a good decision, but it seems like perhaps reducing the amount in the salary line item gives them the discretion to decide which which thing will work in the beginning of January. That is to say, if there is no deployment, then um then they move forward with one hire and perhaps discuss another hire toward the very end of the year to take advantage of um academy training at the year end. Um, and there should be, I would think, enough play in the salary line to do that. Um, and if there is a deployment, then they hire in February, March with the idea of the academy in May. Um, I'm just going to submit that as as another potential approach, which seems to me like it gives a little bit more flexibility to the department.

I would also say again, so we have six officers that are eligible to retire. We could walk in tomorrow and they could say, I'm done. we have somebody who's talking about an additional not even discussed now summer of 2026. So, you know, to reduce our force is bad enough, but to reduce our force and then know that hey, there's possible retirements, likely retirements, it just puts us in a in a bad situation. Yeah. Um, any other comments, questions? And and another thing you you'll see

so because of this retirement and thesemies, you'll also see the savings in the 2025 budget. So I looked at the numbers this morning and conservatively as I put in that email, there's about $150,000 that's going to go back into the general fund that we're not going to use out of our salary line items. So I mean it's there there's just a lot of savings that's maybe not seen at first glance. Yeah, I didn't perhaps acknowledge how much I appreciated all the hard numbers in that email. I'm a numbers guy, so [laughter] yeah, it was it was helpful and it was nice to hear all of that broken out.

Captain Tabian did a wonderful job on on spearheading this with the numbers and stuff, but I don't want to lose focus of the human factor as well. Again, I know you heard me talk about it before and I'm going to sound like a broken record up here again, but you know, with the officers at the rate that they're working, that's why I encourage you to all go out, try to meet up with officers, do some ride alongs, and just see the the current tempo, you know, because that costs something, too. Because when we're constantly working and working and working, and the just the well-being of the officer is a concern that we have because then what happens if you look at our sick time? Our sick time is pretty high because we're running our officers ragged because what they're what's expected of them and the service that we're asked to provide and that we're providing because they'll make it happen and but it's at what cost? You know, the resiliency of the officers and and first responders in general, it goes with with fire as well. They'll make it work, but at what cost? And then it's you start looking at the well-being of the officers. And then when that starts to drop, then you start worrying about the interactions you have in the community. uh officers being irritable. You know, you're you're spending that money now on covering yoga time to cover the sick time because the sick time is now elevating stuff. Uh and obviously I can go into a little bit more with it and we've talked about it before. You know, as I I cited uh in previous budget sessions over the years with the size department we are, we you should be roughly at 68 to 70 officers. I know that's not going to happen. I not ignorant to the the you know the position that we're in now. But but what I do want to just reiterate is that with that being said, we're doing the work of 68 officers with 50 right now and trying to cover all that stuff and and how that's covered is in through overtime costs. So I know cutting over here might look good on paper, as you say, black and white, but that money is going to be spent over here then to to cover that position that we we took away now. So,

uh, just wanted to talk a little bit, uh, about the human factor in that and just something something to think about and that, you know, it goes for the fire department as well and thank you.

Yeah. And look, I mean, I I've I've said it before. I mean, I I appreciate the reiteration of that perspective. I mean, it's the truth again, you know, back to what we were talking about with Sam um, and the fire department. Like, that's that's what makes this decision hard, right? Um it absolutely does. So um you know there's everything you say is is legitimate and is a very strong factor for I think all of us. So absolutely absolutely. Um any comments, questions. Okay. Um let's take the vote, see where it goes.

Hey, Mr. Allison. No. Mr. Mackey. No. Mr. Pizzy. No. Mrs. Catz.

Ms. Mey. Yes. Mr. Ber. No. Mr. Yoder. Yes. motion fails for too. Um so look, I I appreciate the dialogue so far on on these. These are really the big areas we had thought um about and and I think wanted to have some dialogue about tonight. Um I'll Miss Mey, I don't know if you want to try your concept either. That's up to you. But um I can make a motion. Uh, Adam, it would be my recommendation that you not second it [laughter] so that No, because Oh, see before votes. If nobody else it then we don't need to worry about deleting it.

Yeah, fair. [laughter] I would recommend that I would make a motion that we reduce the salary line item um in the police budget. Jamie, you don't happen to have that.

No, no better than I do. I apologize. I should have thought of this, but I was expecting that um debate to go on a little longer. Uh, sorry about that. Um, and I have no fingerprints left right now. Sorry. um the salary line item uh 20110510 um in the Bureau of Police by $71,000 uh $71,700 um uh to account for the possibility of a deployment and uh consequently um constrain a hire unless there is a deployment within the

Is there a second? Second that. There's a motion and a second. Any further debate or questions on that motion? So, the question that I have is we reduce that salary line item by the $71,000. This will change. Um, that's pending the deployment. Should this deployment not happen, that gets pulled right back in. No, the idea is that we there will be an extra $71,000 7 $71,700 in the salary line if someone gets deployed because that is savings that we will realize via a deployment. I see.

Um so that will make them whole again to make a hire. They will continue to have the funding in their budget for the hires that they are proposing for the um 2026 year in the event of a deployment. And then what do we do in 27 when this individual comes back from deployment? Then we need to either know that we are in a better position to um maintain that hire or we need to move on a nutrition concept in 27. Okay. It's not a perfect idea, Eric. I fully admit this. [laughter]

But I just I wanted to make sure that I understood completely how that how that money was being maneuvered. It see it sounds to me as though with the number of potential retirements we have in the department in the next year or so, more than likely a retirement by or a reduction by attrition would be a possibility in 27 in the same way that it is in 26. Um I know that that's not a perfect Yeah, it's not a crystal ball, but but it is a fairly good solution. Yeah. Any other comments, questions on the on the motion to amend? All right, hearing see none of Mr. Frank on the third motion to amend here. Mr. Allison, yes.

Mr. Mackey, no. Mr. Pizzy, yes. Mrs. Catz, Miss Mey, yes. Mr. Ber, yes. Mr. Yoder, yes. Motion passes [snorts] 51.

Yeah. Okay. Um, back to the main motion on the budget. Um, so those were the kind of three overarching or the three overarching things I think that, um, there was some interest in having some dialogue on. Um, let me just circle back to what I said at the outlet. Fire department, police department, and administration, we appreciate the dialogue. Um, it was insightful for for me, for I think for all of us, not only for this budget, but notably going into 2027, um, in January when we get PFM's final recommendations and we start diving into those um, throughout the year. All of that was very helpful. So, thank you everybody for that. Um, and I know that is a difficult dialogue to have, but it was fruitful, I think, and I'm grateful for it. So, are there any other comments, questions, changes that other people want to see on the budget before we pass it? Yes, Mr. Blizzy. I just would like to make the quick comment that um you know as these decisions are tough decisions I appreciate everybody y

um coming forward together to understand that it's not us versus you it's not you versus them it's all of us together versus this problem and this problem is is how do we pay for everything right so um as we look internal and we look to make some concessions hard concessions um and make decisions that are all impactful, right? Um I speak for myself, but I'm sure I speak for the rest of council that I greatly appreciate it very much with um with everything that we're all working together on to try and put our city in a better position in the next couple of years. Thank you. Any other comments, questions on the main motion of the budget? All right. Um, let's take the main vote then. Mrs. Frank, item five, second reading.

Mr. Allison, yes. Mr. Mackey, yes. Mr. Pizzy, yes. Miss Millie, yes. Mr. Ber, yes. Mr. Yoder, yes. Motion passes 6. Um, thank you all. Let's jump to item six. Mrs. Right. Ordinance of the city of Williamsport, county of Lycoming and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, fixing the tax rate for all city purposes for the year 2026 and final reading. Is there a motion in a second? So move. Second.

Um so this is the second reading of the tax ordinance. It's a half a mill tax increase. That is what we just passed in the um budget. And so I mean I'll open the floor for any comments, questions, dialogue, but I think this one's probably pretty straightforward given we just passed the the budget with a half mill tax increase. Um I'll reiterate kind of what I think I said last time. Um and notably for the public, look, none of us want to raise taxes, administration, council members for sure. Um unfortunately we have to given the you know current constraints financially that we're in. Um, and I'm going to remind everybody outside of Randy. Um, um, there's a high probability we're going to have a tax increase budget proposed to us next year. Um, and hopefully it's not as high as what we thought this year's and potentially next year's would be going into this, but um, we should not be surprised if we see one. Let's hope that through good management throughout the year, through um proactive application of the recommendations we get from PFM that we can minimize it. Um and then I'll also say, you know, nobody should be surprised about having some very similar dialogue with all of this next year when we are going through the budget again. It's likely going to happen. It's going to have to happen. Um we should all be prepared for that sooner than later. All right. Um, Mrs. Frank, on the vote, please.

Mr. Allison, yes. Mr. Mackey, yes. Mr. Pizzy, yes. Miss Millie, yes. Mr. Ber, yes. Mr. Yoder, yes. Motion passes 6. Again, thank you all for the dialogue. Jamie, thank you for your hard work on the budget administration. We appreciate it. All right. Um, jump down to item eight. Mrs. Frank, resolution of the city council of the city of Williamsport appointing a city treasurer. Is there a motion in a second? So move. Second.

Motion in a second. All right. So, um, we did interviews for our vacant treasur position on Monday. Um, and just to kind of refresh on some of the dialogue in that, um, our treasury our treasur's role became vacant, um, in October. It is an elected position and because of a vacancy we have to go through an appointment process. Um that process yielded six candidates. Three were nonresponsive to outreach. Um one had to withdraw because of the residency requirements that they are not able to fulfill at being an elected position. We interviewed two candidates um April Wine and Adam Walter Roth. Um, you know, I I don't want to speak for everybody, but I was very very pleased and surprised at having I shouldn't say surprised, but like very pleased at having two very good interviewed candidates. Um, and I'll with reflection even say I think both were better than the last time we did this four years ago. Um, we had an improvement in candidate quality, which was really great to see. Um, in my my sense of of this is I think there is a consensus leaning one way. I'm going to we have a resolution in front of us that has some blanks on the name and the date of start. So, I'm just going to make a motion to amend to reflect what I think is the consensus of the group here. Um, John, I'll let you do your thing. Oh,

I apologize. No, that's okay. Um [clears throat] well I was uh while I was present for the interviews of both candidates um I will be abstaining from the vote tonight and I also um post interview process have not discussed any of my thoughts um with I don't think anybody up here. So uh I have abstained from the deliberation of candidates and I and I will not be voting on this tonight. Sorry I forgot about that John. Um, all right. So, I'm going to make a motion to amend the resolution to reflect the name for the blanks of Adam Walter Roth and a start date of um December 15, 2025. Is there a second to that motion?

Second. Motion and a second. Um so um again both candidates were extraordinary in the interview but um I to me with some reflection um Adam really stood out in a couple of areas that I think are um put him in a bit better of a position to come in there and be successful um and try to work through a number of things we need that office to work through. Um, and my sense is that that was kind of the consensus and what some similar reflections of the group were as well. So, but I'll open that up for debate and any kind of comments or questions before we vote on the amendment to reflect that resolution.

All right, Mrs. Frank. Then on the motion to amend, please. Mr. Allison, yes. Mr. Mackey, abstain. Mr. Pizzy, yes. Mrs. Catz, Miss Millie, yes. Mr. Ber, yes. Mr. Yoder, yes. Motion to amend passes 6. Uh, back to the main motion. Any other final comments, questions on the appointment um before we take the final vote. All right. Um hearing and see none. Mr. Frank on the main motion for item eight, please. Mr. Allison, yes. Mr. Mackey, abstain. Mr. Pizzy,

yes. Mrs. Catz, Ms. Mey, yes. Mr. Ber, yes. Mr. Yoder, yes. Motion passes 6. Um, item nine, Mrs. Frank, resolution, real estate refund. Is there a motion to second? Second. Uh, motion a second. Um, I'm actually gonna ask Nick to kind of cover this for me if you would please. Um, you're a lot more familiar with the refund process and stuff than I am, so if you don't mind.

Certainly. Um, so this is a real estate refund. There was an incorrect assessment uh due to an error in the assessment office from the county. There is a specific law that says when the assessment office makes an error, they're due six years of refunds for that error as long as the error was obviously six years long. Um, talking with the assessment office, the error here occurred more than six years ago. So, this is a request for six years of refund simply due to the incorrect assessment. So, this is just refunding the taxes that were overpaid due to the incorrect assessment. The assessment's been corrected. Um, and I think that's all I have for that. Are there any comments, questions by members? All right. Hearing see none, Mrs. Frank. Item nine.

Mr. Allison, yes. Mr. Mackey, yes. Mr. Pizzy, yes. Ms. Mey, yes. Mr. Ber, yes. Mr. Yoder, yes. Motion passes 6. Um, item 11. Um, we're going to skip over. Um, I think, um, there's still a few things that the fire department is working on. Um, is that correct, Chief? And so, um, they have requested that we just not worry about that and we'll revisit that in January. Correct? Yes. Okay. Um, then item 12, Mrs. Frank, resolution authorizing a professional services agreement between the city and Hailstone Economic for Home Funding Administration.

Is there a motion and a second? So, move. Second. Good evening. Good evening.

Thanks for your patience. No way. No problem. Um so [clears throat] as as Miss Frank said um tonight we're seeking a uh resolution to move forward with a professional service agreement with Hailstone. Um the duration of the agreement would be for uh the year of 2026 um expiring on 1231 and the amount would be not to exceed $30,000. Um, basically they would be assisting our department with um spending down home funds um coming up with a prioritization um matrix so that we're able to move these funds um a little more quickly and to um you know set forth some new policies and procedures that um have not been updated um in quite some time. So we want to make sure that we are you know keeping on top of uh you know our our home program and policies um as well as our uh housing rehabilitation standards.

Thank you very much. Um are there any comments or questions on the resolution? Miss Mey,

when we discuss um ah I'm seeing that I missed a document that might have answered my questions, but I'm going to ask you now that you're standing there. Uh when we discuss spending down um home funds, are we talking about uh the the amount of home funds that the city has returned as pay? That is to say, we have some we we had a pot of funding that I think was originally in the neighborhood of about a million dollars in um mortgage lending that had been that had been paid back to the city and that we were looking to once again spend down as part of a first-time home buyers program. Is that the funding that Hailstone will be assisting with or is it?

Yeah. So, they would be um yeah, that would be our program income. Um they would be assisting in helping us to spend that funding down um and and and including that in that prioritization, but um we also have prior years funds that we'd like to get moving on. Um, and then as part of their agreement with us, they would be working with us to help set forth policies to um so that we're not getting behind on on the expenditure of these funds and that we're able to um you know, spend them down as we receive them because the the federal government doesn't want us to receive funds and and to not spend them in that calendar year. Um so the the goal here would be that we're able to move funds much more easily than we have in the past.

Got it. um what's the total amount of funding that we're talking about them assisting us in creating policies to expend more expeditiously? Yeah, so the the program income is about a million dollars like you had said and then um I believe Valerie we have six years six years of funding um that we had previously um not spent um that we would be able to move forward with. Um the uh the amounts differ year to year, but the ballpark amount for each year would be about $200,000. So we're looking at a total of a little better than $2 million. Yeah, I think that that sounds about right. More or less. Yeah.

Okay. Got it. Um so for the relatively low price of $30,000, they will help us to get that funding allocated and then help us to better allocate funding in future. Yes. Um that that seems more than reasonable to me. Um will part of that arrangement be a discussion about a way about the the kind of highest and best use for those million dollars in program income that we have?

Yeah, we we would absolutely welcome you know any of the members of council who you know would would like to meet with our department to you know we're there Monday through Friday. I I think I would certainly be interested in understanding a little bit more what their proposals are, but I would also suggest that we should reach out um or perhaps request that they reach out depending uh to realtors in the area because I know that there were a lot of realators who seem to have strong feelings about ways in which we could best utilize that funding to encourage home ownership within the city. Um [clears throat] right. So if I could um so this will help us you know expend the home funds that we have um currently our staff is looking to do a housing a housing needs um study moving forward and that would be separate from this but something that um I think that would be probably more apt to engage realers and and developers and things of that nature in in that regard less so on the the home funding expenditure. Um

got it. I guess I was just thinking that this could be since we have used a lot of this as like a um secondary lean on properties that that might be the structuring of it might be something we could get a bit of a sense from the greater Williamsport community on on um what would be most useful to people trying to to become first-time home buyers. But um excellent either way. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments or questions? All right. Hearing and seeing none. Mrs. Frank on item 12. Mr. Allison. Yes. Mr. Mackey. Yes. Mr. Pizzy. Yeah. Miss Mey. Yes. Mr. Ber. Yes.

Mr. Yoda. Yes. Motion passes 60. Thank you, sir. Council. Um, we'll jump to item 15. Mrs. Frank. resolution between the administration and city council to work together to place a government study commission question on the city ballot in May of 2026. Is there a motion in a second? So moved. Second, Miss Mey, the floor is yours.

Okay. Um to be honest, unless you object, I might prefer to read the text of the resolution. Yeah, please. The minutes. Um, but I I guess I can open up first by saying that the the one um concept that has come up over and over again tonight during the significantly longer than one hour of discussion that I said Randy was going to have to sit around for [laughter] before he could go ahead and be a member of the civilian public for once. um is is that um we uh somewhat desperately need it was the recommendation of um the the firm that has advised the city on on gaining a better financial footing as part of the um strategic management planning program through the department of uh community and economic development at the state. Um it was their recommendation that we uh that we try to become a home rule municipality and and when I say try what I mean by that it is is that it is not a choice open to elected officials within the city of Williamsport. It is a choice that has to be made by the voters of the city of Williamsport. And so, um, the thing that I thought should really be kind of the end note of our budgetary year here in the city, uh, was a commitment by the administration, um, primarily in the form of the mayor and a city council to work together to put a, um, a question on the ballot this coming May to put to the citizens of Williamsport whether they are willing to study our form of governance. um with the idea that we would then elect a government study commission. Um the majority of the government study commission's functions would um we would certainly hope be funded by the state as part of their recommendation that we that we move toward home rule and um and that the re that the government study commission

drafts a home rule charter and the citizens of Williamsport then um within 18 months of May of 2026 have the choice of whether or not to adopt that home rule charter. I cannot underline enough the extent to which this is the primary financial recommendation that we have gotten to improve Williamsport's financial standing and the extent to which it seems to have served relatively well. Frankly, Adam could speak better to this than I could. Um, other municipalities that have moved in this direction within the state of Pennsylvania, um, home rule has been a positive step for the vast majority of municipalities that have implemented it across the state. Um and frankly it in some ways it simply allows us to move ourselves into into a position enjoyed by lots of other municipalities across the country without um these sort of um hoops to jump through. Um with that in mind here's the text of the resolution and then I'll jump off the soap box. Um whereas [snorts] under the eegis of the strategic management planning program, the department of community and economic development of the state of Pennsylvania has made recommendation to the city of Williamsport that it pursue the creation of a home rule charter for the city. And whereas the transition to home rule is recommended in order to increase the city's financial stability, decrease its dependency on property taxes, diversify its opportunities for taxation, and provide the city with better local control over governance. And whereas based upon this recommendation and out of an interest in bettering the city's financial prospects, the mayor, his administration, and the city council wish to act to place a question upon the May 19th, 2026 ballot to allow the voters to decide if the city should further study the concept of home rule and draft a home rule charter. And whereas the parties to this resolution understand that the determination to explore becoming a home rule municipality, the drafting of a home rule charter and the adoption of that home rule charter are all decisions that

will rightly rest with the voters of the city of Williamsport when they cast their ballots. end. Whereas the city's intention is to place the following question on the Williamsport ballot for the election in May on May 19th, 2026 in order to provide the voters of the city with the opportunity to better explore and understand local [clears throat] governance via the government government study commission process. Shall a government study commission of seven members be elected to study the existing form of government of the municipality to consider the advisability of the adoption of a home rule charter and if advisable to draft and to recommend a home rule charter. And whereas it is the intention of the administration and city council to jointly select a slate of seven candidates for the government study commission including the mayor and a member of city council with the understanding that other candidates may also choose to nominate themselves and that the final decision on the members of the government study commission will rest with the voters of the city. Now therefore be it resolved that the mayor, his administration, and the members of the city council of Williamsport do hereby pledge their mutual commitment to initiating the home rule process within the city, their mutual desire to seek out upstanding and thoughtful candidates with for the government study commission charge charged with drafting a home rule charter and their mutual efforts to communicate with the voters of the city about the potential benefits of becoming a home rule municipality. Um, we don't usually read those into the record, but um, because I think it is very important that we go on record uh, stating the multiple benefits of home rule for the city of Williamsport, I wanted that to be out there. Um, I'll yield the floor.

Thank you, Miss Millie, for spearheading that. Um, couldn't agree more. As we've talked about, we we need to do this. Um, and as a member of council, as one of seven, um, I look forward to voting yes for this, but also looking forward to doing what is needed of me to make sure this goes to fruition, um, and supporting this however I can for it to be successful. So, you're here. Any other comments, questions on the Mr. Mackey?

Yeah. Uh, thanks, Liz, for putting this together. Um, and kind of you and Adam driving this effort to get it to where it is right now. Um, but I think that last line is is the most important one to repeat again, and that's mutual efforts to communicate with the voters of the city about the potential benefits because it's going to take all of us um, right down to the last public works employee who's hopefully going to be out there um, keeping uh, First Friday safe again next year. um which I know they will be, but um I think this is probably going to be or could be the most important thing that any of us do or will have done on our time here on city council. So,

agree. Yep. You're here. Well said. So, let's get it done. Any other comments or questions? You can see none. Mrs. Franklin, item uh 15. Randy, this is a last vote for [laughter] you. He does a victory lap. Are you ready? Mr. Allison. Yes. Mr. Mackey. Yes. Mr. Pizzy. Yes. I'm here. Janice. Oh. Mrs. Catz. Yes. Ms. Mey. Yes. Mr. Ryder. Yes. Mr. Yoder.

Yes. Motion passes 70. Good stuff. Um, item 17, except for filing, I don't think we're accepting anything, are we?

So, we'll scratch that one. Um, item 18, announcements. Um, this is our last meeting for the year. Our next meeting will be on Monday, January 5th, 700 p.m. Uh, our next, um, yeah, our next meeting will be Monday, January 5th. It will actually be in, um, Trade Trait 1, first floor where CTL is. It's our reorganization meeting for council leadership. And then our next voting meeting, first of the year, will be Thursday, January 8, 7 p.m. here in Drain Transit 2. Are there any comments from members of the public that have stuck with us for a solid two and a half hours? God bless you. Um, any comments from members of council? Mr. Ber,

uh, I just wanted to say thank you, Council President Yoder, for all the hard work you put in, not only to the budget, but throughout the year. As was said earlier, you put in a tremendous amount of effort throughout the course of the year to heard all of the cats uh that are on council, not also including Bonnie Catz. Um but but we greatly appreciate your efforts and I applaud you for all of that. Thank you. I appreciate it. Yeah.

Thanks, Randy. I appreciate it. I learned from uh I learned from good people like you very much. So, any other comments? It's our last meeting of the year. I'll just wish everybody uh merry Christmas, happy holidays, and a happy new year, and be safe. Mr. Pizzy, final word from me for the year is good luck, Randy. Yeah, we're going to make where he's going. Randy doesn't need luck. [laughter] Are there any comments from the administration? All right. Uh I'll take a motion and a second for adjournment. So move second. All in favor? I meeting