Yeah, he can't take it.

So I have a new agenda to read, so we'll bear with me.

Call.

Yeah, I believe there are eyes.

Are you going like this?

Sky are you all right?

Do you want to turn the lights down?

No, it's fine.

So don't call it.

Yes.

Yeah.

I got you covered.

Well, congratulations.

That's a nice life change.

It takes a little longer.

More power to you.

All right.

Does anyone have any disclosures to share with the group and the public?

Does anybody have any changes to the agenda?

I'm gonna say a negative.

Staff liaison.

I'm Jake.

Do you know if there are any public service announcements?

Randy's you're not a staff liaison.

Oh, I guess I guess Doug would be the staff liaison.

Commission liaison.

I think this is actually written for a different board.

Doug's on Jake.

Jake, I am sorry to be late for my very first meeting with you guys.

No, you are fine.

You are fine.

We normally aren't this prompt, but we're getting kicked out at noon or kicked out at one.

So we're gonna try to hustle through it and give Tony a hard time when he's late.

Um this is a new agenda for us today, so I'm sort of like reading off a uh do you have any public service announcements you're aware of?

I have two.

Oh so first of all, three really because I want to introduce myself and Douglas for sure.

Um, thank you.

Yes.

I really am off my game today.

Um I'm Douglas Fisher.

I'm your new commission liaison.

I believe I'm I've I've I'm sub you know replacing Terry Cunningham, so I have some big shoes to fill.

Um I was the liaison for the uh business improvement district, the the downtown VID board.

Really enjoyed you know being involved with with downtown issues.

I think it's really essential for our city.

Um and so I'm I'm honored to still be a part of this, even though I will miss sitting with Randy.

Um there are two quick uh uh just updates for you guys.

The first is that um on March 3rd, the city commission will be we're we um kind of nailing down a a list of priorities.

And um it's still still being drafted, as you can see.

Um but but the main ones are kind of you know make Bozeman a safe and welcoming place for all.

Umgage meaningfully with the community.

So we will are as part of that work, one of the one of the sub-items within that our goals is to um kind of strengthen the uh the effectiveness of our advisory boards.

And I would put this one i in there, you know, kind of so we're gonna be we look at you know, in 2021, I believe we we um consolidated down from 42 boards to five kind of superboards, plus like the URD, the BID, the um inner neighborhood council.

And so we're looking at like did we go too far in and and how do we um best get information to the commission, you know, about community wishes and and desires.

Um and then and then another the two other kind of main headliners, you know, uh goals are to um help bridge the affordability gap.

And that's obviously it has a housing component, but there's also a jobs component to that, and like how do you how do you help families access child care, for instance, right?

Um and then another one is to protect Bozeman's heritage neighborhoods and environment.

Um and you know, that it ranges from the neighborhood conservation overlay district um you know standards to our water resources plan to um what we do with the urban transportation district, for instance, right?

Um so that that will come in front of the commission that'll kind of guide our action, our our work for the next, you know, our priorities for the next next two years.

Um then the other thing I have a question for you guys is um there's been, as you know, a big neighborhood discussion about B3, the appropriate height for the B3 zone, which is it's it's outside that you know, there's the B3 and then there's the B3C, you know, which is the core downtown.

And you may remember as part of the um unified development code update last year, there was a sudden, it was a it was like whiplash.

It was the B3 height was 90 feet.

We dropped it down to 70 feet, and then we kind of put it back up at the last minute to 90.

And so it's 90 now in the code for a for a building height.

And that's the the core kind of the B3C core remains, I think 45 feet or is it 60 feet?

I think it's it's the B3 core, like the yeah, I think it is 60, remains at fronting Main Street, those from um, I think it's almost from Grand to Church, maybe.

And it's a little bit different, like on the uh South Side goes all the way to back path, but on the north side it goes to the alley.

To the alley, right?

Exactly.

And there you can you can go, I think you can go up 45 feet before you have to step back and then you go up to 60, but it's capped at 60 to kind of stay consistent with the that frontage you know look.

Um, but then the rest of the B3 would be allowed to go to 90.

The commission is getting some pressure to roll that back to 70 or to put a moratorium on.

And and I think you know, what we're what what we're leaning towards is just wanting to see how this UDC rolls out over, you know, is a complex code, 500 pages of changes, with completely new code, completely overright.

There's zero uh there's little appetite, I would say, on the majority of the commission to kind of go in and tinker immediately.

There's the the I think the plan is is going to be um to let it see how it how it rolls out.

You know, there will be some tensions, you know, we have some transitions we need to work with, there will be some other areas of like, oh, that didn't work the way we expected.

And so I think what our instruction is going to be to the to the community development department is like as you encounter problems or issues or sticking points, just kind of put it in a basket, and in four to six months, I think the commission, the community, we should look at that what's in that basket and decide how we solve those things.

The B3 height is going to be one of those, I would I would suspect.

Um the question I've I've been asked, and I'm having trouble answering, and I would put to be honestly to you folks to you know, folks who are most involved with downtown, is how do we know that what the appropriate height is?

And how will we know in say six months?

Is it is it should it be 60?

I mean, should it be 70 feet?

Should it be 90 feet?

I would I don't have a uh a marker to say, oh, it should be this one because you know it's it's you know, I don't I don't know what that's what success looks like.

And I'll leave that, you know, possibly for I don't know, future discussion, but but that's honestly something that that I think will will come back to us as a commission, it'd be helpful to have perspective on.

You know, I think um from my opinion is that you hit the nail on the head of don't do anything yet.

Like it doesn't make sense to tinker it yet because we have to we have to let the decisions that have been made play out and see what what comes.

Um the other piece is like I don't think there is going to be a barometer that you'll be able to put definitively say this is the metric, and anything above this line is success, and below this line is failure, or above this line means we did it right below this line, we should we should should do it differently.

So I think it's it's going to be um a just commitment of the idea, you know, the approach that the city that the community wants to take, and the idea is that you have faith that you're making the right decision for that approach.

And so backing into what you said earlier about affordable affordability and helping span that affordability gap, I think you I think we as a community are better served to say, does this in concept support our priorities?

And if that's the case, I think you have to have peace, and I don't know that four to six months is a long enough runway to really see what it does to the community long term.

I'm not saying you can't review it in four to six months, but I think if there is a belief that the decisions, whether it be this height or whether it be a setback or whether it be a brick color, whatever it is, if if there is a belief that the decisions that were made in in that UDC are in the in the right vein, or or they support the community's priorities, then we owe it to ourselves to really see that play out longer than six months.

And sure, review it every six months, but I think I don't know that it's fair to try to find a breaking point of like, is it 70 feet?

Is it 90 feet?

Is it 100 feet?

And like there's a point where it's like you make a commitment to support a priority and like let's stick with that commitment for a period of time long enough to really see tangible change, which I think is more than six months.

Yeah, agreed.

And and this board wrote a letter in support of the 90 foot, so we're on the record saying that we support that because of um, I mean, we we understand the implication of tax increment financing.

We understand what an additional 20 feet is going to mean for our the support of the infrastructure of downtown for the next hundred years of the viability.

And and if it had been you know, 90 feet on Main Street, that would have been a completely different discussion.

But we are talking about B3, not B3C.

And I think there was a big miscommunication when all of that kind of came out.

And I do think to Jake's point, four to six months is just not enough time to see any impact of anything.

There are going to be zero developments that occur in four months that will have any impact on does it affect affordability?

Does it affect you know a project?

I mean, really, we're gonna need to see over 10, 20 years what this impact is, how much more uh fund do we have to put into an affordable housing fund or you know, infrastructure to create some sort of you know the the underground infrastructure to get rid of all of the asbestos or to you know put sewer lines, you know, under all of the stuff that's a hundred years old and that needs to be replaced.

I mean, there's just I think that's it's so beyond what the scope of most people are considering.

People don't understand that like our downtown is blighted underneath the streets.

That's I think that the lack of consideration that's still occurring.

Um, but our board is tasked with recognizing all of that and recognizing that this is like even though we sunset in 2032, these issues do not, and we need to have a fund that is able to support that.

And the and these funds and all of that that is created by developers coming in and putting more taxes into our city, that's what's gonna allow that development to happen underneath our city.

And so, you know, we we feel in support of that, and it just takes time.

Goodness, better myself.

When do you want official feedback?

Well um, we there's gonna be time.

I think like I said, I think we're gonna give some time, you know it's gonna be six months before the board the the commission rethinks this.

Um so I I'll be in touch with Jake and you know, in terms of making sure that you guys have adequate time to if you want to put another letter in or whatnot, right?

You're right.

We do have that letter, um, and I appreciate that.

That was very helpful actually as a decision maker.

So I would say we can just take a breath for four or five months, and and we'll we'll come back at this in the summer.

I do have one extra thing to add.

So in the scope of time, so while six months is not enough time for development, I think to your point, and and maybe this way you're getting that, it is enough time to see what the community's reaction to the paperwork is, right?

So I think the idea of were our priorities, did the UDC not match our priorities quite right.

So I think there it is an appropriate amount of time to like receive enough feedback from the community of did we miss something that the community wanted differently than we thought.

So while it's not a time for development to do anything, we can't see the ends.

I think I I do look forward to hearing what you guys find in the next four to six months from the community feedback piece.

All right.

Let's anything else, any other service announcements?

That was perhaps more than enough.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying.

Yeah, and I think that to just to piggyback on your community feedback, like if if you're hearing only negative and you need it, if you're like, hey, we're only getting negative letters and we know that there is this opinion, but nobody's writing in just because they're like, we might think you need positive support, just reach out.

Just reach out.

One thing I would like to get around or over or behind us.

Is that uh you know, I feel like past commissions have made decisions like either ignoring or in you know against what our advisory boards have recommended.

Um and the the fire the firehouse sale comes to mind, right?

I mean, all of our downtown boards said don't make that affordable housing.

The commission made it affordable housing and it's still sitting there as a vacant firehouse.

And so I think it's you know, the boards like this, the BID, um, you know, uh the the you have a I I would like to make sure that your voice is is part of that discussion and is um has is properly weighted as you know as you guys live and breathe this.

So appreciate that.

Um yes, I will I think you it's important to have input and and and we'll come back to this.

Yeah, appreciate that.

Um in the future we're gonna approve minutes and go through agendas, previous agendas, but not today.

So we'll jump to public comment.

Uh this is the time to comment on any matter falling within the scope that univer uh URD board, not economic vitality board.

There'll also be time in conjunction with each agenda item.

Oh, there it is.

There'll also be time in conjunction with each agenda item for public comment relating to that item, but you may only speak once per topic.

Please note the board cannot take action on any item which does not appear on the agenda.

All persons addressed in the board shall speak in a civil and courteous manner, and members of the audience shall be respectful of others.

Please state your name and state whether you're a resident of the city or a property owner within the city in an audible tone for a voice for the record and limit your comments to three minutes.

Are there public comments?

We do have one public comment.

Um Jason, if you were raising your hand to provide public comment, you may do so at this time.

Yeah.

Um I just happened to uh be tuning in.

I don't normally, but um I guess I had a slightly, well not slightly significantly different, maybe recollection or understanding of the 90 foot height limit in B3, and it's not that it's something new that came about as part of the UDC update, but rather it's something old that the UDC update like was finally getting around to implement any.

And um just going from memory, I think um essentially the 90 feet was an approximation of seven stories.

Um in the UDC, the original proposal of going to stories from feed got changed back to going to feed.

Um I think that um the last two downtown plans were calling for seven stories.

Um so anyway, I just think it's important to remember, assuming that that's right, if anybody has a different recollection of the history, you know, definitely uh speak up.

But um, yeah, anyway, yeah, I don't think that was a sudden change in this UDC, but rather it was the you know eventual finally we implemented something that had been set forth in the downtown plan that was based on how this regionally significant fast growing city, which is kind of a regional economic hub, was going to take its next step in its evolution to meeting that role.

So anyway, thanks for listening.

Yeah, I appreciate that, Jason.

I think you have it correct.

Yeah, he that we would I think that they went back and forth quite a bit on the seven stories versus ninety, and because there was a lot of discrepancy in what seven stories could mean, they wanted to make it um they wanted to clarify that 90 feet was just a cleaner version.

But yes, you're right, Jason.

I think it does equate essentially to seven stories.

Um, but that seven stories was just much more open to interpretation, and 90 feet was just clear.

But yeah, thanks for that clarification.

I think that's you're you're correct in your interpretation.

There's no additional public comment.

Okay.

Uh let's move on.

Um, would this be yep?

Our good old ethics program.

And we have Randy Scully here from the downtown BID board who is joining for the ethics training.

Um, there's different scenarios, it's the same format as the last several years.

So if there's volunteers, otherwise we can just kind of move down the line.

Um, read the scenarios and then um just chat about what um issues arise or um so on.

And then just to highlight um this is part of the city charter that the citizen advisory boards must complete an annual ethics training.

I think we're one of the only cities that actually has this requirement.

Um the city is required to establish standards and guidelines for conduct and provide annual trainings for all representatives of the city of the city to avoid the use of their public position for private benefit.

You guys are pros.

Um another thing to highlight is that the city attorney is your main contact.

If you ever have any questions, comments, or concerns, and that's Greg Solvan, his contact information will be provided at the end of this PowerPoint.

Let's get started.

John, would you like to kick us off?

Why not?

Thank you.

All right.

A member of the tax increment financing board owns a restaurant and did it in a district and is very invested in improving the district for both their business and Bozeman in general.

They are diligent about filing their financial disclosure form each year and notes the business and property interest on the form.

A developer recently brought before the board a proposal for a hotel in the adjacent unused lot.

The board member, very excited about the hotel, as they had had some conversations with the owners and experts and and and expects the two to share some parking facilities.

The hotel will bring in customers for them.

They don't mention this at the board meeting because there is no direct business interest in the project.

And since their form is on file, staff can bring it up if they think it's a conflict.

The board member enthusiastically approves the hotel.

What are the ethical considerations?

And I won't just put on if anyone wants to hop in, we'll just kind of do it open style.

While I don't have a formal agreement, I do think it's best practice, right, from an ethical standpoint to just note that there might be a potential conflict ahead of time to uh sway any perception going forward that hey, the only reason this happened was because I was not me.

The board member was gonna financially gain from it.

Yep, so conflict of interest, the um board members should disclose their interest in the project on the record at the meeting.

Um code of ethics states that the officials must discharge from their duties impartially and fairly.

Um then also goes on to say that they should not use their position to secure any financial interest or personal interest.

Um and then just that financial disclosure form.

Well, it's public records, staff members typically do not have direct access to these documents and will not necessarily know of potential conflicts of board members, so it's the responsibility of the board member to recognize and to disclose any potential conflicts.

Is that true?

I mean, do they not have access?

Is it public agency?

I mean, isn't that a good idea?

You can go on and I I believe it's public record.

I believe I we could go on and find on the city website right now, maybe just front hand, it's not.

Yeah.

Okay.

Do you know where my financial disclosure forms are?

No, but I could probably find out.

Hold on, Jake.

Let me uh Google.

Any other thoughts on this scenario?

Great.

Marley, thank you.

An active member of the Urban Parks and Forestry Board and vehemently opposes a proposed change to the tree maintenance district.

The subject has been discussed at the board a number of times.

And while a few members agree with them, the majority of the board supports the changes to the district.

The board members member feels like their voice isn't being heard.

So they submit a public comment to the city commission and writes a letter to the chronicle expressing their concerns about the district, acknowledging the experience with the board project given their membership on the UPF board.

They make sure to include on behalf of UPF in the letters to reinforce their legitimate opinion, and so that others will take their opinion seriously.

What are the ethical considerations?

Do I have to answer it?

I can't.

Well, I should John, I'll to me this is pretty clear-cut, right?

That we don't speak on behalf of the board, right?

As is you can as a private citizen write in and express that, but using, like for example, if we were writing for on behalf of the DERD, I'm representing us.

No, that that typically will come from the chair, if anything from a formal letter that we submit.

So yeah, again, it's like if if we do decide if we vote to be cohesive in something, that's one thing, but then it's very clear that we can't be dissenting from that opinion in the public sphere.

I maybe also add, I think in this scenario you would have to disclose that it's your individual opinion, right?

Is it you kind of just say that?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I think you have to do that in writing as well.

Yep.

So board members have free speech rights and can express opinions as private citizens, but they need to keep in mind to not either say or to not say on behalf of the urban parks and forestry board.

Um since they wrote into the chronicle, uh voicing their concerns to the board in the state commission is appropriate, but the member goes further by writing the chronicle as they are no longer acting on behalf of the municipality, but instead on their own interests, they can do so as a private citizen, but using their position as advocacy of their own interests is not appropriate.

Okay, but I have a question on this.

And then somebody was like, absolutely not, I don't believe in it.

And then a write a letter.

Right?

I mean, that would be weird.

Is it unethical if they there's one thing to be weird?

I know.

I I feel like it's almost unethical, though.

I mean, there's Do you have any questions?

You can contact the city attorney and he'll be able to vote.

Okay.

Good out, Emily.

But I do think it takes us to the point that if we have a tough issue and that not everybody agrees that no one speaks on behalf of the board.

Right?

This at one body, one voice.

So if there were ever an issue where everybody else agreed and there was one outlier, we'd probably have to talk through it more because we wouldn't be able to, you wouldn't be able to be on behalf of the board even if that one outlier didn't feel the same.

All right.

But talk to Greg.

All right.

Uh the chair of the down.

The chair of the downtown Airbnb Renewal Board handles settling the agendas.

They also own a hotel in the district.

Recently, the agendas have been pretty full of a new activity in the district.

So they want to prioritize retail and food service projects as they view that as a gap to fill with new development.

A proposed hotel has asked the board to be considered for financial incentives.

The chair knows that this level of request needs to be approved by the DURD and does not go before the city commission, but doesn't want to put it on an agenda as their hotel is covering the needs of the district at the moment.

They didn't give any incentives when building their hotel.

So if they are in a time crunch, they can proceed without the incentives.

I guess in independent directions.

Yeah, financial incentive.

Yeah.

Yes.

Um financial interest does not need to be tangible, regardless of whether the chair is intentionally creating a barrier for the new hotel.

If the new hotel is delayed due to their actions, they stand to keep business at the new hotel, may have been taken away.

They need to be aware of this level of financial interest, and even if motivations are in the right place, the perception of a conflict may still exist.

They need to take this into account in their decision making when setting the agenda.

Any other thoughts?

Nicholas?

A member of the community development board also works for a local nonprofit that helps to coordinate placement of low-income individuals in affordable housing.

They are happy that their involvement on the board can help facilitate a community need, their job also addresses.

Since they are an expert in the area, they make sure that developers coming before the CBB are fully aware of the different resources in the community and gets frustrated when someone asks for an incentive when they haven't gone through all the steps to minimize development costs.

They vote no on these projects since there are so many local organizations that could also benefit from a developer utilizing their resources and only votes yes on projects that maximize these resources.

What are the ethical considerations?

I guess I don't recall how it's actually.

Oh abuse of power in some manner?

Yeah, that sounds about right.

I don't know what you call it.

Selectively picking.

So I heard you say financial interest, but it financial interest does not need to be tangible.

While the board member may have good intentions, they're using their position to build a business for local nonprofits, which benefits their job security directly and community relationships.

This is just not a role of a board member who has a city official needs to put on a different hat to advise the city commission and act on half of the municipality.

And aren't they speaking on behalf of the board as an I mean they're not speaking as an individual, they're speaking on behalf of the board?

Right.

And then it um just also says that they need to discharge their duties and partially and fairly um all board members must consider the information before them with each application, not of life standards not expressly given to her by law.

Sky, well, you do want to realize this one, Skype, I'm like this.

I'll take it.

I got it.

Uh the transportation board is working to coordinate an expansion to the downtown parking garage.

This week the board is considering the construction contract for the garage, which includes a subcontractor, an architecture firm for which a member of the board's daughter works.

The member wasn't sure if approving the contract would show favoritism to a relative.

So they emailed the chair of the board to let them know of the relationship.

The chair thanked the member for letting them know.

When the board got to the item, the member did not disclose a conflict since they already did since the relationship since the relation was once removed from the contract before them, they voted to approve the contract.

What are the ethical considerations?

They shouldn't have voted on it.

Conflict of interest, like family members are included in that clause, right?

Just don't exactly go.

Yep, so disclosure must be on the record.

It's the board's member's responsibility to disclose the conflict at the public meeting.

Knowing of the conflict, the chair also should bring it up since the member failed to do so.

And then nepotism, state officials are not to have interest in contracts if they are directly involved.

Um they're their daughters and subcontractors, irrelevant as she may directly stand to benefit from this contract if approved.

Some good scenarios this year.

Any questions, thoughts?

This is the same one that was done at all the citizen advisory boards.

Here is Greg's contact information, Marley, if you'd like to ask.

I mean, I yeah, I do have a question.

So you know, us being on a development board, a board that does infrastructure.

Many of us are, I think all of us in some way are involved in infrastructure in our professional lives.

Um it seems like I mean the these scenarios, obviously, they're built to create very clear lines, but it seems like you can connect enough dots to make an argument of connection a lot.

I'll say not always, but um it's not as though, I mean disclosing if if I realize I can connect the dots to whatever this infrastructure grant that we're gonna talk about later today.

If I realize that so I work for Dick Anderson, I realize that Dick Anderson's gonna bid on it or something like that.

If I disclose that, is that usually enough where I can then speak and like participate as the chair, or is it usually I gotta remove myself and completely recruise myself the cues myself from the conversation altogether?

Thank you myself from the conversation altogether.

And maybe that's a question to bring up on a case by case basis, but I've always been fuzzy at like when do you just disclose something and when do you actually remove yourself from the conversation?

I had this exact conversation with Terry because when I was coming up on my second term, I was like, I feel like I could have a conflict of interest at every board meeting.

Yeah, you know.

Um, because yeah, it's like I work with developers, I work with building owners, I work with, yeah.

I mean, you know, it's like you could be like, okay.

I mean, there could be a conflict all the time.

You can make a connection.

You could make a connection, but I think unless you were like Dick Anderson is bit is bidding on a project that I have to say yes or no to, then you recuse.

If it's just like I know about the building world and I know in general what all of this means, and yes, at some point, Dick Anderson could benefit financially from some project that could occur sometime.

That's to me that feels, and this is what Terry said.

That is that is just knowledge of the industry.

That's totally different.

And so that's that's the line that I try and find in my mind is like this has no specific financial gain for me.

This is just me using my skill set of the industry versus if I say yes to this, I will show yeah.

I think Jake, another way to think about it too, is if if there's even even an inclination of a per of a perceived benefit from just disclose it.

Yeah, because then you then we're we're click clear, right?

I mean, then we can have the conversation versus the perception, right?

Of hey, I was trying to hide something, or hey, I was trying to make sure that you weren't aware of this.

That just not a good look.

So it's ethics, it's always ethics.

Really clear, right?

Black and white.

Yeah, I think last year was it's in the grid.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, obviously talking to Greg with any of these, but that's exactly my understanding that you all are on these boards for a reason.

You have knowledge, you have experience.

Um, and and you're we need individuals like you on these boards because of your experience.

And so um just keep that in mind.

But I think disclosure is just always the best bet.

So if you look at an agenda item and you think maybe there's a connection or maybe there's a perceived connection.

Um disclose your your involvement.

All right.

All right, way to go, everybody.

Radio, welcome to super ethical.

Yeah, thank you.

And use it.

Oh, yeah, okay.

I can do it.

I can think of it.

Uh, did you get registered?

Did you get ready?

Did you?

Oh, I did, yes.

So um just to let you all know, my daughter is signed up for Montana Outdoor Science School camps.

So thanks for your patience with me.

Um, so we are gonna we're gonna move right into the financial report, I think.

Um, and a quick reminder that we will at some point approve all the batched minutes.

So if you would like to look back, of course, all of our meetings are public.

Um, they're on the city website.

Um, and so you can go back and look.

But at some point we'll have a visual and we'll approve those.

So um, not much to talk of in the way of our current financial report.

I will change this upper dollar amount because I do have a finalized cash balance for the start of our fiscal year.

Only, you know, eight months later.

Uh we did um decide on a panel design for EHO Peace Park.

So that's where that expense went.

11,550 for trees that were planted actually at the end of last year, or not last year, but the end of the last season that were paid for a little bit later, and then the 703 for sunshine lighting is to replace some light bulbs along Main Street and Men and Hall, and then 23,162 latter consultants who is doing the parking fission project for us.

So, any questions?

Current financial report.

All right, we'll move right into our draft budget, which I think I made some notes of, but we'll see how close I am.

Okay, so if you look on the left hand side, that is our um fiscal year 26 amended budget.

We did approve our budget and then had some changes, um, minor changes that were approved later.

Uh year to date, uh, those are the numbers that we just looked at, um, separate from that total income amount, which is our finalized current number.

Just to let you know.

Um, and then we will mostly be focused on our projections in our fiscal year.

So for the sake of walking through that.

We will of course project.

Sorry.

When do you have questions on this?

What's that?

When do you want questions on this as you go or at the end after you get through this?

You know, give me maybe just a couple minutes to just maybe just go through the template and how I have it organized.

And then we'll and then you guys will have comments.

Is that sound good?

Okay.

So if you just look at the projected budget, of course, this is what I'm estimating that we're gonna be paying out or taking in before the end of the fiscal year.

Um this is an estimate.

I will get closer to this number um as we get closer to the final draft, just to let you know.

Um if you look at the fiscal year 27 budget, uh, this of course is simply just based on my projected cash rollover.

We won't have that number until October of fiscal year 27.

So that's always an estimated number.

The operations costs, um, we are estimating an 8% increase.

Um that is pretty much across the board, both for URD, BID, DBA, all of our management fees, specifically due to um bookkeeping increase of cost, small rent increase, um, and insurance costs.

So again, our operations.

Um, the city administration administrative costs, again, 8% increase.

I don't really know that number until I sit down with financial, um, but that's generally a pretty set number.

Um, and then if you look below at expenses, I am trying my best below to compile um these or combine the categories for these expenses so that the next time we look at this, that it will be kind of an apples to oranges comparison in a way, uh specifically because we've been kind of working towards um compiling these into very set categories.

Just to give you a heads up where I'm going with this is essentially breaking them into uh uh categories of projects that we are overseeing, right?

The SILD, Bozeman Creek, uh, you know, the parking vision and some of the the parking data collection if we go into an RFP, uh you know, tree replacement, park improvements, things like that.

Then separately we'll we'll have our grant infrastructure grant as well as our planning grant.

So in a perfect world, that's what we'll be looking at from a compiled grant or compiled budget perspective.

And um just keep in mind when you look at these some dollar amounts are set.

Five million in parking and data collection is really just the um allocated amount that we've been able to just kind of continue into the next fiscal year.

We can take out other items or other projects to increase that amount, but we can have that discussion later.

Um the 335 is of course our annual bond payment.

That does not change.

And then, oh, of course, I should move up the 1.6 of um for the fire station one, which is encumbered until October 2027.

All right, with that, please give me your comments, thoughts, ideas.

John You want to start?

Please.

Oh, I my oh yeah, one little question on the one point six.

Do we know what uh how much interest has been built on that one?

I know it's being held in an interest bearing account.

It is.

Um, I you know what?

At one point I had that, I don't have it right now, but I will find I will find that out.

I think it's in in an email that was going back and forth, but good idea.

Okay.

Uh thanks.

So I agree that getting that that consolidating some of those um line items into one would be great.

Two of those questions are on the alternate transportation project.

Can you explain to me or the board what is that a combination of things, or are we is there another project coming forth?

You know, this specific um amount in here is specifically for that Babcock, Bozeman and Black intersection.

So the actual curb um project, curb enhancement project, although it is for essentially what we deem as projects we'd like to take on.

I do not have any additional projects in that realm, so we could rename it, but that's what sits right there, sits there currently.

And then second question was uh the DP DBIP planning at 100,000.

I know we had 400, you know, and we bumped it down to 40 again, just it's 100 basic, like a yeah, I would think that's where it's gonna be.

Yeah, yeah, it really is.

You know, DB DBIP is really our downtown plan improvement um funds, and I think the thought is really just planning funds, right?

You know, what projects can we take on and and really get the planning needed to to take the next step into the the um actual project stage.

So really just a general aim.

Uh and then maybe as we scroll Emily, if you can scroll up or oh yeah, please sorry, Ellie.

I know we're kind of all over the place.

That's okay.

Uh I was just curious.

I know we don't have the COB in our local share in there.

Are we not getting that for next year?

We are.

Okay.

I just didn't have it broken up when finance told me our our cash number.

I just don't have it broken out, but I will break that out and have it be more specific.

It was kind of one of those this is a draft.

No, it's fine.

I just want to make are you saying that that you're correct.

Roughly three million will be part of the eight, or in addition to this.

No, it's I'm sorry, I should have been specific.

The local share and interest are included in that three, five.

But eight, nine.

In the red column.

Sorry, I'm looking at I don't know the the first line up there if you keep if you go up.

I'm just looking at um, I'm just using this number at the bottom.

Okay.

I'm just carrying that to the top.

My question makes sense though.

So I'm looking at the third line.

Oh, um COB interlocal share.

Oh, yes, yes.

Will that carry over?

And then be an additional it will, I'm sorry.

That's okay.

I know I know.

Yes, it will be an additional amount.

Okay.

Correct.

Um that's it for me.

Thank you.

The the Babcock um Babco Methall, Babcock and Black?

No.

Yes.

Yeah, that you said is that in this that's part of that uh 50,000.

Oh, there it's okay.

That also okay, I was looking at planning.

All right, so that's 50.

So we're projecting to spend the entire utility infrastructure improvement in 26, the full million.

Is that the other 300 that you're talking about?

Like that million dollars for utility improvement projects.

Well, I I will tell you yes, because if we so we will, I should back up.

We will be looking at a TIFF infrastructure grant request, um, about 300,000 is for sewer repairs um at a project right here on Mendenhall.

That will actually be looking into fiscal year 27, part of the million in utility infrastructure improvements.

Board audience.

But it will not be paid out this fiscal year.

It will be requested and likely approved.

But 300, not even the whole million.

Some of that million will be carried carried over as balance.

Absolutely.

Yeah, yeah.

Based on the projections.

Yes, I you know, when I first did this projection, I should tell you, I wasn't totally sure when we pay this out.

But yeah, as soon as I'm clear on my projections, that will absolutely be asked for in 26.

I mean, Jake, there might be to me.

This is a budget.

This is just a guy.

Well, this is a guidepost, right?

Like, hey, we think.

I'm just curious if she yeah, do we think that?

Yeah.

Do we like is that truly what we think?

Maybe.

Well, we do have quite a few months left, correct?

But this is a reimbursement grant.

Correct.

So the I think my projection was not correct, I guess is what I'm saying.

Is when I was kind of estimating it was like, okay, I have a few ass out there.

This might happen before the end of this fiscal year, but you're correct.

It most likely will not at that point, it will be part of the cash balance for the next year.

Sure.

We could look at increasing that amount.

Is that kind of where you're going to do that?

I'm not less worried about the numbers in the spreadsheet.

I'm more worried about the level of interest from the community on that grant.

Like, is there so much interest that we're gonna spend a million dollars in 26?

It sounds like probably not, because the projects aren't gonna one, the actual cash and revert reimbursed that fast.

But two, John, your point, is sh is it true to project that we'll have a million dollars in grants that we're gonna award in 26?

I don't know.

But do we think that's a good guess or not?

Maybe not 26, but I mean there are quite a few projects coming up.

So I think to be able to roll over 27, 28, I can see it.

And you know, I think that number two, and and we can certainly have more discussions about this, but I think that number two is really a guiding number for you all, right?

Is how much really as a board do you all want to support in the way of infrastructure improvements going into this next fiscal year, knowing that we've encumbered five million for parking?

Um it's really just where we're where do you all want to go?

We could potentially get more than a million dollars in ass over next year.

I mean, it's it is a true reality, and maybe you can comment more on that.

But you should just know that that number is really based on I know we're gonna get a lot of ass.

And at the million dollar mark, do we you know approve that many?

And then anything above that, the commission approves, or we go to the commission for additional guidance.

I guess that's a bit where my mind was going.

And I for me as a board member, right?

This just signals our strategy of where we want to invest.

And so we may or may not have, but we're saying we hope we have a million dollars in infrastructure.

We want to address parking, right?

Versus like, hey, if we set aside whatever five million for park improvements, okay.

Well, we're signaling to the community we're really interested in downtown parks.

Well, part of it is like it's working.

Like I remember, you know, go backwards two years.

We were like, how do we get more interest?

We were like starved for grants or people coming in, and then like that effort is proving fortuitous, right?

Like we're gonna do that.

Yeah, absolutely.

We've paid out a residential grant, y'all.

Okay, finally.

Well, and I also think too, if we're paying out one year, if we pay out 400,000 and then the next year if we get a million three as a request, like I don't mind that balance.

Right?

I don't feel like we need to go ask the commission for permission.

Maybe there's rules around that.

There is okay.

No, I I'm that's why I'm asking the question, but so but like that's okay from a logical standpoint.

I think we can make that argument, like, okay, this is why we think we we're asking for your permit approval.

I think the commission would absolutely listen to every word you all are saying.

If we go above, if we want to approve what we more than what we've budgeted for, I think we have a very good argument to the commission for them to say, of course, right?

Because we've outlined priorities, we've set a budget.

Um, I think this number is that, like you were saying, John, that allocated amount.

We're saying this is what we'd really like to support.

Now, if more projects come above and beyond that, then yes, then we can make that call at that time.

You all are an agency of the state as the downtown URD.

So use it at a different level than the other city advisory boards.

You do have a budgetary um, you know, uh abilities.

So the reality is is that if we budgeted for this amount and there is a request, you all do have the ability to approve or deny this.

Unlike the tax increment board currently that does need to go through resolution with the city commission on any amount that is approved over 50,000.

So that's written into their infrastructure grant.

We're taking this a step further to make sure that we kind of protect this amount through our budget more than anything else, right?

So it's like John said, saying this is where we'd like to be if things change, of course, we have avenues to make different decisions.

Okay.

And Ellie, sorry, just to be clear.

So we currently only have pipeline of requests for 300,000 out of that one million?

Yes, correct.

And I'm meeting with Greg.

Um, there are some questions about how our TIFF assistance grant is written in comparison to the midtown TIFF assistance grant, which we are a bit different in the way that we can make decisions, budgetary authority, that sort of thing.

So a meeting with Greg, Greg um with legal tomorrow to make sure that we clarify a few of those things.

Um, I will send you all the um the the request in between now and the next board meeting, and we will really want to you know go through that very specifically.

Um it's a pretty big ask.

This is our first grant ask from an infrastructure grant perspective.

So we'll do that in March.

Piggyback on the next question.

We've spent 423,910 in fiscal year 26 so far.

Yes.

So whatever else we're talking about, whether it be this 300,000 or someone else, that's that's the 300 or whatever you're gonna present later is in addition to the 423,000 we already spent.

Correct.

Okay.

Now, when I filled this out, I did put a million in there thinking maybe it could be paid out within this fiscal year.

It likely will not.

That's fine.

I'm just keeping this dollars.

So that projection line item may be a little bit different when we review it in March.

Okay.

Is there two separate trait replacement projects going on?

It's on there twice under infrastructure improvements.

It doesn't get carried over, but I was curious.

Which one?

I'm sorry, say that again.

Um you have two line items that are the same.

Under infrastructure improvements?

Oh, yeah.

The first line item and a few down.

Oh, I think you have the typo on the first line item.

250 and then 10,000.

Yeah, I think I have a typo right here.

I think what we did is we we put it under tree replacement improvements, and then we kind of added it to just the streetscape improvement.

So I think this is just streetscape improvements is the top.

I think that was just a typo on my end.

So we just m okay.

And then that's the one that'll carry over the first 27th.

Okay.

Yeah, so we'll remove that and it will just be here.

Ooh, okay.

We may need to readjust some of these.

Uh I'll change them.

Sorry, that is a typo, but then I need to look at the far right.

So that's I think the consolidation is good.

Maybe less questions later on also.

Just not soup done super cleanly, but I but I'll I'll clean up some of these.

Okay.

But this is streetscape improvements, not tree replacement.

All right, let's see here.

Any other questions?

Thoughts.

Yeah.

If you if we need to be out of here at one, do you want to jump to your improvement?

Yeah.

All right.

So any other questions on this, we're good.

Okay.

I will have um, you know, just a more refined draft in March again in April.

We will look to approve this in April.

Okay.

All right.

Let's go to my downtown ED report.

We're gonna do this in five minutes, y'all.

Um okay, so just budget season.

We're doing this at all the boards.

So if you're interested in how all these tie together, B I D U R D D B A um and the the partnership budget.

Um I'm happy to share these with you if you'd like them.

It won't bog you down.

Um we are doing a new website to refresh and logo refresh.

So you'll be seeing some new colors and new cool branding for downtown very soon.

Um I am sitting on the MSU strategic planning committee.

Um I'm the only current member not um located on campus.

So um I think it was a pretty special request, and um I'm taking my job very seriously.

And with our first public listen community listening session is Wednesday tomorrow at 6 p.m.

Please join us on campus.

I want people to come.

Um, let's see here.

City meetings.

Keep up with um the Bozeman Creek such and new podcasts.

I haven't heard any more information about the new podcast, but I think it'll be really cool, and I'll keep you guys updated.

We've already have a a couple subjects I've been throwing out at Joey and throwing out to Joey.

Um Downtown Projects TIF Assistance Grant.

We have revamped it, meeting with Greg, move through it.

You guys will get your first big ass next month.

Eho Peace Park work is still going on, and we are planning our grand opening on August 14th.

And we have begun the uh special improvement lighting district for downtown.

Excited to move forward with that.

I will let you guys read um the parking update.

Um, but I am gonna continue to you know take you guys through all of the you know, parking updates, the vision plan, that sort of thing.

Um no current jobs from you all right now, but you will in the near future.

We are going to put a hold on the RFP currently, um, but it is on Greg's desk as well.

If you have any more questions about uh DBA dates and calendars, check those out.

And then I'm just gonna go in here, developments and business updates.

If you guys are interested, we have a lot of new changes in downtown with developments, lots of big developments coming up and lots of new uh businesses opening.

So these these lists are pretty exciting.

So go back and change them.

So that is it from me.

Any questions, concerns?

You want to discuss March date?

Oh, thank thank you.

Yes.

Okay, so um it is spring break during our next March meeting.

We really do need to meet in March because it will be our second draft budget re um review, and I'd love to have one more time to revine refine some of these items before we bring the final draft back to you in April.

Um I did propose a March 25th, which is Wednesday, um, which proposes uh uh um an issue with Douglas.

We would love to have you here, Douglas.

Um so we'd love to readjust it, but also I didn't think about this.

Emily was gonna propose the same date to the BAD board um for the March 25th, and they do have Wednesdays.

I will admit to that that Wednesdays are their day.

So I'm wondering if there may be a different day or two.

I'm gone the 25th, unfortunately.

Oh, so so we have a couple of of issues.

I agreed to be on this national panel for a planning and architecture um conference.

Super random, but I can't do the 24th.

Spring break.

No, no, the week before spring break.

Oh.

Oh, like on the 10th on February 10th.

Yeah, no, uh March 10th.

Oh, sorry, March 10th.

Um I could do that.

The only issue is that our agenda is due, you know, the full week prior.

And so I just, you know, I don't know if that changes anything, but it's just gives a little less time to refine that budget and get where we need to be.

panel for a planning and architecture um conference super random but I can't do the 24th spring break no no the week before spring break oh before oh like on the 10th on February 10th yeah no uh March 10th oh sorry march 10th um I could do that the only issue is that our agenda is due you know the full week prior and so I just you know I don't know if that changes anything but it's just gives a little less time to refine that budget and get where we need to be but I we can schedule I mean I can provide written comments on the the budget so um one I just want to be here on the 20th what do you think March 10th y'all I'm I'm I am good with that if we want to do that 10th march May works noon March 10th okay all right there's the date I will send you guys you'll just need a confirm analog to make sure this room is available but it like what Emily said and even if it's taken we'll just come in and make kick around allowed to we're not allowed to do it in your office.

We need to record yeah yeah that's what's worried about okay yeah yeah and I think any budgetary discussions I think it are are pretty critical to have them in this room so okay well we'll go with March 10th for now and if that changes we can certainly handle it through email and then one more thing and that is welcome Commissioner Fisher we are so excited to have you my list um that I included on this agenda is wrong we assume that Joey might be joining us but we are so excited to have you and Douglas was on the BID board and was just an outstanding member and we're just yeah if you want to say anything please take it.

You missed that I we we went over it and you guys are at time anyway so thank you though it is an honor to be here thank you thank you.

All right well well uh we'll adjourn call today thank you everybody goodbye good job do you think