Hello, everybody.

We are having our last kind of pre-meeting of the budget before it is introduced on the uh October 6th City Council agenda.

Just to kind of wrap up those who are watching the kind of the purpose of this meeting, we had an initial introduction meeting and then we had two workshops for each department.

We went through each department to go through their budget.

The council gave feedback on items that they maybe would like to see adjusted or cut.

And the mayor and her team have taken that into consideration or coming back with us with a few adjustments today.

Today's meeting, the way this is going to go.

After that, the council will be able to ask questions or make comments.

And I don't anticipate this will be a meeting that will go all the way till 11 as scheduled.

But the time is there and we'll not shut off conversation.

I want to make just kind of some opening comments before I turn it off and turn it over to our mayor.

I know sometimes things kind of get uncomfortable when you're dealing with very serious topics that matter to so many people here, and we're facing a lot of challenges with Senate Enrolled Act 1, so this is uh not a fun budget season for us.

Uh, but we appreciate your willingness to consider our viewpoints.

The two biggest changes that she'll be going over.

One is experienced Carmel is no longer uh in the 2026 budget.

Um, that will be an item that we will continue to discuss in 2026, but not will not be launching on January 1st.

And then the consulting money for Indy Partnership, which is part of Indy Chamber, uh, that has been adjusted, and um there's also some money available from that too.

And Mayor Finkel will go into more detail.

Um, I really thank you for that because I vow to you that I will uh keep an open mind uh in 2026 for experienced Carmel, and we will have some robust discussions, and we won't have as much of a compressed timeline to talk about this, which will uh I think make for better discussion.

And with that, I will turn it over to Mayor Finkham.

Thank you.

Good morning, council.

Uh, you already pretty much went over the but uh uh agenda.

However, we will be also talking, updating you on the bonding capacity and just the quick next steps for your actions on the budget.

Uh so moving forward, uh, thank you for the overview.

I just cut out a couple paragraphs because I was gonna go over the process, so you took the care of that.

Uh, today we do enter a new phase of the budget preparation for 26.

Um, for those who have not been following closely since this summer, our budget or our departments have been working diligently with me and our finance team to match programmatic desires with economic realities.

And uh as you are all away here, it's a long slow work, but it's really important.

Uh as you know, Senate Enrolled Act 1 changed the landscape for Indiana cities and Carmel included.

Expectations we had this time last year evaporated as that legislation became law, and we modeled out the impacts.

Gone was the expectation of continued generous general growth fund general fund growth and available access to bond funds.

Uh notably, this took a further hit as the Hamilton County auditor recently reduced Carmel's net assessed values in response to their calculation error as they interpreted this complex new law.

Uh, my priorities throughout every main public safety infrastructure, parks, and arts, but no department achieved everything they sought.

We balanced each request against limited revenues.

Taxpayers asshared that food prices, back to school costs, and rising home costs due to a shortage of housing have hit their pocketbooks hard.

And we've listened, and this budget we delivered, does not require tax increase.

I'm also proud to say that by keeping the line on expenses, unlike many Indiana communities, our team members are getting market and cost of living adjustments this year.

Today we're here to present some updates to our proposed budget, addressing the two main concerns you shared.

For the revised proposal, we are suggesting two major changes.

As Council President Austin said, removing the experienced Carmel grant from the budget and reallocating those funds to the MAC department and reducing by 120,000 dollars funding to Department of Economic Development and allocating those dollars to MAC.

To be clear, I believe strongly in a model like Experienced Carmel, community-based with many stakeholders and a diversified revenue structure.

It's appropriate that the City of Carmel graduate into this model.

As many of you expressed worry about the timing required to receive to uh realize the fulfillment of experienced Carmel.

I'm proposing to collaborate with the council over the next 12 months to build an experienced Carmel model that meets the need of our community that we can budget for this time next year.

Well, I believe the first of the year timeline was workable.

I appreciated that the council did not.

As such, moving it out for 12 months should give everyone comfort that the that Carmel can achieve this change.

My economic development plan is rooted not only in the best that Carmel has to offer, but also the regional advantages of Central Indiana.

Indie Partnership, the 10 County Regional Economic Development Program housed within the Indy Chamber, focuses on marketing the region.

Simultaneously, we work to position Carmo for Winds.

It's a partnership, not a delegation.

Eschewing regional economic development is a throwback to a bygone era.

People and businesses are mobile.

We have to be attractive region to support future growth.

The Indy Chamber also has approximately 100 Carmel businesses that are members and also share our vision of regional cooperation.

And we'll need regional support in the coming years because it's expected that by 2030, we will need to import approximately 18,000 workers to fill Carmel jobs.

However, to make this work by keeping Mac in-house, we will scale down this involvement and ask the CRC to take on take on economic development work.

Normally their work focuses on redevelopment, so focus on proactivity will take some transition.

Finally, I would like to take a moment to talk about our city team.

As I mentioned before, this budget has hundreds of team members that work for our community.

They perform at a high level and deserve credit for a job very well done.

Their budgets have been significantly trimmed, and in some cases, open positions are not being filled, as we discussed the last time we were together.

They all deserve our respect and support.

We will not falter or fail in our support for ensuring Carmel continues to bill for big dreams.

Zach Jackson, our CFO, will now go through some specifics, but I hope you recognize the significant changes made here in an effort to partner with you.

I look forward to passing this budget and getting the work of the people of Carmel underway for 2026.

Thank you so much.

Zach.

Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Council.

So first of all, I just want to reiterate the priorities that have not changed through this process.

And so as the mayor mentioned, no tax increase is being requested this time.

We have spending proposed that does not exceed available revenues.

And just as a I guess as a point of clarification with regards to the changes that were announced from the county on their recertification of NAV, that did not change our operating revenue estimates, so that number is still the same at the 144.3 million that I've mentioned for a few weeks now.

We'll continue to fund essential services and improve our infrastructure.

We've provided the team with a 3% salary increase of COLA, but no COLA for the mayor or the senior leadership.

We've maintained unappropriated reserves of 15% of our annual budget, and that includes 10% reserve in the rainy day fund.

As we've discussed, we've made some changes in response to feedback from council on the experienced Carmel shift as well as trimming some expenses out of the economic development department.

And so how those actually pan out here.

It does come at a slightly higher cost by moving that in, a few hundred, I think about 200,000.

And so you'll see some reductions that I'm going to mention here that help to afford that change.

We made a minor reduction at CRC in terms of some of their membership fees, and then just other adjustments as we've whether to kind of get to these numbers or just some cleanup.

There was an omission in the docs budget, and so we we needed to plus that up by 60 grand the overtime at the I should have put it Brookshire there.

Well, we fixed overtime funding at Brookshire.

It was overfunded by 22 grand.

And then also with the permission of the clerk, we've removed the tuition reimbursement funding that was included in his budget, as that will be uh covered by HR's appropriation.

And again, that was uh that wasn't us kind of unilaterally doing that, that was with cooperation with the clerk's office.

With this next slide, I'd like to kind of clarify how things are looking for the art support and operations budget line.

And so I've tried to separate uh the art support from the operations.

And so the four lines listed at the top are the support for the arts grants, the payment for the uh for REI to take care of the James building and the theaters, and then as well as the center's uh management fee as well as the reimbursables for the center.

So in this top section, uh you can see that we have uh the current year appropriation is 6.6 million.

Uh as of right now, we've spent about 5.5 of that.

Uh and then the request for next year uh is about 6.4 million, and so that's a 3.1% decrease in the arts support section here.

On operations, uh the overall reduction is uh appears to be much more significant, 64.5%.

Uh but actually 1.2 uh 3 million of 1.23 million of that reduction is actually a shift over to the uh food and beverage tax fund for next year because there's simply just not enough general fund money to to afford these things.

Um the the reduction in that uh the the true reduction, if you will, uh in that section is is more in the ballpark of two three hundred thousand as uh some of the projects that we uh the capital expense projects rather than paying cash for those uh next year, which again we just we don't have the cash to to make those payments, we have uh instead we're we're we're doing a capital lease for those things.

Um so we're still covering them, we're just covering them through a different payment mechanism.

Moving to the surplus statement, um this looks largely the same as the version I uh I shared uh uh earlier this month.

Uh really the only change on this document from what you've seen in the past is that the proposed budget for 2026, that 144.263 uh is a number that I think is about 300 dollars uh less than it was before.

And so again, for the year, we're looking at revenues of 144.265 million and appropriations of 144.263, leaving an annual surplus of just under 1700.

Uh general fund balance remains um virtually unchanged uh year to year at 10 point uh 75, and then combined reserves would also uh be maintained at approximately 23.5 moving into bonding capacity, and this was already something that was going to be significantly lower than what our capacity was last year.

Um, but with the recertification of NAV originally we were at 12.689 billion uh for CNAB with the recertification that that changed to 12.4 billion.

At this point in time, uh I shouldn't say it like that, there is no new debt that's needed in order to maintain our current uh property tax rates for 2026.

There is the capacity to bond for one time uh of 1.25 million.

However, uh there are probably a couple cons a few concerns with that, and that would be one uh Senate Enrolled Act 1 does discourage short-term geo bonds.

There are some ways to um I don't want to say get around that, but it does not restrict lease rental bonds, um, and there might be the possibility of putting some uh slight payments uh trailing a one-year bond, so it wouldn't look like a one-year bond, but it's it it would it would be rather creative to get there.

Um also taking on additional debt this year uh as as the as the levy is impacted by the by the deductions, taking on more debt this year will impact our operating levy in 2027 adversely.

Essentially, we'd have to uh uh our operating levy would go down.

And then uh if we take no action, and and this isn't so much of a negative, but if we take no action, uh the city will still receive that 1.25 million, it will just be added to the balances of the reserves for the property tax-backed funds, property tax-backed bond funds.

And then just as a reminder, we've got uh 10 6, the first reading of uh the budget ordinance, and then on October 20th, the the second reading and scheduled vote.

And with that, we're happy to take it.

One thing I would want to clarify at the end while we anticipate a vote on October 20th, uh, what is according to the state statute if I needed to call a special meeting after between that and the day, what would that be?

Let me let me confirm that for you.

I I know that there's a deadline for when the finance department has to submit the budget to DLGF that's approximately um November 9th, but I think that's it's not so much that the 9th is a is a firm deadline, it's more of you have so many days after your meeting to submit it, but I'll send you some.

We're gonna shoot for that though, because I also know that after we pass a budget, you need time to make the changes to submit it.

But um, I just want to be clear that for the public that the 20th isn't the statutory deadline, it's kind of our hopeful target.

All right, with that, please let me know if you like questions, comments.

Who wants to get started?

Councillor Schneider?

And then Zach is the proposed salary ordinance, or the is that reflected in the budget, current budget.

It it is.

Um the the proposed has uh the the proposed salary ordinance that's in committee right now has uh you know, like about five employees uh that would receive a salary increase for next year.

Um we've budgeted for those as well as the COLA for next year, uh, which is not in that salary ordinance yet.

Um and then also the step increases that kind of last round of step increases uh that would go into effect January 1st, those are budgeted for as well.

Plus this morning.

I'm sorry, yeah, and and plus the the uh matrix increases for Sworn have been budgeted as well.

Thank you.

Counselor Taylor.

Thank you, Zach Mayor.

Um, what was our what was our recertified CNAF or certified net assessed value and and if it didn't affect our general fund levy, um what revenues did it affect?

Yeah, it yeah, it's um it so initially they when when they came out in August, it was that 12.689 billion was the was the uh CNAV at that time.

Uh but then the uh the new C N A B, which technically we've seen the numbers, they do not become official until I think this Friday.

Public hearing.

Yeah, but but that's that 12.4.

Um it so that so the overall reduction there of 285 uh million on CNAV.

Uh it it the reduction is only on the debt levy side, um, and that's where we were originally thinking that we could bond for approximately four million for this year, and so now it's it's down to 1.25.

Okay.

And then just real quick, um, I have another follow-up question later, I'll ask.

Counselor Warall.

Well, I thought you had a question.

Yeah.

Did you want to ask the question now, Castor Taylor?

Oh, sure.

Okay.

Um related but unrelated to the arts.

You know, we have an appointee to the um for CDC.

Um the net operating income for the James Building has declined because of the debt service on the mortgage for the James building.

Um there's some concerns from one of our appointees for the ability to continue to run the master lease program for the art galleries and in particular for a couple of the unit um a couple of the galleries or um beneficiaries of the arts and design district.

Um wanted to see if we just if I could get a report on what where that net operating income stands, what the profit and loss looks like, an SR appointee, um, and then also is there solutions maybe of what is that um current market value based on what we think is a capitalization rate and the net operating income for that James building, at least the condo portion that's not a um that's condoed out for the for-profit uh rental uses.

And is it in you know knowing the energy center, all the other items that we have coming up and the and the challenges?

I wonder if they could do an assessment to see if they could sell that for-profit component of the James building, what type of revenue net uh uh net um sales proceeds that would create and what type of opportunities that creates for our budget, if not um 26, but uh maybe even 27.

Thank you.

Yes, happy to provide you that information.

We're currently looking at a lot of our real estate holdings.

Okay, thank you.

I wouldn't I would add to Councillor Taylor's comment that you know art galleries in the arts district are very important to kind of we call it the Carmel Arts and Design District, not just the design district.

So uh anything we can do to continue to support those art galleries flourishing in our downtown, I think has been um part of our strategy.

Counselor Warall.

Thank you.

Um Zach, could you then um since stuff is rolling back into the MAC department, can you go ahead and give us a summary?

I was just trying to find the presentation, but could you give us a summary now what the Mac budget was, what it's going to, all the you know puts and takes if you would.

Yeah, happy to.

So I believe the 2025 appropriation uh for the MAC department is 4.2 million and and change.

Uh as it was originally uh laid out in in the budgets that we've unveiled up until this point, um we had a uh requested approximately I think 775,000 for uh the the new Mac department comms team and then the one point uh I think it was 1.8 million dollar uh grant to experience Carmel that was funded through the art support line.

So the 775 plus the 1.8 uh gets you uh 2.575.

The uh new amount for Mac is just barely over 2.8 million, it's like 2.803 if I remember correctly.

Um so in total, we had to plus it up uh by about 228,000 or so uh once we added it back.

So 2.8 million in in total.

Great.

So I I okay, so I think um now so all the employees stay.

So I so if we're going from 4.2 to 2.8, can you send us a document so I can understand where all the puts and takes are?

But assuming all the employees that everything remains the same, there's just something different from the 4.2 to 2.8.

I think that's what we'll detail in the document for you.

I think it's a little more complex.

And again, we also not knowing where this is going, haven't discussed this with the Mac team yet.

So we're trying to respectful of this, just like the salary survey, uh, we have to do this publicly, but not yet with the team.

So Kelly's been instantly involved in all these changes, but we'll get that to you in writing.

Okay.

Counselor Josh.

So could you also um Zach walk me through the differences between the arts grant support that you originally proposed and the arts grants reduction in support that you're proposing now?

Yeah, and and thank you for the question, Counselor Joshi.

Um we have not changed our requests for uh for those lines, and so uh they have changed or they they have uh remained the same since the past versions of this budget that you've seen.

So on the screen here, we have uh the proposed 1.25 million for the support for the arts uh grants for for 2026.

Um that compares to the 1.47 that was appropriated this year, uh, but uh we we've only spent 1.36 of that this year.

And then uh uh I I would were you asking about the management fee as well.

Okay, so yeah, that had been at uh 2.25.

Uh we've distributed that 2.25 this year, and we've not changed our um our request on that.

It it's it's still at the 2.15 uh a reduction of 100,000.

Um I'll note that we have increased our uh reimbursables for the uh center for next year.

Um that has gone up from where we budgeted 1.62 million this year to 1.735 for next year.

But as we discussed, you know, the concerns about reduction in the funding for the arts grants.

There was a conversation about trying to hold that number and not have that significant of a reduction, but my understanding is then that has not changed.

We have not made those adjustments to try to increase our support for the arts grants.

That's correct.

Um jump to councillor Bernard, but I want to just uh just because why it ties into that.

Um I asked Mayor Finkham about this uh in the meeting yesterday.

Um I anticipate that counts will have other cuts that they suggest throughout this process.

You know, it happened last year, it'll likely happen this year.

Um if that were to happen and the council reduces money, it sits unappropriated in the general fund, and you have the opportunity to restore even a portion of some of those arts grants.

Um would you consider that?

Happy to consider any requests the council makes.

I would say my first priority for any if there are any cuts that come out of this budget, we go to the Fire Station 7.

And also funding our chiller, which is on its last leg that supports all of our arts.

Okay, so then probably not because those things are to take consideration.

Okay.

Council Minar.

Thank you, Mayor Finkham, for all your hard work and dedication to this.

Um I know it was tough decisions to be made, and I appreciate that very much.

Um, one of the things that I do want to touch on as well are the arts grants, and I really want the the general public to know that you have committed to our resident companies, that they'd be a priority, and um hopefully they receive the higher grant dollars.

I mean if I'm being selfish, I'd like to see that.

Um to uh Council Morell's excuse me, Counselor Austin's point.

The focus for you is going to be on the chillers and what was the other thing you said?

Fire station seven design in particular.

Okay, all right.

So, what would the cost for those items be?

Just because uh if it's those are the priority, then it sounds like the arts grants are likely not being restored.

I think there's a lot of work to do.

The initial estimate we got for the chiller was 14 million, and there's no sinking fund that we were left with for that.

So we're gonna have to be creative on how we get that funded.

Before I get to second by the apple, uh, Councillor Locke or Councillor Ergy in comments.

Okay, Councillor Taylor.

Thank you, President Austin.

Um I apologize, I'm gonna go back in history a little bit here, and this might be helpful to these conversations going forward related to the Center for Performing Arts.

Um I was president of the fourth CDC, we had the unique opportunity to work with the City of Carmel and the Carmel Redevelopment Commission to develop and finance uh the palladium and the center for performing arts, including the energy center, which we know is now failing, and the purpose of the energy center is to supply um heating and air to City Hall, Station 41, uh portions of the police station, and obviously the entire campus of the Center for Performing Arts.

Uh that fails in the middle of winter or in the middle of the heat of the summer, you're not performing in the palladium.

So that's a huge priority.

Um but I also know that during the initial discussions of the creation of the Center for Performing Arts and the development of the palladium is we talked about many different sources of revenue.

And at the time, uh one of the discussions were related to uh fee revenue that could be passed along through ticket sales for capital asset replacement.

I know the center has done a great job of developing a capital asset management plan, identifying deferred uh ongoing for deferred maintenance, which they recently shared, um have shared in the past, previous administration, but also just recently shared with the city.

But at the time, adding additional fees to the ticket prices at the beginning of a newly formed venture by the city of Carmel was chosen not to adapt additional fee structures that could create additional revenue not only for the center, but also for the city for these important items, including paying for a management fee, replacement of boilers and chillers, and long-term capital maintenance for the center, which there is no plan besides what the center's funded, but there's no funding plan to provide long-term capital asset maintenance and replacement for the entire center campus, which is a huge problem.

Um core to this, and I think this um you know, this this discussion about the management fee today is that the original management agreement with the with the city of Karma with the center is not very prescriptive.

I don't know many management companies or actually owners would maybe uh enter into a management fee structure uh management agreement like this because it doesn't provide any guardrails, not only for um expectations of funding for the Center for Performing Arts, the management fee and and funding can be changed at any time at the will of any administration, but also for the city, it doesn't provide guardrails on the introduction of additional fee structures, etc.

that could help fund these items.

So I implore um this administration, the Center for Performing Arts, and this council to over the next year to look at really incorporating a management agreement that solves many of these problems, so we're not continually addressing these issues every single year.

And I think renegotiating that agreement would create clarity and solve many problems that we're discussing today.

So I just wanted to make that statement and make sure everybody aware was aware of some of that history and see if over 2026 we can enter into a better management agreement that provides budget clarity for the city of Carmel, a capital asset management plan and how we could possibly fund some of these items and also clarity for the center so they know that uh their revenue um is committed through a uh official management agreement.

Thank you.

I I will point out that you say they're not to have this argument year out year after year.

This is the only time we've ever had this argument um in the history of the palladium.

I'm not saying argument.

I'm saying it's a it is a discussion every year and even during the discussion last year.

It even if uh even if the pr but the previous what through the management agreement at the will of an administration through their budget process, they can and the count and the will of a council, they can change that management agre that management fee without without um any agreement from the Center for Performing Arts because of the way this management agreement is is written.

Counselor Minard.

Uh quick question.

I I I don't I know you'll probably update us, but uh with the prevail and cherish, the prevail and the cherish house, I think they call it, um those dollars were in that one point, is that right, the one point eight million dollar grant or police department, correct?

Yeah, both of those in the Carmel Police Department.

They are in those.

Okay, I just wanted to be sure because they really support yeah.

It's it's such a both of those functions are so intertwined with what the police department does.

Okay, I just couldn't remember.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Councilor Rowe.

Thank you.

Um okay, so I want to go back now to the uh economic development uh budget.

So the Indy partnership, those dollars are being returned to where for indie partnership, where do those dollars go?

Is that going to CRC or Yeah?

So so we have not shifted those dollars.

The the uh uh the new total for economic development, I believe, would be one hundred and twenty thousand, and that includes um some contract cost as well as some some travel costs.

Uh I'd have to get you a a a better breakdown.

I don't have that off the top of my head, but I can uh we've not shifted any funding to to CRC.

Okay.

Um but you will or so I was just trying to figure out where that money's going.

Is it just staying?

Yeah Yeah, so we are we are still requesting an economic development department appropriation of uh of 120,000.

Okay, got it.

And so then under the things that Indy partnership was gonna do, undertake business sex sector cluster mapping, coordinate city participation and up to two visiting city events in Carmel, manage Carmel Mayor Business Visit Program, and reply to business leads for growth or expansion.

How is that gonna be covered now?

That work will be done in a combination between the mayor's office and the CRC with the exception of the cluster analysis, and we would ask one zone to uh help us with that by finding another partner to do it.

Okay.

So you think that work is important?

We want to pursue it.

So the that lat the cluster will then go into the one zone it'll remain it'll remain an economic development budget, which will be part of a contract to one zone.

Okay.

Does the one zone contract change in price?

I believe it does have to get to the details later.

Okay.

Yeah, I mean I just I want to know.

Yeah.

So okay.

All right.

Um, so then so the one zone list of items that you presented before goes up by that uh that item that they're going to increase the work and increase the contract.

Is that correct?

Again, we'll get you that detail in writing.

Okay, I believe that's correct, but I don't want to misspeak.

Okay.

All right.

Okay.

I'll wait.

Counselor Snyder?

Can I you say it's important, maybe I need a better understanding.

Like what I don't why do we need the cluster analysis?

I mean, I mean, I can understand that for areas with boroughs, large areas, but maybe to help me better understand that.

So it'll allow us to better target industries and target companies then that could come to Carmel as the is a net answer on that, the short answer on it.

And I think that we know that we have a lot of jobs in the white collar sector, like uh finance, knowledge-based workers, accounting, health care.

But this allows us to look at some sub sub segments as well and really determine what's moving, what's interested, where how Carmel is a good fit.

So I really want to make decisions based on data and target appropriately.

I think that's important.

So those that fit us.

So I I uh I hear the data collection, which great.

I mean, can never have too much data.

When you talk about moving people here, though, is I think we've we've talked about how until we reduce our growth under four percent, we're always gonna be in this perpetual cycle.

So, like how important is bringing more people to Carmel as far as just residence-wise.

Well, we anticipate after a couple years that some of these ceilings that are on top of us will be lifted from the state legislature, and any kind of corporate headquarters move or large move will be more than two years out.

So it's feeding the pipeline, Counselor Snyder.

That's what we're interested in.

Thank you.

Especially on again, the US 31 corridor, we're seeing decrease in assessed values, decrease in revenues, decrease in tax revenues to us.

Any other questions?

The council.

You want a second?

Sorry, yeah, I wanted to do when we do, I'm sorry.

When we do our and this may not be an impact for this year, but as we consider how we're tackling issues or trying to find additional monies, when we do our rainy day fund with 15% of 10.

It's 10.

Um is that off of the total operating uh general fund, or is that because I just I just kind of removed all things that would not be necessary in a shutdown, for instance, and if it was off of the actual needs instead of some of the wants, would that be an impact?

So the 10% was originally put in place at my request when I was on city council to have some type of metric, right, that we could track.

What I would love to see over time, which I don't know if this is where you're getting to or not, is that these are actually tied to long-term capital asset needs.

So maybe the rainy day fund is 5% or 3 million or whatever the number is that we deem important, and the balance that is actually has names to those dollars that we can put them to work.

I don't like keeping the big amount there that can be put to work for the taxpayers, but without a capital asset plan where we know what we're gonna basically need to spend when it's more like just a really big piggy bank in case needs like the chiller come up.

So just because I don't have it pulled out.

What is the what is the line item for rainy day fund this year in this budget?

14.3 million.

14.3.

So yes, to your point.

14.6 would like to see that.

Under rating a fund balance is second to the bottom number there if you see that.

Okay.

And and just to clarify also I think the requirement is that it's uh it's 10% of that uh appropriated budget for the year, whatever council passes is the overall general fund budget.

It's and is that a state thing or is that our us thing?

So if it if we did have somebody look through this and say, okay, to actually function the city for now the way it's set up, it wouldn't necessarily have to we could take out a whole bunch of stuff that there's no reason to and I I've got the clerk's office in front of me at the moment, like chamber luncheon fees does not need to be can contribute to the percentage for rainy day fund.

Like I'm just thinking of a way to reduce that number without actually reducing the the ability to serve the community should some disaster happen, is just my thought.

Uh it's arbitrary and set whatever we want.

We do have the 15% requirement right overall for um non-appropriated funds.

I do feel like uh it's right for discussion once we get a long-term capital asset plan in place.

This was the conversation we had when this was put in place was we have a lot of spending, we have a lot of debt and uncertain times, so let's at least have some policy tied to savings that we could as a council control.

I I would also just reiterate, you know, as as I look at uh as we were building the 26 budget and also looking at 27.

We do have very healthy reserves.

It's it's more of an ongoing revenue uh challenge for for 26 and 27, and that's why we tried to use one-time dollars uh uh that were appropriated this year uh or through the food and beverage tax that weren't appropriated this year uh to try to buy down our our spending for 26 and 27.

Before I get into like third comments, Counselor Joshi Lock Air is anyone in an additional comment?

Okay.

Counselor Taylor?

I just wanted to also enter into the conversation about the general fund balance and uh reining day fund balances is uh what's also very important about that is um creditors in our rating agencies really look at um what type of reserves we have.

Um we have a double A plus bond rating right now, so in the future we do we do need to issue debt, those reserves are very important when um our bonds are being rated, which obviously the higher the rating the l the lower cost of issuance and interest rate.

So um they have their own sort of uh benchmarks on where they would like to see our cash balances, and it would be interesting if our last rating called Zach, if you might be able to provide any commentary from the rating that was done in 24 about those balances and if they're sufficient based on user SP.

Yeah.

We we'll we'll get to some of the borrowing stuff.

I want to still talk about this this budget.

Um the um uh before we cut a I don't wanted to suggest maybe if we have a shift in topic, if there are any cuts that counselors wanted to bring up identify, you don't have to bring about this moment, you can always bring them up later.

But if any council has seen any of the cuts that they would like to suggest for this budget.

I just had one question actually on the um when we had talked about the food and beverage tax and applying it to the repairs for the chiller, was that was one of the things we had talked about, correct?

That's a that's a possibility.

We we have not um at this time earmarked any of those those dollars for that, but it it's certainly a possibility.

Okay, because that was one thing that I know we had been brought up, and then you know the concept that that the mayor talked about with um the rainy day fund being used for example things like the chiller.

I mean, this is this cap long-term capital management.

Long-term capital asset management plan is obviously critical to a city's infrastructure, and infrastructure is not sexy, and I understand that, but it is what allows us to continue to function as a city.

So I'm all for creating a plan like this, but I'm also if the original intent of the Rainy Day Fund was in fact to use it for certain small projects where we knew there was a small amount that we were gonna take out and do, and that would allow for other areas of the budget to be funded.

I just want us to think a little bit creatively, and so I'm asking really for all of council to sort of consider that as well as the mayor and kind of work together as we look at these details to see where we can actually allocate these pieces counselors.

Um I do have one idea I want to raise for discussion is possible cuts to look at right now.

Um if you look at our uh legal services outside legal help that we've you know had throughout the years, um I think that's remained generally static.

Um I support our city legal department being able to use you know specialists outside of you know City Hall to protect our city.

Um for making cuts everywhere, I do think that's something we need to look to cut.

Um see if we can do more of that work in-house with our attorneys.

And uh, you know, we've had some instances where we've spent over a hundred thousand dollars on on matters that um, for example, the Chris Kindle market, where um it it raises the concern that maybe that outside legal funds is overfund, overfunded, and we can start doing a little more work in-house um for our legal fees.

So I'm gonna raise that as something that is a possible cut.

We say we're making cuts everywhere.

I've looked through this budget.

There are a lot of areas that saw increases and not cuts.

And so we're gonna keep looking at that as we try to get a budget for October 20th.

Any other council comments or questions?

Counselor Schneider.

I don't have our sheets right in front of me, but I thought the the Berkshire overtime was like 44,000.

That's right.

It was essentially double funded uh in two lines, and and so we removed one of those 22,000.

So now it's it we we cut the 44 in half, basically.

But the director said there would be no overtime, that he doesn't do overtime.

There there is overtime for one employee there.

If there aren't any other we we can always don't have to go to 11.

So any other closing questions or comments?

If not that, I will adjourn the meeting.

Thank you.