All right, we'll go ahead and get started here.

It is 8 30.

First fiscal committee meeting of the year.

Happy New Year to everybody.

We've got 11, I believe.

Yes, 11 items before us this morning.

So item number one, we've got a resolution to strike the outstanding 2020 personal property taxes from the delinquent tax rule.

The amounts to a write-off not to exceed 87,107 and 57 cents of personal property taxes, which 24,058 dollars and eighty-four cents is really the city of Grand Rapids and Villages.

Is there a motion?

So move.

Support.

Alright, moved and support.

I'll turn to Mr.

Golinsky.

Good morning, Commissioners.

Morning.

This is an item that comes to us every single year.

So after uh six years, we cannot no longer collect delinquent personal property taxes.

Those are taxes on business assets.

We bring this to you every single year to ask your approval for this first before we can move forward with moving it to a circuit court bill because it had does have to go through the 17th Circuit Court to be signed off on.

It does not stop our collection right now as of today.

We do have until June 30th.

So we're going to continue to collect this money or attempt to collect this money until then.

We have small businesses that go out of business relatively quickly, and sometimes we will not be able to find those assets or the person has actually moved out of Grand Rapids and we cannot go get these this tax money.

The important thing to note is that $24,000 is actually related to city millages.

The other monies are related to all the other local tax collecting authorities.

And I have already notified all of those tax collecting authorities of the dollar amounts that they will not be collecting through if we have to write off the entire amount.

Including how they can possibly file for uh the small business taxpayer exemption.

So we we do try to bring that to light to hopefully diminish their tax burden in future years.

Okay, thank you so much.

Um I do remember this coming before us annually too.

Uh what is this amount compared to past years?

Is it higher or lower?

Um it's slightly higher.

Last year, I think it was right around the $18,000 level.

Okay, I think in total it was $54,000, $55,000 versus $84.

Um, but again, we work on that continually all the way through June 30th, and we're hoping to diminish that number.

Okay, awesome.

Colleagues, any questions on this one?

Comments?

I think uh commissioner, just to understand some of the scope.

Sure.

Um we build over 18 million dollars in 2020 for those delinquent personal property taxes.

We're talking a very, very small percentage that go uncollected.

Yep, no, that's good context to add.

I appreciate that.

Um, hearing no other comments, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any oppose?

The motion carries.

That brings us to item number two.

We've got a resolution authorizing a 285,000 dollar budget substitution for an asset management plan uh for our fire department facilities.

Is there a motion?

So move support.

All right, moved and support.

We got two right here.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Uh well, this is a timeout for us.

Um we had a lot of emergency repairs over the last several years.

Frankly, just trying to keep our stations going.

And we got to a point where we're we're almost caught up.

You'll see number three.

We still have a few emergency repairs left.

Uh, we thought it was time to bring in the professionals, align with uh the city facilities plan, uh the engineering department, and really get a good look at our 13 locations and over 250,000 square foot under roof.

And uh, we're excited to go through this and have a plan to move forward.

So just to put it in context, we were up to almost two million dollars a year in facilities uh spending on these fire stations, and so we decided to take a year off and just do a reset, make sure we're spending the money as wise as we can.

Okay, great.

And and really the the goal with this is um you know, doing an asset management plan to help um, I guess preemptively prevent some of those repairs in the future.

So it's prevent emergency repairs, extend the useful life, and then eventually, like our division avenue fire station, there's gonna come a point where it it just doesn't make any more sense to dump money into a certain building.

Sure.

Yep.

Okay.

Colleagues, any questions or comments on that one?

Does any of this money come from the state allocation chief?

No, this is our normal capital funding that that we use, and we just said, hey, we're not gonna spend 1.8 million this year.

We're gonna take a year off and have experts come in.

So this was we had already planned on spending money in some form or fashion for our buildings, just not a plan.

That's why we have to move it.

Thank you.

Yep, good question.

All right.

I will call the question then.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any oppose?

The motion carries.

That brings us to item number three, also referenced uh by Chief.

It's a resolution authorizing uh 180,000 budget substitution for exterior facade repairs uh at various fire stations.

So move support.

All right, move Dan Support and anything.

Right.

Yeah, so Le Grave, Chester, and Kalamazoo have received extensive uh tuck pointing and brick work.

Unfortunately, at the Kalamazoo station, which was constructed in 1987.

It's not like it's a really really old building.

Uh they discovered quite a bit of water damage uh behind the bricks, and so they had to it's actually tinted right now, they're heating it, they're peeling off a ton of bricks, they're gonna repair the water damage and put everything back.

So that exceeded our original maintenance type of tuck pointing when they when they dug into it.

So again, it's a good year for us to kind of take a pause, get these emergency repairs done, and then live to fight another day.

So awesome.

Anything to add, anything to ask?

All right.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any oppose the motion carries.

Thank you.

Thanks so much.

That will bring us to item number four.

We've got a resolution allocating uh 14,000 sixteen dollars and sixty-seven cents of GVSU's Bellknap property voluntary payment funds to neighbors of Bell Knack look uh look out for community benefits.

So move support.

Moved and supported.

We got Mr.

Kane here to tell us a little bit more about this.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Uh this is a long-standing agreement between GVSU, the neighbors of Belknap, and the City of Grand Rapids.

Uh uh GVSU has a number of properties uh up in the Belknap neighborhood.

And what this does is the tax um payments that GVSU would have had to make to a number of different uh entities.

A part of that money is given to the city of Grand Rapids, which in turn gives it to the neighbors of Bellknap who uh have a plan for that uh particular funding.

So I'm happy happy to answer any questions.

Uh this is a very routine item.

Sure, thank you.

Colleagues, any questions on this one?

All right, hearing none, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, the motion carries.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Uh item number five.

We've got a resolution approving a payment to K Connect for support of uh development of a Grand Rapids Kent County Arts and Culture Strategy, and that'll be in the amount of 75,000 dollars.

So we'll support.

All right, move into Doug Matthews, uh assistant city manager.

This is the next step in a process that started.

Um I want to say it was about two years ago when uh the um arts and culture collective came forward, uh, presented the work that they had been doing.

We moved that forward with uh economic study um and made the decision at that point to see what we could do to support an actual plan for the arts and culture sector in Grand Rapids and Kent County.

Kent County is also making a contribution, and then they're uh pursuing uh outside philanthropic donations for the remainder.

Okay, thanks.

Any questions?

Colleagues, thoughts?

Uh, do you know off the top of your head what Kent County's contribution is it's the same.

Same thing.

Okay, okay, just curious.

All right.

Um, hearing no other questions, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any oppose?

The motion carries.

Uh brings us to excuse me.

Item number six, we've got a resolution adopting uh revisions to city commission policy 100-06.

Uh, City of Grand Rapids conflicts of interest, ethics, and financial disclosure policy.

So move.

Support.

All right, moved and support.

I'll turn to our uh interim city man uh attorney here if he wants to add anything to set up this conversation.

Thank you.

Uh so I'll take a little bit of a history walk on this one.

We started talking about this publicly in the summer of 2025, and it uh the conversations can uh continue through the fall.

Uh the last time we brought this to the committee of the whole, there was some conversations about removing some of the personally identifying spousal reference and expanding a definition of business partner with the concept that uh business partners that were appointed to other city commission committees uh would necessarily need to be disclosed as well.

So uh I've made those suggested changes and brought it back to the fiscal committee.

Uh I've talked to uh some of the the mayor and the city commissioners that were most involved with those suggestions.

I know there might uh not be full agreement on on this committee or at the committee of the whole on the wisdom of this, but I leave it to the city commission and the fiscal committee to have those conversations and determine uh the next best step forward with this.

Excellent, thanks.

Um, I'll turn to my colleagues and see if there's anything they want to add, and then um I've got a few comments afterward as well.

So, yeah.

Commissioner, sure.

Yeah, I'm I'm very happy to see uh the robust conversation and work by both uh city commission uh reaching out to our constituents who we represent and who we make decisions on behalf of and uh from my uh very built out uh discussions that I had over our whole first year.

It's crazy to think it's been a year on commission.

Uh folks were very supportive of this uh and wish that they saw this at different levels of government and really appreciate what we're doing here at the local government for transparency, for honesty, uh, and for folks to know that we have nothing to hide.

Um so I'm ex really thankful for the work that the law department has provided for this uh to make sure that this is a very uh sort of all-encompassing uh policy that can you know continue to be worked on, continue to be looked at by both the commission and the public.

So as I have been since the beginning of this conversation, uh I'm supportive of this and happy to see this formally adopted by the commission.

Great, thanks.

Any other comments or questions?

I think you want to add, Commissioner Knight.

Um thank you.

Sure.

Um I I again um from the very beginning, I'm all about transparency, right?

And I think that we are in the position that we don't have access to the things a lot of people in other forms of government have access to.

Uh in lobbying, uh, we have departments that are very capable of taking care of what they do here, and we support that work, and we review that information and we help set policy.

I think we the the initial document that we had may have been light, however, you know, when when people want to see what they want to see, they can find it.

Like it's out there.

The information is available for people to access and see um what's going on.

So I'm not saying that we we um shouldn't have it because we are accountable to our constituents and to this community.

Um I think some of the pieces are a little far reaching.

Um, and I've said that from the beginning because people also have personal lives.

We all live in this community, we're regular people just like anybody else.

We've just been elected to this position to help direct um the policies and the things that happen at this city.

Um so I just want to be careful that we make sure that we are mindful of that.

Um, and uh we are also doing what we are supposed to do as leaders in this community.

Yeah, thanks for your comments.

And I know you've shared much of that before too, so I appreciate you.

Um reiterating it first of all, I want to thank the law department too for their work on this.

I know this came about um as interest from our mayor and a couple other commissioners um as well.

So between uh kind of workshopping it here, conversations at committee the whole and and some feedback um over the past couple times it's come before us.

I just appreciate the work um that's gone to this.

I I too am supportive.

I I've been supportive of this um measure since the beginning.

Like I said, I think we've had some some good discussions where we've um revised, added, you know, removed a couple things too.

So um at this point, I am I'm happy to recommend and move this resolution forward to our uh committee of the whole.

And um that I think it's important to note too.

I mean, this isn't coming before us as a result of um you know specific concerns with um the commission or the mayor, and you know, um trying to try to mitigate certain circumstances, but um rather just uh a way that we can kind of go above and beyond and and try and match um, you know, and and even lead in this area with um with disclosing our our finances and and conflicts of interest and things of that nature.

So um all that to say, I I'm supportive and plan on um supporting this here this morning.

So um hearing no other comments or questions, I I will call the question.

Um I'll call the question.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Those opposed?

Aye.

The motion will carry.

Thanks.

That brings us to uh item number seven.

We've got our bid list resolution for this week, January 13th, 2026.

Is there a motion?

So move.

Support.

All right, moved and supported.

I'll turn to Miss Claren to see if there's anything specific she wants to call out for this meeting.

Uh good morning, commissioners.

We have nine items this morning, all fairly routine.

Um we are um I will highlight maybe number two origami risk.

That's a risk management information system.

It's um we were hoping to get this functionality within our ERP, but this will be uh a good complement to it as it has outward facing functionality was the the main thing.

Our um Oracle is a closed system where the public doesn't interact with it directly.

So that's that was one of the reasons.

So when you do see a software, we do vet you know, things like that out.

We have a technology coordination group that asks those kind of questions as well as of course all the security and things like that we need whenever we adopt a new software.

So um I'll just highlight that one as a um hopefully we'll also create efficiencies up in up in risk as well.

So thank you.

Any questions or comments on any of the items, colleagues?

All right, hearing scene.

I'll just point out um page 39, I believe it was in the packet in case people want to go through and read about any of those individual items.

But um hearing other comments, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any oppose the motion carries.

That'll bring us to um item number eight.

We've got a report of bond sales.

So this is gonna be 41 million dollars two hundred or sorry, 41 million two hundred and twenty thousand dollars for water supply system refunding bonds, series two thousand and twenty-five.

So move support.

All right, moved in support.

We got Mr.

Verbrugge here this morning.

Good morning.

Um, this is a report of a bond sale for the water system.

Um, this is not an entirely new bond issuance.

We've talked about this.

Um this was priced back in November, and we closed at the beginning of December.

Um so this is a new issuance of 41.2 million dollars, which allows us to pay off old bond issuances ranging from 2013, 2015, and 2016.

Um this is going to save the water department about 295,000 dollars a year in interest, um, which if you discount the total value of all of those annual savings to present value, um, it's about 4.8 million dollars in savings.

Great, thanks.

Comments or discussion, colleagues.

All right, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

The motion carries, and then similarly for our uh sanitary system, we've got uh report of bond sale, which is gonna be in uh 48 million two hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars again for the sanitary sanitary sewer system refunding bonds series two thousand twenty-five.

So move support.

All right, moved and supported.

Anything you want to add on this one here?

About the same deal.

Um, you know, we closed, we issued at the same time.

Um, again, 48.2 million on the sewer side, um, annual savings a little bit larger, about 337,000 per year, total net present value um of 4.7 million dollars.

Okay, great.

Comments or questions?

All right, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, the motion carries.

Thanks.

All right, brings us to our last two here.

We've got item number 10, which is our comp trolers warrant report for the period of December 2nd, 2025 through December 29th, 2025, and that's an amount of 56 million forty-six thousand six hundred seven dollars and fifty-two cents uh in our monthly travel report.

So I will turn it over to you, Mr.

Comptroller.

Good morning, commissioners.

Uh, for the period reference, cash payments were released totaling just over $56 million.

Uh that amount includes approximately $12.6 million dollars for employee payroll expense and just over $228,000 for income tax warrants.

And in terms of quantity, $576 income tax refunds uh were issued, and $2,000 and 39 checks uh and electronic payments were issued.

Uh these funds were issued for payment not by not by individuals um in the city controller's office and not in accordance uh with the terms of the city charter.

Second, uh here we have the uh monthly travel report for uh November fiscal year to date, and that report details mostly travel spend by um each city department, and that report is showing that uh today we've spent uh about 941,000 dollars or about 41 percent of the total uh annual budget thus far.

Okay, thanks.

We will uh receive and file that, and then lastly that brings us to item number 11, which is our treasurer's report uh for the period of December 3rd, 2025 through December 31st of 2025, and I will turn it back over to city treasurer.

Good morning, commissioners.

Um, since our last meeting, the Fed lowered the interest rate by 0.25%, so we're now tracking in the 3.5 to 3.75%.

Um inflation is still above two percent.

The most recent numbers have uh both the uh core and PCE at 2.6 and 2.7 percent unemployment just recently announced they shift a little bit of a uh decrease.

So the unemployment rate was 4.5 percent, it dropped to 4.4.

Um our gross semester product, our our economic growth is still strong at 4.3 percent.

Um, so there's still a very good positive trend in terms of the health of the economy.

Uh but when I look at the most concerning one I have is really is jobs growth because that's when you talk about economic data and things that are coming out.

We talk about this the how strong is the data that we're looking at.

Um, if we look at just the job growth from 2024, the average during that year was 168,000 jobs created per month.

Right now in 2025, we're averaging 49,000.

And during that time frame, when we look at the strength of the data, we did a downward uh revision of those numbers by 900,000 jobs.

And so this is sometimes the things that you have to dig into with the economic data.

What are what's feeding into those numbers?

How many people are feeding in?

What businesses are feeding in?

Are they are they missing something?

And so sometimes when we look at the the jobs data, that's kind of uh a hard one to peg because I I don't know how many people are actually plugging in the information that we need to actually make a sound judgment on that.

So sometimes I I don't pay attention so much to job growth, the number actual numbers.

I'm looking more at the overall unemployment rate to see where that is.

But this is actually one of the challenges that the Fed faces with their dual mandate.

You know, they're looking at the two different items that they can actually impact or or that they're directed to get, and that is to have full unemployment and keep inflation around two percent.

That's that's a difficult mandate to have, and as you've seen in the recent news, there's a lot of turmoil.

Um I am fully supportive of our Fed chair, Jerome Powell.

Um I do believe that that has to be an independent organization, it cannot be swayed by politics because at that point in time um I think all bets are truly off in terms of um adjusting the economy at a whim and not thinking about long-term stability in our economy.

Um if uh you're looking at the news today, you see uh a very large number of of global economic banking leaders of their countries coming forward in support of that.

So I am fully supportive of Chairman Powell and the work he's done and the course he's taken to maintain uh a very data-driven stable organization and trying to guide our our economy through and our country through a lot of of challenges.

Yep, yeah, thanks for that.

That is one job I would never want to have.

Um just don't renovate a building, yeah.

Yeah.

Um just one question.

So do we see with the unemployment rate falling because I know labor participation rate also plays a factor in that.

Do we see have we seen an increase in desire to participate in the labor force or decrease?

It any way you're gonna look at it, it's gonna give you a different type of number.

So there's really never that there hasn't been a really firm number that I I would place a uh my decision on that I support fully on that participation.

Sure.

Because you just don't know how many people are still dropping out of the economy, right?

Or only taking a job that's gonna fit 20 hours a week or 10 hours a week, or um, is there work from home actually tracked?

You know, it's there's a lot of inputs that just don't make a sound um piece on that participation rate.

And I think it's you know, we could we can see it, we can we can look at ourselves internally and say how many people are are part-time for the city.

Are we are we contracted with more outside temporary staffing agencies to not really fully hire or not or or to bridge the gap?

And so it's a difficult number to put a finger on, sure, it really is.

Yep.

Yep, no, I appreciate that.

Um I'll turn to my colleagues and see if they have any questions or comments for C Treasurer.

Nothing.

All right, we'll go ahead and receive and file that, uh, which then wraps up our scheduled business for the day.

Uh, we'll go ahead and adjourn our meeting here at 853.