I'm just saying what the proposal is, just with the proposal, right?

Case number two forty one twenty four.

And the first one is the snow plows, in case you want to ask about that.

Sorry.

Mike, did you want one of these?

Oh, you're gonna you're going, yeah.

Yeah.

He's coming to I don't know what he's five, eight, one, send this thing too.

Yeah, I'll sign it.

Okay.

God, my hand is so one nine.

Scary, that's gotta stay.

Yeah.

I'm not putting my email in.

Maybe I should.

Sure.

Is he around?

Thank you, Nielsen.

He's talking with the ladies and gentlemen.

We don't have a hammer and work quorum.

Jeff.

Yes, right there.

What?

That's the first one proposed.

What are you saying?

Okay.

I'm not I'm not following you.

So I'm set up as something.

Okay.

I'm not sure what's it.

I don't know who we turned these into.

What?

Are you guys gonna collect these or to speak these are for we signed up to talk uh for the items that we listed here?

Whether yeah, there somebody collects them and then they let you speak for those items.

That's just the one on the button.

Good evening.

Okay.

I'd like to begin in the bottom with introductions, which I missed the last time.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Chairman Paul On A, District 22.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Mike Dilk, District 24.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Derrick Cahill, District 23.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman McRoberts, District 4.

Thank you, Chairman Andy Nielsen, District 14.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair Renee Allen, District 15.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Josh Payne is a guest counselor tonight from District 21.

Good evening, Chairman Miss Gary Band Boots, Washington Lawrence Townships.

District 3.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Michael Paul Hart as a guest representing District 20.

Thank you.

With consent, I'd just like to move one budget hearing to the front.

I hold her favor.

Barbara, you're on a you're on the clock.

I love bond issuances.

I'm still if you ever need anything, then you get a hold of Barbara.

She she has all the people, the right people.

Good evening, Christa Carlino, District Eleven, West Side.

Pardon the target.

Treasurer Lawrence, we have the hard copy if you want to try without it.

Or do you need the screen?

Welcome, Barbara.

Okay.

Let's talk about the 2026 budget for the Marion County Treasurer's Office.

I am Barbara Lawrence.

This is my fifth budget presentation as the Mayor and County Treasurer.

I am joined here this evening by Rodney Schein, who's my chief deputy treasurer.

We are honored to be here and thank you for this consideration.

Just a quick agency overview.

The Mitrain County Treasurer's Office is comprised of four distinct divisions.

The administrative, the accounting and finance, the revenue, and the customer service division.

And I think with those titles, it's probably obvious what they do.

But if you have any questions, please just let me know.

Just a few numbers to put out there.

The Marion County Treasurer's Office bills for approximately 385,000 parcels annually.

That's not the number of pieces of mails because we have multi-parceled billings that go out, but that's the number of parcels in general in Marion County.

We collect about 1.7 billion in 2024 and distributed that amount.

We invest about 420 million over the course of the year.

And we distribute 2.5 billion to 48 units of local government in 2024.

Just a quick overview about the agency staffing.

We have 25 filled positions.

We have two vacancies that we're currently recruiting for.

We offer them every training opportunity we can, especially with AIC, NACO, the E County Treasurer's Association, and Rodney is actually on one of the committees for GFO or the Government Finance Officers Association.

Now I'd like to ask Rodney to talk for a little bit about some of our programmatic and financial successes.

More people are paying online.

So we had this big initiative in understanding the large volume of checks that come in.

How can we most efficiently process them?

If you if you look to the right, we we have a chart of mail processed uh monthly for for the last three years.

We look at that and we looked at how we could be more successful.

And I have have in bold April of 2024 and September October of 2024, where we had large increases those months.

And what happened is we took more of an ownership in processing that mail.

When when bills go out in early April, we have a ton of phone calls that come in where as a team we have to answer those calls.

Then we have a slight lull.

And we we looked at it and we felt that there was an additional week where we could process as much mail as possible for the in-person started to ramp up again.

So that was one of our big wins.

And when it comes to lockbox fees, we reduce those fees from uh 65,000 in 2020 2016 that we paid vendors to 24,000, so 33,000 in 2024.

The other thing I mentioned is about electronic payments being a being a really big big trend, and that's something that we want to make the public aware that when you walk in, you can make pay payments electronically.

So if you go to the to the 10th floor, you'll see some signage that essentially says if you want to be first in line, you can you can you you can pay online to give them that option.

We have literature also to help people under understand what options they they have when it comes to the payments at the treasurer's office.

Another program success is collecting a levy.

So we send out tax bills.

We want to collect that 1.7 billion dollar levy each year and distribute uh the funds to units of government, and we were successful in in collecting 101 and distributing 101% of the levy to units of government last year.

Another where we sought to concentrate is in the area of community engagement and outreach.

to to help people under understand what options they they have when it comes to to payments at the treasurer's office another program success is collecting a levy so we send out tax bills we want to collect that 1.7 billion dollar levy each year and distribute uh the funds to units of government and we were successful in in collecting 101 and distributing 101% of the levy to units of government last year another area where we sought to concentrate is in the area of community engagement outreach we previously did not have personnel to do this we have since created a position with an internal position it's not a new position we simply rebranded an old position to create a community outreach coordinator and we focus on key events where we can reach out to people help them understand property taxes do a number of property tax checkups make sure they have their deductions or exemptions in place and educate people on property taxes we have sought to provide these services in the area where we have the highest incidences of tax sale parcels and just to give you an indication of what those areas are it's zip codes 246218 4622 46201 46208 and 46203 and you can see the neighborhoods that comprise those those zip codes and I think it's interesting to note that 49% of the tax eligible parcels were from the top five zip codes that's a lot of concentration in those areas I want to talk about a major goal that we are setting for ourselves for 2026 and that is to increase paperless billing for a whole bunch of reasons it's more efficient it's more effective security the environmental impacts but I'm not going to lie to you and say that there's not going to be an offset or reduction in postage so we are looking forward to this currently we have about 306 parcels that are on e-billing and our goal is to increase that by 10% next year.

I'll go into the budget breakdown you can see for character one character two character three and character four um we we we did have any changes in character two and in character four um overall there was a a 7.6 percent decrease and and I'll go into each character in the uh next slides care character one it really helped help staffing pretty from uh February of this year we we we held it constant and uh there'll be a 2.6 percent uh increase in in in cola and that really comprises our character one budget our character two budget we we we held steady at 11, uh 319 with character three uh we we did have a reduction of 13.5 percent most of those were really uh charges from internal uh agencies and it's really just the way that they change billing um so you can see ISA was was what was the biggest with the 149 thousand dollar reduction and there are also reductions of billing authority uh office corporation council and and and also with uh the new telephone uh service that we that we that we got uh we we have a reduction because we were on an on on an old telephone uh service uh last year and character four we we had no change now moving to the the uh revenue breakdown um the biggest uh the really good thing about uh revenue and um what what we do in the treasurer's office we have a a portfolio of about 80 80 to 85 percent is liquid and we have about uh 15 percent where we have short term term investments in 2024 and 2023 we averaged about five percent uh on that on that money and we're projecting uh uh 15 million uh 775 000 in in investment earnings for uh 2026 uh to to make that goal we have to average around uh three and three and a quarter when it when it when it comes to our our liquid earnings um we expect the average balance to go to go up about three and a half percent this year and next year so with that uh seven percent increase we'll have about a 450 billion dollar average balance and with that mix we should be able to uh to make the investment earnings uh budget and and and i really expect with some of our uh short short term investments that that we'll be able to exceed that goal um next slide is a breakdown of what our what our investments uh earnings were uh for the for the for the last couple years and our our our year to date right now we're at we're we're at 10 million uh 3134 so we'll be able to well exceed our our budget for 2025 you have um a packet of information which also includes the flyers that we sent out uh that we use as part of our outreach effort they are printed in both English and Spanish uh for our patrons

We're we're we're at 10 million uh 313, 334.

So we'll be able to well exceed our our budget for 2025.

You have um a packet of information, which also includes the flyers that we sent out uh that we use as part of our outreach effort.

They are printed in both English and Spanish uh for our patrons.

Uh we've included all of the account node reports that are part of the package that everyone submits.

Um, but we try to make this short and sweet and to the point, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you, Barbara.

Uh any questions from counselor counselors?

Councillor Nielsen.

Thank you, Chairman.

Um, thank you, Treasurer, uh, Chief Deputy.

So um I wanted to take one step back on the investment earnings target.

So we're projecting that we'd be able to hit the target because uh you mentioned we're gonna we'd have a higher we'd have a higher balance than normal, is that correct?

Not normal, the balance uh the average monthly balance has increased uh 20 to 25 million in the last last few few years.

That's just with taking in an additional um property tax revenue and uh kind of uh the the lit revenue that could flow through our office that's distributed to units of government.

So it's just that it's just kind of the nominal increase as we see hopefully growth in both of those sources of revenue.

Great.

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

Any other questions, counselors?

Seeing none.

Barbara, uh my question is someone's house is going to be sold for tax sale.

How many chances do they get to pay off the taxes?

Is there what's the process?

I guess.

Well, uh um the first step is is that to become eligible for tax sale.

You are three at least three cycles behind, so conceivably a year and a half in property tax.

So when it goes to tax sale, it's actually a tax lien sale.

So we are selling this as a lien on the property.

So and then there is a period of one year after the sale where the owner can redeem the property.

So they have a year after it's actually gone to tax sale to redeem the property, and it takes a year and a half to get to that point.

Thank you.

Councilor Boots.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman, and thank you, Treasurer and Deputy.

Uh good to see you again.

Um, just a couple of quick questions.

On your character one fees, looking at slide eleven.

Uh and I may have missed it.

What why the reduction and the variance uh are you a spot or two down in personnel?

Is that it?

And you don't expect to fill that spot as that's what is that what's driving that number?

Pretty much, yes.

We have as we have tried to cross-train and get people trained in different areas.

Um we have also reallocated some responsibilities, and we we have a couple of positions.

I think there's just no need to fill that I'd like to keep them open and keep them on wage control, but not fill them right now.

Great.

And then final follow-up on character three on slide 13.

You mentioned that variance is mostly due to the way chargebacks are handled.

Can you just expand on that briefly?

Um, it's primarily the ISA charge back, and they've gone through, and I saw Colin here.

I don't want to call him up, but I would ask him to correct me if I get it wrong.

But ISA has actually gone through and done an analysis of how they charge um how they recoup their charges, their internal charges, and there are some agencies who have increased and some who have decreased, but it has to do with the realignment of how those charges are made, and it just so happens for us that it was a decrease.

Wonderful.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Counselors, anyone in the public would each which to speak on this?

Say none.

Thank you, Barbara, and your team.

All right, up next is proposal 236.

Thank you.

Counselor Hart, would you like to take the floor on this?

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

And we got a presentation that I've got prepared.

Get that up there.

All right, we can go ahead and go to the next slide.

All right.

So members of the committee, so I appreciate you taking the time today to hear out essentially what I've got to say and how this even came to be.

So the purpose of today's presentation on this uh proposal is just to give you guys an update of you know essentially where this idea came from, um, what it does, and and what the ask is of you today ultimately is to move it forward uh with full count to full counsel with the do pass recommendation.

Uh next slide, please.

So how how did it begin?

Um if you guys may or may not be aware, um back on July 10th.

Um I hosted along with Counselor Bain and Counselor Cahill participated, um, a public safety round table where I had uh the chief of police, chief of fire, chief of Mesa, um, uh prosecutor Mears and and the chief of fire if I didn't say that.

So basically all the chiefs of public safety and prosecutor Mir's there.

Um basically asked them the question, you know, uh what are things that we need to know as a council, right?

And I put together a report on that, and I'm happy to share that.

It's more of a public safety.

But this is actually one of the findings that came out of it when I had a pretty simple question.

If there was one thing I could change or we could change as a council uh that would make lasting changes in the city, what would it be?

And they said eliminate the residency requirement.

So that's honestly where the idea came from.

Uh it wasn't something I was just sitting around in my sleep and said, Well, you know what, we should go visit the municipal code and identify this thing and remove it.

But uh fun fact, this was actually something put in the municipal code back in 1977.

So it is a a long uh it's been in there for a long time, and I thought it was appropriate that we revisit it based on the the leadership's uh recommendation.

So uh that's how it began where where it really uh what we've learned throughout this process, and you may have seen it in some of the committees that we've been on, but I know members of the Republican caucus have been asking uh various leaders what their opinions are on the residency requirement.

There's been varying degrees and opinions on that.

Um, you know, from the coroner's office, forensics, uh Todd Wilson, uh, you know, even uh the public defender's office, right?

There's been a ton of uh support for for various reasons, right?

And some of those are on the slide here about uh whether it's you know trying to get backfills, you know, finding specialty roles, um, you know, folks not even applying because they see things on the the application that says you have to live in Marion County.

So, you know, when we put this together, it would we try to keep it really simple.

Um, you know, I worked with uh if we can go to the next slide, please.

No, I worked with uh basically the attorneys of the mayor's office and the council office.

So I worked with uh uh counselor Pierce, Counselor uh Beeler, and uh Slaughter, um, as in the counselor as an attorney counselor, uh, to figure out how can we, what is the most efficient and effective way to modify this.

And essentially they brought a couple things to light that there were some state statutes in place that are required uh for director roles uh and uh council council roles such as the corporate council roles and then firefighter, and there were some residency roles on police, and and essentially what this proposal does is eliminates uh some language in the code that requires the broader scope.

So in anything that's not mandated by state, but the broad scope across Marion County to allow anybody to live essentially wherever they want, right?

We just took it away uh and eliminated the code that was in there.

We did not add anything new.

Um so essentially this draft preserves all state level requirements that were still still there.

Uh and then um anything around residency for police, their vehicles and things of that nature, that still stays.

That doesn't change.

It's the folks that um fall into all the varying degrees of categories that we've seen, um, whether it be DPW, BNS, um fire support, mechanics, um, you know, folks that are just working at the city that don't fall under one of these specialized categories that say they can live outside.

This covers them now to be able to live outside of Marion County.

Uh next slide, please.

So what we've learned throughout this time in terms of uh really the challenges and the benefits that that come with it, uh a lot of specialty roles came out throughout this conversation.

You know, folks like the coroner's office and the folks that I just learned the term and I forgot it, but do the stuff on the bodies, right?

Those are hard to find.

Uh in the forensics office, folks that are are specially trained to do forensics work and investigation type of things, uh our public defenders.

Um the union members of um BNS uh code enforcement said it would be great for them.

So I mean there were varying things throughout uh that this process that we've learned uh that there's desire for varying reasons.

Uh one reason that we learned is that you know surrounding municipalities don't have this requirement.

So we had a conversation with Director Vukusich, who was formerly the uh I think the the she she had a leadership role in Fisher's before coming here.

She lived in Marion County when she worked in Fisher's.

Um, you know, we had um conversations about faster time to hire.

Of course, if the the pool is broader, it's gonna be easier to find candidates.

Um, you know, we had another uh individual who was presenting that brought up diversity of pipeline and made it easier to hit our diversity numbers by again expanding uh our pipeline.

Other things included when people have changes in life events, they have more children, they want to look at different school options, they need to get a bigger house or whatever that reason is that fits their budget.

This provides them the option if they're currently a city employee to find those elsewhere.

Um what really stood out too in this decision or in this conversation that I've had is um today's there are there are waiver options, and that came up in a varying degree of conversations.

Um so if somebody say wanted to work uh or live outside the county, they would need to get a waiver, and where that ultimately ends in approval happens is with the chief of staff.

It's one person makes that decision uh case by case.

And you know, what this would do again is just make an even playing field for everybody, so we're all on the same on the same page at the city, um, other than what's required by state.

So the other thing that just hit on me and thinking about you know, if if I worked for the city, how would I feel if you know, and I'll I'll pick on Mesa because I was just talking to them, right?

Half of their staff is you know, the 911 operators, they can live outside the county, but there's other staff that they have that works for Mesa that has to live in the county.

And you think about workplace morale, and you think, well, that guy next to me, we both support public safety in some fashion or other, but he or she get to live outside the county, but I'm right across the hall and I have to live in the county.

That's not fair.

That doesn't help with employee morale or things of that nature as well.

So that just hit me and as I empathized for, you know, this is just one of those things that it's really old.

It's 1977 uh policy.

Things are significantly different now, you know, however many years later it is, you know, it's time to make an update, it's time to address uh next slide, please.

So I did talk to the city uh just to make sure that I was touching all bases, and you know, their their major concern is co it uh at the end of the day, that if folks don't live here, then their county income tax doesn't stay here.

To me, um, where where that boils down for me is departments, you know, at the end of the day can still decide on who they're hiring, right?

We're not forcing them to hire people outside the county.

They still get to make that decision through the hiring process.

So they have the ability, the autonomy to make that call.

Um we're not replacing anybody, um, but we do put a lot of sunken cost into people if they stay and then leave.

And that cost overall to me outweighs anything uh that we would look at in losing in COET.

But most importantly, the the point I'll end with is that uh when we think about the city growing the city morale of the employees here, uh we shouldn't put money over people when thinking about coat dollars.

Uh we should we should create a work environment that uh gives people the flexibility for any of those varying reasons that I that I picked on about you know where to live and things of that nature, and retaining high performing employees often will save more money uh than making them live here again, you know, for whatever reason that that may be.

So with that, uh Mr.

Chair, I am uh finished with my presentation.

Thank you.

Uh any comments from the uh counselor councillor Lewis.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I do apologize for my tiredness.

Uh thank you, Councillor Hart, for your presentation.

Uh Mr.

Chairman, with your permission, may I ask our CFO a question regarding this proposal?

Absolutely.

Again, while I I think it is important that we expand our pool of team members, employees to the city of Indianapolis.

I also believe that we have talent as well right here in our community.

But the bigger issue that I have with this proposal is the financial impact, and I've said this at multiple committee meetings.

We are the fiscal agent for the city and the county.

Our responsibility is to levy those dollars.

And so that's my biggest uh concern about the proposal.

Again, not I have no issue with expanding the the pool.

I do want to say that.

I think that is important and that we continue to diversify uh the talent in this in this building and across the enterprise.

Um Ms.

Candace, what's the overall impact with this proposal have on our city-county budget?

So the estimate is anywhere between 3.5 million to 4 million annually.

So uh follow-up question, Mr.

Chairman.

Councilor Hart, where do you uh believe we make up that difference?

And again, we know that there's already restraints on the on the budget.

How do we make up that difference?

Yeah, if you don't mind explaining uh Mr.

Chair, if you don't mind having the CFO explain how she came to that number, I'd be interested to know how that was uh calculated.

After my question, Mr.

Chairman, how do you make up the difference?

My question was on the floor.

Well, I mean I think it's important to know that the the validity of the number.

I mean, if we don't have to make up that actual number, then how we got to that number is important.

Thank you.

Any other any other questions?

Or can Counselor Councillor Maine Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um CFO Harris, can you explain how you came up with the three and a half to four million dollar number?

So I'm gonna defer to our controller who is in the audience today.

Uh Controller Hanson, can you come up for a second if you don't mind?

Good evening.

The three and a half million dollars is the number that um I did the analysis.

It is based on the assumption that today 49 percent of our eligible employees, public safety employees who are not required to live here, 49 percent live outside of the county.

If we assume that 45 percent, 49 percent of the employees that are currently restricted by residency uh are to move out of the county, then it would generate a three and a half million dollar loss in income tax revenue.

And then on top of that, their gas taxes, wheel taxes, and license excise taxes are either based on population or the location of your residency, and so the culminating impact of those is about a half a million dollars.

And rough math, but thank you, madam controller.

Is it the administration's expectation that if city employees, city and county employees are permitted to live outside of Marion County, that almost half of them would rather live outside of Indianapolis, Marion County than inside the city?

Uh I can't speak to the what people are going to choose to do, but I think looking at what our current distribution is is the best way to do an analysis to use what we know and make an assumption that that could be the impact moving forward.

I mean, I I I think we are like I know you said that you're not really able to judge what people are doing, but when you come here and you say three and it's gonna cost us three and a half million dollars, because we think almost half of this people that currently work in this building would rather live outside of Marion County.

That's a bold statement to make.

Well, to be clear, that's not what I'm saying.

Well, excuse me, excuse me.

And so, and we also know that there is a big difference between public safety employees and other employees of the enterprise.

We know that there's a culture around law enforcement, living in bigger metropolitan cities.

A lot of them want to live outside Marion County.

So there's a big difference between the culture of that workplace as well and that job compared to other more civilian jobs here in Indianapolis as well.

Any other questions?

Councilor um Yeah.

Yeah.

That's why I don't like having this room.

I can't see the name of the one.

Um thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, I just wanted to kind of just make comment real quick.

Um, after giving a lot of considerations proposal, I do plan to vote for it really for all the points that were highlighted before, with really recruitment and retention and really just the consistency of city employees.

Um I think my perspective on it is partially shaped.

I live right on the county line.

I live at 96th in Fall Creek.

And if you lived a minute north of me, you'd be in a Hamilton County.

And if my perspective, I would rather have those positions, you know, whether it's engineers or um people at the different county agencies, full-up people, even if they are a minute north than not at all, right?

In those positions.

And I do think there should be a preference for people living the city, but to me it's not the end all be all.

You know, I run into constituents all the time who work for either the city of Carmel or Fishers or McCordsville or Lawrence, and I think the argument they would make is you know, those employers is we're concerned about the ability people to do these positions well, not necessarily where they live, and I think you can have a stake in a city whether you live there or not.

Um so you know, I think if you're doing a good job, that's my argument that we should be able to really retain those um positions and recruit for them.

Um so I plan to vote for it.

I respect both sides of it.

Again, I think there's a lot of pros and cons to it, but I do think the pros outweigh the cons.

That's why I plan to vote for it.

Thank you.

Counselor Anay.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Chairman.

I appreciate the conversation that has been um uh initiated um through this proposal.

You know, I think back in in the in the 1970s, this this was a good policy, it was a good uh um policy for the city of Indianapolis because the truth is, regardless, I would assume if were you sit on this proposal's side, whether you're for it or against it, we all would acknowledge that we would love to see those who live in our community working in the city.

I mean, we we all I think would like to see that and and that's how it's been, I think the last you know, 30 or 40 years, but but life's changed, times have changed.

Uh uh we have a lot more competition uh with our donut county neighbors, Hamilton County, Johnson County, uh, et cetera.

And so, you know, uh whether it's public safety uh in particular, you know, we talk about how other uh municipal municipalities have been able to poach our talent uh from our departments, um, and and we've had to kind of ever um come back to the table and and change uh salaries and benefits to try to keep pace.

So, you know, while I don't necessarily agree with the controller's figure, uh I think we'd have to pass it and really better understand.

I think about all of the money and resources that we lose and waste uh because we can't fill vacancies because we can't uh identify folks particularly with specialized skills.

So I I think that you have to balance all of that out.

I don't think it's easy enough to say, well, you know, we may project three and a half million dollars.

Well, look at what we're losing today with the vacancies uh that we know we're probably going to continue to keep if something doesn't change.

So I think that the environment's changed, and and I think that if something like this passed, I think that uh more than anything, it puts the onus back on the city of Indianapolis to continue to be competitive with its peers in in central Indiana.

Uh you know, you think about the snow discussions we had uh earlier this year, you know, where other communities offer uh other services and other amenities than Indianapolis.

So Indianapolis needs to make sure that we continue to be able to provide world-class, first class uh amenities and services uh to residents uh to not only get people to want to stay, but to get people wanting to relocate or come into Indianapolis, Marin County.

So um, you know, if the city had not been singing the same song for you know ten years where we continue to have vacancies and and staffing issues, um maybe I wouldn't support this, but when you think about all of the things that uh we've tried to fill vacancies uh and and attract more people to the city, to a large extent it hasn't worked in in certain areas.

And when you hear from some of the folks here tonight uh who have uh said it would make their lives a heck of a lot easier, I I don't see why you don't at least give it a shot and and evaluate it uh in practice, not in theory.

Uh and so I look forward to supporting it.

Councillor Lewis.

Councillor Lewis.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Just to follow up with Counselor Onay's comments.

We were questioning the controllers' math when it comes to the number, where are we getting the data regarding vacancies?

Are are we having issues with vacancies?

Is there anyone in the administration that can speak to the actual vacancy rate?

Because I haven't heard that narrative that our vacancy rate is at a all-time high that we need the council to solve for it.

Thank you.

I'll take a stab at this one.

Um looking at the vacancy position vacancy data, we are 20 percent more staffed today in non-police, non-fire, non-seasonal positions compared to 2022.

So that is a substantially better position than we were several years ago.

Additionally, if we look at how many positions we have posted open right now to recruit for, we have 69 postings that are on our website for non-police, non-fire just assume that what I'm saying is always non-police, non-fire, non-telecommunicators, people who don't have this option.

Um that accounts for 151 positions.

So, you know, snow truck drivers or whatever, we might have one posting, but we're filling five positions.

So 151 positions.

If you take the number of positions we're trying to fill in relation to the number of positions we have filled already, we are at a 3.6 percent vacancy rating, vacancy rate.

So pretty small.

Um and as we've talked about, there is a current residency waiver process, and we have granted those in some instances for very specialized positions.

So looking at things that like it require um mechanics that require a CDL and some kind of license or experience.

And so things that are uh very technical or we just don't have a large pool of candidates that are here in the city.

Counselor K you, Mr.

Chair.

Um I I appreciate that whether whether or not I agree with the specifics of the uh of the math or not, I appreciate the concern about the the loss of the income tax, the wheel tax, the various uh taxes that would otherwise come here if whether we hire somebody from the outside or if someone we have uh moves out.

But I guess when I look at this, we we use tax dollars through tax abatements on a pretty regular basis.

Uh and I typically ask a question, it's uh oftentimes it'll be privately with the other counselor.

Uh but we've recently had two not where people are working like right here in downtown, but we had uh counselor Hart had one recently and then Councilor Roberts.

So I I really appreciate your commentary because when we looked as an example at the Roche uh tax abatement, it sits right on Hamilton County, and we don't see the the numbers that are being discussed here, even when you have no obligation, no anything in a uh I guess I would say a highly specialized uh type of employee scenario.

Um we and we have not historically pushed for a uh Marion County residency requirement or say put an obligation to say you have to have X percent, even if it's not a hundred percent.

So when we are talking about tax dollars that we hand to the private sector, we don't concern ourselves with that.

Uh but when we're talking about hiring our own employees, all of a sudden we are.

So I I I guess I take I take I hear the concern that I take it with a grain of salt uh because we're not being consistent if that's the case.

Uh thank you.

Counselor Maori.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

You know, I I um I I had to do a little research of my own on this because when I think of 1977, that's over a decade older than I am.

Um and when I looked it up, I look at it and I see I look back and I see that in 1977 we had the release of Star Wars, disco was on the rise, Elvis died, and Jimmy Carter was sworn in.

Those are all things that happened in 1977, along with this pro along with this current proposal that we're trying to amend.

A lot's changed, obviously, since then.

We've seen changes in the dance style, changes in the music style.

While sure Elvis's music's great still today, um we've seen a lot of change in that as well.

And I think it's been the miraculous thing of the country as a whole, is our ability to make make these changes and evolve with change.

I don't think that I can appreciate uh controllers, madam controllers analysis on these numbers, and you know, I think you can depending on how you shift those numbers, you can land it just about any number.

So, and not that you would do that by any means.

I'm not trying to insinuate that.

I just think that we've got to take that kind of with a grain of salt because we don't know what what amount of people would actually leave the city.

We don't know if it would have a huge change.

And I agree with counselor Cahill that when we give away a lot of these tax dollars to these corporations for these abatements, we don't have any kind of requirement on them hiring Marion County uh residents.

So I think to me, I think Counselor Hart said it pretty well with kind of putting people over money and making it to where if you want if you want to work for the city, great, come work for us, but we're not gonna require you to live here if you don't if you don't already live here.

Um and you always like like we've said many times already tonight that you have the option to be preferential to folks that do live in Marion County, and while we question about the the openings and the vacancies we have within these departments, I think one thing we've seen year over year is that there are vacancies that remain unfilled.

Uh I don't you know I don't know that I've ever seen a very uh very few times if we have at all seen a budget hearing where we've heard they're fully staffed.

There's usually some openings, and you know, if that can help us move forward as a city and have a fuller staff to be able to do more good work for the people of Indianapolis.

I don't know why we would have an arbitrary line be the end all say all for this.

So I do plan on supporting this, and I would urge my fellow counselors here to support this as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Counselor Bain.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um I feel like I'm doing a lot of talking tonight for a guest counselor, so I apologize for that.

Um when we compare you know our vacancy rates now to 2022, let's say when I don't know, coming out of a pandemic, uh I would almost expect to see a pretty big difference, especially when you look at the amount of union contracts that we've done.

You look at the vacancy rates within union contracts, non-public safety union contracts, you see that that is pretty low.

But then you look at other civilian vacancy rates.

I don't know, let's pick a random one that was last week, um, which was DPW's budget hearing.

And Director Wilson confirmed that we are at almost a 25% vacancy rate with DPW engineers.

And when we don't do that, we have to go out and get contractors to do that.

Those contractors don't have to live in Marion County.

And I'm just gonna take an assumption that we have to pay them more per hour than what we would pay a city employee.

Don't have confirmation on that, but I think that's something that we could all speculate.

And then we do have a vacancy waiver as well, correct?

Everyone has acknowledged that.

The problem with that is, and if someone wants to refute this, they can, but every department head that I've spoken to has told me that you have to officially hire someone first and then get a waiver after they have been hired to have them live in the city-county or to work in the city-county enterprise.

We all know that these people are just not clicking apply because it says in the job description that you have to live in Marion County.

Some people just don't want to do that.

But this isn't about that.

This isn't about the those dollars necessarily, even though I do think this will have a cost savings to it because of the fact that we are having all this sucking costs and having to hire all these contractors.

It's about how do we serve the people of Indianapolis, Marion County the best?

That's our job.

How do we serve our constituents best?

How do they get the best city services?

For me, when I dial 911, it doesn't matter if the person answering lives in Marion County.

And right now, they don't have to.

When the ambulance shows up and is taking my mom to the hospital or me.

It doesn't matter to me where the mechanic lives that is doing the work on the ambulance.

I want it to run.

That employee has to live in Marion County.

I'm building a home right now in Marion County.

I have to get permits.

It does not matter to me where the person lives that is having to issue me a septic permit.

I just expect it in a reasonable amount of time.

I think that's what our citizens expect as well.

And this is a great way for us to serve our citizens the best that we can.

Thank you.

Uh Counselor Nielsen, final question.

All right, comment.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um so I kind of want to address a few things, so bear with me, Mr.

Chairman.

Um to the author, you know, I know we've there's this discussion about how much this may cost, and I think that that's really important and based on even what the leader was was was asking and getting to, because this is ultimately a spending decision, right?

But choosing to do this is a spending decision, and not having an offset is a little bit concerning.

And we can debate whether or not the controller's estimate is good, valid in between, but to ignore that it does or does not have a fiscal impact, I think is a little bit kind of intellectually dishonest for this debate.

And I think that if if the objective is putting people over money, I couldn't agree more.

And so if we're gonna make a spending decision and we establish the principle that we're gonna put people over money, why not invest three and a half or four million dollars in the people who actually work here right now?

Make it more competitive to want to come work in public service, right?

Some just basics of supply and demand.

And so I don't I don't like some of the conversation of well, if we if we open up open up to other counties, we basically can get employees at a at a discount.

I've watched a lot of these budget hearings, actually, every single one of them, and arguments like that have been made.

That maybe if we open up to surrounding counties that we can pay employees less to do what is I agree with you, Councilor Bain, really important work for our city.

Um I also want to point out that I don't know of any enterprise at all that is ever at full staffing.

I I I just want to I want to point that out.

You know, as an econom that the largest economy in the world, we actually accept that unemployment or vacancies are a part of a healthy and functioning economy.

A city-county enterprise of our size is no different.

And I also want to address kind of the discussion on tax abatements.

I I appreciate that.

And I appreciate where you are going, Counselor Cahill, but I think that's we're comparing two different types of fruit.

I don't know which ones, but it's definitely an apples and apples because tax abatements, I think, should be evaluated on what the long-term impact they provide for the property tax base.

That's the evaluation that's being made.

And so while I do appreciate that, I think we need to make sure that we're isolating because there's some tax abatements that aren't great, and we shouldn't be approving them.

Again, those are spending decisions, but the outcome of that spending decision is what's best for the property tax revenues in the future.

Um this is a spending decision on what's in the best interest of the city.

And I think that we should have a capital city in a community where people want to live and want to work here.

And I think we can provide a good example of that by the people who live and work in this building.

And I'd be happy to talk with my colleagues about how we can incentivize again more public safety officials living and working in uh our community.

But I just I just think that this is just missing a few things.

Um I think unfortunately is a solution in search of a problem.

And there are just a few pieces on this that kind of I think the supporting evidence on it doesn't really hold.

So for those reasons, Mr.

Chairman, I will be voting now.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I don't entertain a motion.

I believe you got you forgot to take public testimony, Mr.

Chairman.

Anyone in public like speak on this?

We have one.

There we go.

Good evening, thank you.

My name is Ray Cassidy.

As we move forward to the public comment portion of the debate for this proposal, I would like to I would like to remind my colleagues and the members of the public of a few ground rules in order for everyone to have a fair chance to speak and be heard.

It is important that we observe the following ground rules.

First, each speaker will be limited to two minutes.

Second, any public comment must reasonably be reasonably relate to the agenda item under consideration.

Third, speakers who stray away from items under consideration or become unruly repetitious, may be asked to move on to their next point or conclude their comments.

Finally, attendees who cause disruptions that prevent the council from proceeding through today's agenda in a reasonable in a reasonably efficient manner will be removed.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Please state your name.

My name is Ray Casanova.

I am the chief public defender for the Marion County Public Defender Agency, and I'd just like to say a few words about how the residency requirement impacts my agency.

First, I'd just like to say for due process to be realized, there should be parity between the public defender and the prosecutor's office.

The prosecutor's office currently does not have a residency requirement.

My office does.

My office currently has vacancies, particularly within the major felony division.

It has five vacancies that we're attempting to fill.

The residency requirement is impacting my office's ability to fill those positions.

Those positions handle everything from Level 4 felonies to murders.

Whenever my office has problems with staffing, we run up against the possibility of falling out of compliance with the Indiana Commission on Court-appointed attorneys, reimbursement standards.

The Commission reimburses this county 40 percent of my budget each year.

In 2024, that was 10.3 million dollars.

I'm expecting it to be closer to 11 million dollars this year.

If I do not have the ability to fill that staffing, we are at risk of falling out of compliance, and we are at risk of not receiving that reimbursement.

I want also the counselors to understand the impact that the residency requirement has had on four of my employees in 2025, one of whom requested a waiver.

That waiver was denied.

As a result of that, he had to leave the agency.

He left behind 114 cases that had to be then re taken up by all the remaining staff that put additional pressure on that staff to take those additional cases, as well as having to take more assignments because the staffing was left.

That person had significant amount of training from our office.

He was an attorney in our office for three years.

He was qualified to handle higher level.

Another minute.

Thank you.

Higher level cases.

We also had another attorney in our major felony division who left because of the residency issue.

She left behind 67 cases.

Again, that left a difficult situation for us to handle.

I understand the situation with regard to revenue and with regard to connection with the community.

We do risk the revenue that is returned from the commission that's approaching 11 million dollars a year.

We also risk the connection that our office, my office does with the community.

We connect on an individual basis with the community.

We do not build something and then leave.

With or without the residency requirement, public defenders are actively involved in the community.

They're facing clients who are facing their worst day, and they have to begin by building that trust so they can effectively represent them.

The residency requirement as it stands right now does not establish parity with the prosecutor's office.

It does not serve the citizens of Indianapolis who we are tasked to represent under the Sixth Amendment.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Anyone else from the general public?

Again, I'd like to entertain a motion.

Mr.

Mr.

Mr.

Chairman, can I ask a question on the I'm sorry?

Yeah, uh Mr.

Public Defender, I have a I have a couple, I have a quick couple quick questions.

So you kind of you kind of made both arguments, I think, right?

You made one where you were talking about it's a retention issue, and you need parity with the prosecutor's office, but then it also being an ability to to meet your mandate.

So I'm curious what conversations that given that a sizable proportion of your budget comes from the commission, what conversations you've had with those who have made the decision for our public safety officials to uh allow for residency outside of Marion County, how those conversations have gone to date.

The conversations that I have with regard to waivers are with the mayor's office and with the chief of staff's office, the chief of staff of the mayor's office.

Those are the conversations that I have directly.

I have to demonstrate that there is a unique set of skills that this particular person is providing.

I think I demonstrate that when I when I can show that I have an attorney who's been trained and recruited out of law school, that we've spent significant resources to train, and they're handling 114 cases that they will leave behind, which will overburden my staff.

That did not that was not sufficient for the waiver, and my understanding is uh they are reluctant to grant waivers because they do not want to set a precedent that opens the floodgates for more people coming forward for waivers.

I think the question I want to get to though, excuse me, is I know we're again at time, is that the parity concern with the prosecutor's office?

We we don't have any control over that.

So I could say I want prosecutor mayors to hire every single person in Marion County.

That won't get anywhere.

Have you had conversations with those at the state level, those who made the decision for us as to providing you relief?

At the state level, we have.

We uh there was a bill uh that was set forth in the 2025 legislation that called for relieving the residency requirement for municipal attorneys.

We approached the sponsor of that bill to ask her to include a provision for public defenders.

Um that was not allowed us.

So we then came here at this uh uh at the local level.

The issue with the prosecutor's office is we like the prosecutor's office, we recruit from law schools.

Our philosophy is to find people who are interested in indigent defense and provide them a career path.

Uh when we do that recruiting, uh, and and it's perfectly fair.

The prosecutor will, as a as a recruiting point, say you do not have to live in Marion County.

Um I mean, that is just something that that's a fact that we have to deal with.

It does impact our ability to recruit.

It also impacts our ability to uh to retain.

I mean, there's been another situation here in 2025 where we were interested in having uh someone someone come in to one of our divisions.

Uh that person instead decided to go to the prosecutor's office, basically because the prosecutor's office was okay with that person living out of county.

Understood.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

Counselor Bain.

One final question.

Thank you, um Mr.

Chairman.

Um just also want to thank Counselor Nielsen for proving the point of this proposal when it comes to parity.

We are not at parity with our surrounding communities.

Our surrounding communities don't have to deal with this.

And I don't know why we would be looking for the state to solve problems that we are facing.

I don't know why we would look at the state to say, hey, give our public defender's office the option to not have parity when we can do that right now with one yes vote.

And I just want to thank you for the courage that you're displaying by coming here and testifying in support of this tonight.

I don't know if you realize it or not.

You are speaking for a lot of department heads within the city-county enterprise that I have had discussions with that want to see this pass, but just didn't quite have the gumption to come up and testify in support tonight like you did.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilor Lewis.

I prom pardon me, I promise to go fast.

I wonder if the issue uh is the waiver process.

I wonder if there's an opportunity for us to have a deeper conversation uh with the administration regarding just a waiver process and not necessarily this uh this proposal, just trying to figure out a happy medium.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

I didn't entertain a motion.

Yes.

I move to send proposal 236 to the full council with a due pass recommendation.

Councilor on A second.

Uh Clerk Clerk Kendall, I'd like to do a roll call vote, please.

Councillor Allen.

No.

Councillor Nay.

Aye.

Councilor Boots, no.

Councilor Cahill.

Cahill, yes.

Councilor Carlino.

Carlino, nay.

Councilor Book.

Counselor Dilk, yay.

Councilor Lewis.

Lewis, nay.

Councilor Maui.

Yes.

Councilor Newerson.

Nielsen, no.

Councilor Roberts.

Roberts, yes.

Council Chair Mascarry.

Mascarry, no.

Thank you.

Six to five.

Proposal up is proposal 240.

Who do we have presenting that tonight?

Yeah, I'll go.

I'll get welcome, Mr.

Glass.

So you're presenting uh the next three, correct?

Yes.

Uh with your permission, Mr.

Chair, I'll uh present all three at once.

Thank you.

Well, now it's uh do we have the consent to do all three at once?

Consent.

All right, you have the floor.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chairman, members of the committee, and guest counselors.

So my name is Joe Glass.

I'm the executive director.

Thank you.

I'm the executive director and general counsel of the Indianapolis Bond Bank.

I'm here to uh present uh proposals number 40 for uh excuse me, 240, 241, and 242.

So as uh Controller Hansen laid out in uh the presentation of the budget uh before the full council, um, an increase in assessed value in Marion County has led to an increase uh in debt capacity, and the city is looking to utilize that debt capacity to make uh 21 million dollars in investments in um uh public works uh fleet and uh public safety infrastructure.

And uh that will uh be done in three series, um which are uh presented in these uh three proposals uh here this evening.

Um bond issuance of the Metropolitan Thoroughfare District, an amount not to exceed uh four million dollars uh for snow trucks uh paving and line striping equipment.

Um bond issuance of the public safety communications and computer cute computer facilities district and an amount not to exceed eight and a half million dollars for uh severe weather sirens and um other communication um apparatus, and uh proposal number 242, which would be an issuance of the consolidated city in an amount not to exceed um eight and a half million dollars uh for a new uh fire station 33.

Uh so proposal number 240 um would um be an issuance of four million dollars, it would pay for uh eight to ten new uh large uh snow trucks.

Um this is done uh in concert with um the purchase of uh 14 smaller trucks uh for uh connector streets.

Um these would be larger trucks uh for uh for thoroughfare uh plowing um as well as uh other uh street maintenance equipment.

Uh proposal number uh 241 would provide uh 8.5 million dollars.

Um it would replace uh 62 uh severe weather sirens of uh the current 171 sirens.

Um it would replace uh the prime site for uh the public safety uh radio system.

The prime site is like the control center.

Um it's a centralized location for uh the control and management of um voice radio communications um routers and antennas uh for uh the public safety uh radio system as well as uh dispatch consoles uh for our uh 911 call center.

Um it would also provide uh 8.5 million dollars for the construction of a new uh station 33.

Uh the current station 33 is located at um 34th and Muller Road.

It's just southeast of Northwest High School, um, south of like the international marketplace.

Um it is a currently a two-bay um fire station.

Um the new construction, uh the location, exact location of which to is to be determined, uh, would uh be a three-base station, which would accommodate uh the uh newer uh apparatus of IFD.

Here's some uh pictures of uh the current station 33.

And uh here's um some renderings of uh other stations to give you an idea of what that would look like.

There's um IFD station uh number three, uh which is in Fountain Square, I believe opened in uh 2019.

There's a rendering of the soon to open uh IFD station number 32 in Broaderville, and uh the uh station number four, which is at uh 84th and ditch.

Uh so these would be uh general obligation bonds uh backed by uh property taxes, um, as I said earlier.

These um are uh supported by an increase in assessed value.

Uh there would be no new levy or no change to the property tax rate, an amount not to exceed 21 million dollars, a term of 20 years, uh interest rate not to exceed uh six and a half percent.

Um with us today are uh financial advisor, uh Sycamore Advisors, uh bond council, uh Bozeman Kenny and Evans and uh Luke Capital will be our underwriter.

And to give you an idea of the process, we were introduced at the previous uh full council meeting.

We'll uh do our first uh of two Board of Public Works meetings tomorrow.

Uh we'll go before the full council at the next meeting in September.

Uh we'll have two meetings before the emergency safety agencies board, and then we uh plan to go before the bond bank for the final approval in October and plan to price uh in uh November or December.

So that happy to answer any questions of the committee.

Thank you, Mr.

Glass.

Uh I I couldn't read that very well, but uh the tornado sirens would they be in place by next spring or if everything's approved?

How soon?

I believe we might have somebody from uh Mesa who can speak to the timing of that.

Uh Rip, could you repeat the question again?

Sorry.

Uh the tornado sirens, when would the new ones be in place?

Will they be done by next spring?

Uh so real real quick first.

Uh so Jacob Spence, I'm the director of emergency management for Marion County.

Uh so it would be done in phases.

The contractor that we would be implementing that would be the vendor that we use currently for our sirens and their contractor believe they could do roughly 32 a year.

So we would do it, you know, basically it would be through 2026 and then 2027 through those two years.

Sorry, yeah, we've we've been working with the vendor to identify those those 62 sirens and uh to make sure that you know we're keeping up as much as possible with uh the current sirens uh and and working through that, but it will be those sirens that are considered to be the oldest and that need replaced.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Counselors seeing counselor boots, Mr.

Chairman.

Not a question, just a couple comments.

Um this discussion of these uh proposals was tangential to our entire budget discussion this year, um, because we thought it was an uh important to one, for example, proposal 240 just carries forward what we must provide the city to fulfill our charge to them to improve the snow policy.

And if we're gonna dictate policy, we need to dictate revenue to support that.

Uh so we cannot ask for enhanced snow service without more capacity, so hence 240 in the money for additional trucks.

Um then proposal 241 with the sirens.

Um the last thing I would ever have on my conscience is a disaster that happened in Texas uh with the river floods when their sirens did not work, and nine-year-old girls were were flushed down the river.

Um that's a drastic example, but um we cannot ever let our guard down here in Indianapolis, and if we have a uh deficient siren system, then uh it must be fixed.

So I would encourage uh support of 241 as well.

And the fire station is part of the IFD's periodic and systemic, or I should say systematic replacement of their stations on a cyclical basis.

So that is uh part of the um driving force behind 242.

So I would encourage uh my colleagues here to support all three proposals.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

Any other questions to counselors?

Anyone of the general public can speak on any of these proposals?

240, 241, or 242.

Good evening.

Counselors, uh Mary Bookwalter of Indianapolis.

And I first of all want to congratulate us all a very happy anniversary for the 125th uh signing or passage, 125 years has passed since the passage of the uh equal rights amendment number 19, which uh gave supposedly all of us uh equal rights under the law.

Uh and I'm sorry that was another 40 years until uh we could make that effect with the Civil Rights Act of 1965.

But it's there, and women are equal, and we're all happy here together.

So thank you.

And and secondly, I I'm in in not to be picky, but um I'm a little disappointed over the time we've spent uh together, some of us on uh issues of park expansion and uh green spaces, and I'm I'm grateful that uh we retain apparently the three million dollars uh that was uh budgeted, but I've also heard the mayor say he wants to decrease every department by four percent.

And I'm wondering how um this fits in in saving money, and we were still trying to fill these positions, uh many of them critical.

I would also ask if if we could look at um the um necessity of 10 snow plow uh trucks.

Oh, they're 200,000 each, apparently.

There's all kinds of other rolling stock, and having at one time been responsible for a great deal of rolling stock, and it is heir to problems, mechanical failures.

I'm glad they're brand new, but even these things anymore uh require attention and repair from more talented people, uh and they're all engaged.

So thank you for your attention.

I appreciate it.

Thank you for your comment.

Anyone else in the general public like to speak on this?

Yes, sir.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman and members of the committee.

I'm Jeff Stant.

Um, and you all know I've been uh trying to persuade you and the city to appropriate more funds for forest acquisition.

Uh and I want to to point out that at last year's hearing on the budget, the sole hearing that it was people testifying for putting more dollars in the city's budget that dominated that hearing.

Now there was a lot of uproar over the Gaza situation, but when it came to actual testimonies presented, that's the issue that dominated the public hearing.

And this year to have zero dollars, new dollars being appropriated, and then to hear this bond uh being talked about.

Um I have a question about what is the total increase in assessed value in the city, and was it just 21 million?

Uh and and also uh was there some room that could have been there for the three million dollars in in additional forest acquisitions that we were asking the council to consider and the the mayor's office to consider.

Uh we're just surprised that that we're told there's no money, nothing in the budget, and nothing outside of the budget is possible for appropriating those dollars, and and skeptical of that assertion.

Um thank you.

And feel frustrated by it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Any other counselors have anything on on these proposals?

Not at entertain a motion.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

All right.

We'll see it's full council.

Well, we're now we have two more budget hearings.

Up next is Marion County Auditor's Office and Administration.

You folks have the floor.

You know you have six minutes.

Well, welcome.

You you have more than six minutes.

You have the floor.

Thank you.

Thank you for allowing.

Good evening, Mr.

Chair and Council members for the record.

Um, I am Milo Aldridge, and I have the privilege of serving as the Marion County Auditor at this time.

I'm sorry.

Oh, I thought I heard someone say something.

I'm the uh again, I am Isla Eldridge, and I have the privilege of serving as the Marion County Auditor.

Um, in attendance with me tonight, um, I have my chief financial officer, Tiffany Matthews.

We are always looking at ways to streamline and make the office run more efficiently.

And so with that, there has been some changes.

You all know Drew Carlson, who was the chief financial officer, but um Tiffany becoming the um chief financial officer allows Drew to um have more time to manage our very large real estate department and also with me tonight.

If I could just take uh a second to acknowledge those that helped me do this work on a daily basis, as you all know, we don't do this work alone.

Um I would like to acknowledge my chief deputy auditor, Patty Morris, uh Drew Carson, our deputy auditor of tax, Shakira Martin, Deputy Auditor of Accounts Payable, Stacy Miller Jones, Deputy Auditor of Payroll, and Liz Gordon, our accounting administrator.

So you guys just wait.

All right, perfect.

And they are here to answer any questions that I cannot answer.

So with that being said, we are excited tonight to present to you our 2026 budget for the auditor's office.

A quick agency overview.

You guys can read along with me if you like.

Um, our department structure, um, accounts payable and receivable, provides accounts payable and accounts receivable functions for all departments and agencies, including property tax distributions, internal charges, payments to vendors, and to citizens working during elections and serving jury duty.

The division also serves as the general accounting agency for the entire city county enterprise and performs monthly and year-in processing.

Reconciles cash balances and funds, issues all 1099s, and assists with the preparation of financial reports and audits for both the city of Indianapolis and Marion County.

Payroll.

Which looking at the demographic slide, breakdown by gender.

We have 23 females and five males.

Of those, nine females and two females are in leadership.

Last year we only had two males on staff, but we have been able to hire an additional three males.

Four African American, one Hispanic, and four Caucasian are in leadership.

As you can see, we try very hard to provide or have a very diverse office.

In 2025, the auditor's office successfully implemented a new supervisor position within our real estate division.

This created an advancement opportunity within our agency and allowed for further cross-training for employees.

I am a strong believer in cross-training employees because the office needs to continue to operate regardless of anything were to happen to any one of us, including myself.

We continue to hire a diverse staff that represents the internal and external customers we serve.

In 2025, a payroll staff member attended, we believe in education and educating, attended a GOA, which is the government finance officers association training, and another employee is preparing to take a payroll accounting class to better support the enterprise we serve.

Additionally, staff has attended the AI training offered by ISA.

Our operational successes successively successfully implemented a paperless process for our accounts payable division.

Payments are mailed within three business days from the date the auditor's office receives the invoice.

Prior to printing checks every day, we were printing them three days a week.

So again, as I stated earlier, we are always looking at ways to make the office run more efficient.

We started printing chip printing checks daily.

This has enabled us to use less paper and less future expenses for storage.

Additional progress in 2025.

We're currently working with working on ACH payments for employee reimbursements.

And I think and I may be mistaken, but I know I believe one of our highest employee rebursements would be like for mileage.

So instead of getting a check, it'd be nice if you can.

We're working on making those like electronics so that they're like automatically deposited into your account or into an employee's account.

This will create cost savings in check stock envelopes, ink and postage.

Our goal is to keep strong relationships with our current vendors and attract more vendors to the city of Indianapolis and Marion County.

We strongly believe in just are looking at ways again to pay vendors more efficiently and it not take 30 days, if possible, not to pay or for a vendor to be paid.

Cost savings again, checks per year, $3,500.

Check envelopes per year, where we were paying $2,375 mail per year.

It was approximately $40,000 that we have been paying.

So these expenses will decrease as we add more vendors to ACH versus writing a check, a paper check.

We will work with ISA to have our online forms in Spanish a translation.

So right now we're providing that, although some of the state forms are still only in English.

Community engagement.

Again, just trying to accommodate the um the public that we serve.

So the real estate deduction forms, as I just stated, provided by the state are only in English.

But we are doing our best to make sure that we accommodate our clients.

As you all know, we have a 5%, a point five percent increase in operational budget compared to 2025.

As you look at that slide, the chargeback budget decreased by 194K, total of 1% or 111K decreased in our uh 2026 budget.

And as I uh delve through this budget, you will see where the difference or what why that number what the difference is in our budget.

The ineligible deduction fund is the auditor-specific fund that gets its revenue from collecting money on uh duplicate or fraudulent um homestead deductions.

The personnel um breakdown is the county general general decreased by 200,636 dollars, but subsequently there will be an increase in ineligible deductions fund.

This will fully fund current full-time employees, level salaries, health insurance, and colour which um is the 2.6 percent increase.

Character two $560 increase for fleet chargebacks, as you see on the slide, which includes maintenance items for um actually my county vehicle overall decrease of 180K.

Um, and we shouldn't see a change to um services at all.

Okay, last slide.

As you see, there are no changes to character 4 in our 2026 budget.

And that is our last slide.

And my staff and I are here and available to answer any questions or any or listen to any comments that you may have.

Thank you very much.

Counselor Bay or Counselor Cage.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Just it, I guess a question on the I'm trying to find it in here, but the you you referenced that the current process is to take invoices and pay them within three days is I I guess it are not that there aren't variations, but is our standard practice for most of our contracts not something like net 30 or something like that you want to speak to it.

Hi, thank you.

Um so I would say yes, um, prior to this paperless process, we were paying them within 30 days.

Sometimes it could be longer, depending on when we the auditor's office actually received the invoice.

Um but with the paperless process, we've cut that down from the time that we receive it to within three days.

That's depending obviously that there's no errors within the invoice we receive or the the purchase order, or there's a um receiver issue or something like that, we have to communicate with the agency to correct.

But I guess it so let's say that in a perfect world, uh, and especially as we move electronically, things like that, that hypothetically invoice comes in, you get the proper approvals, and that all happens instantly.

Do you then actually release the payment on day three, or is it in the system to be released like on net third, like 30 days later?

No, it'll it it'll be no, we don't we don't wait the 30 days if I'm understanding your correct your question correctly.

I guess in the in the and the great scheme of things, once we receive the invoice, so the agent typically the a the agency receives the invoice before the auditor's office does.

So once it goes through through their approval path, um it's a we have to work together with the agencies essentially in that time frame.

So but even our process prior to um by the time we received it from the agency, it it very well could have been longer, 30 days or longer in the previous process.

Got it.

That's it.

It was a very paper heavy process at that as well.

Got it.

That's that's interesting to hear because in the private sector, it it very often, I mean, invoices can get into the system with it.

I mean, same day is not uncommon.

And then we just sit on it to float the money.

So then I guess my follow-up question is as a result of given that that's the environment, if as you get more efficient, is there any concern with us losing the float that is baked into so in in what I would call normal terms like a net 30, you would issue the check at day 27 or something, knowing that it'll get there on day 30.

But now it sounds like you potentially could be cutting you know three, four or five days out of the float.

Yeah, if I could just add to what Tiffany um was saying, um, first of all, I just would like to say again, number one priority is to make sure that the office is operating and running as efficient as possible, and we learned that it was not.

So from that being said, to answer your question, the turnaround period would be within that three days.

So once we receive the invoice or the PO from the agency, then our goal is to not let that sit, right?

And to have that invoice processed and turned around within three days instead of 30 days.

Does that make sense?

So the quicker the better for us to pay vendors instead of vendors having to wait to be paid.

Yeah, I I mean I hear what you're saying.

I'm just saying that in the private sector, contracts frequently are written with like net 30 uh or more terms, and so you could get the invoice today and get it in the system, everything's keyed in, and then we deliberately sit on it for 30 days deliberately because baked into all the assumptions is we want to we want to hold on to our money.

So everything's in the computer, and then 30 days later, finally it releases.

So in government, just keep in mind that the agency is doing the sitting.

So by time we get it, like seriously, seriously, the agency can sit on it forever.

I get phone calls all the time.

Like I submitted it to my invoice to the prosecutor's office, just an example, right?

And I haven't got paid yet.

Well, it had been sitting already for about 60 days.

So by time we get it, and I think that's what um is important to point out that by time we get it, and we're getting those phone calls, we need to turn it around as quick as possible and get it processed because it's already been sitting right for a while.

Yeah, I I understand that part.

I get so my question, the follow-up question is now that you're not mailing checks, so that you're you're releasing these payments, but in the old old way, you were mailing a paper check.

So we we still got to sit on that money for three to five more days, right?

Is as you get to I think you said your goal 75% ACH.

Is there any financial impact to the loss of that through call it three to five days float?

I think I'm still am I okay.

Um that is something we are with our partners and like the treasurer's office um and OFM are working with them to figure out what that is going to look like long term.

So there might be a little bit of that, but just the number of checks, check fraud, um, the mail, yeah.

Um those those types of things are you know it ACH there are a lot of things in place that make it very secure.

So um so those are things that we are looking at in this whole process that um actually we've we're ongoing partnership with the treasurer's office and OFM currently on those specific issues as well.

Because I know the treasurer's office do not want to lose their their interest, you know, and their you know for the city union um and their accounts.

So um so yes, they are very much a partner in this.

Yeah, I just would be interested in seeing the the quantification if we could sometime.

Thank you.

And if you um I would just like to add too, before we even started this process, we met with um the state accounting department just to get some idea of how they do things and that they're already doing it this way, um, which is more efficient again in regard to how they pay their pay or reimbursement.

Oh, yeah, I know there's no argument on the ACH and the less manual processing, stuffing envelopes, you know, printer, mickerton, or all the all the fun stuff.

Uh I'm I'm all for that.

I'm just curious about uh the more the process.

Like it many companies when they have made these migrations or made this push, they have kind of it oftentimes you talk about your printing checks every day, but some of the decision to not print checks every day was itself part of the trying to squeeze out a few more days of float.

And it's not a perfect scenario type of thing.

But it the the flip side is that is if you do something like this and you get more efficient, where let's say you were calling it net the practical effect, like you're saying is net 60 or something like that, and we've we are now moving towards net 55, right?

That there's some quantification of we're losing sitting on that money for a few days.

The efficiency is all great.

I'm just curious, are we the to your point the the the loss of the interest or whatever, however, we have that money invested, uh what does that hurt us?

So thanks.

Thank you.

Any any other questions from counselors?

Seeing none.

Uh anyone from the audience really speak on this budget.

See that?

Thank you very much.

We'll see you at the review and analysis.

Thank you.

Last one, we saved the last is City County Council office, Greg Stour Stours.

Good evening, counselors.

I'm Greg Stowers, Chief Administrative Officer and Policy Director for the Office of the City County Council, uh, joined by uh Miss Candice Carris, our uh chief financial officer today.

We uh will walk you through our budget uh as well as some of our programmatic successes.

Um I think you all probably understand this more than anybody before the folks at home, uh the city county council serves as both the legislative and fiscal body for Indianapolis and Marion County.

Uh that means that you all um have two key responsibilities.

First, as the legislative body, you pass laws that set public policy for our community.

Um second, as a fiscal body, you adopt budgets for uh local departments, agencies, and municipal corporations.

Um and beyond those responsibilities, um we uh as council staff serve as a connection point for residents, answering questions, addressing concerns, and responding directly to the issues our communities uh face.

Uh our work uh is only possible because of our dedicated council staff uh providing constituent services, legislative support, communications, and policy analysis that directly support counselors from managing um meetings to ensuring information flows clearly clearly to both counselors and the public, their day-to-day efforts drive the council's ability to serve effectively.

What may not always be visible is the depth of the process from the idea of a proposal to a passed ordinance.

Uh, it is a thorough, intentional and requires real commitment.

And I'm deeply grateful for the ways my colleagues in the office execute that work uh every day.

Uh here we have uh council staff demographics, as you can see here, we're relatively small, so don't need to get uh too in-depth here.

Um go to the next slide.

Uh a few programmatic successes.

Um first is the 2026 budget process, um, just supporting counselors and providing input uh on this important work.

I want to thank our partners at OFM and the administration as a whole uh throughout this process, uh supporting the AI commission as it explores deeper integration of technology in the city services with valuable contributions from counselors, commissioners, uh expert presenters, and our general counsel, Leonette Pierce.

Um strengthening cultural districts, uh, thanks to our partners uh in the community and DMD as we work to continue to add vitality and creativity to our city.

Uh that application actually closes on August 31st.

So just a heads up there.

Um the establishment of the uh economic enhancement district, a tool to support and strengthen the vibrancy of our downtown, uh, the launching of the homeowner repair program, uh two million dollars in dedicated funding to support uh housing stability uh by helping residents, uh the adoption of the uh new snow removal policy uh that guarantees neighborhood streets will be cleared uh when snowfall reaches critical levels, and then continuing the work on Vision Zero uh aimed at reducing traffic injuries, uh fatalities and partnerships with agencies and departments, uh especially DPW.

Uh while we want to acknowledge these wins, we're also mindful of the broader environment our residents live in.

Um SB 46 passed in 2023 gave the council the opportunity to pilot a program offering property tax relief.

And with the impacts of SB1 still unfolding, we must be thoughtful heading into 2026 and beyond.

We want to ensure, well, our office wants to ensure that constituents not only feel benefit from tax relief, but also continue to have access to the programs and support they rely on.

Uh and then heading into 2026, uh, some goals and priorities, uh, just advancing legislation that responds to community needs, uh, strengthening budget engagement with the public and stakeholders, uh, modernizing our operations through technology uh while also valuing the people and processes that play a role there, um then deepening partnerships in the community, recognizing that collaboration is a is a cornerstone to community progress.

Um then here are some division updates.

Uh our communications team is working to expand our public engagement.

Uh legislative team continues to work on policy development and analysis, and then our clerks team has continued to improve the filing and record keeping systems.

And I want to shout out the folks who are still.

I think we've got Yolanda and Sarah and Fernandez still here today.

Um, but with that, I will pass it to uh CFO Harris for the numbers.

Okay.

So uh 2026 budget process was probably the tightest budget I've ever worked on in the enterprise so far.

And so in that uh council did uh participate in the four percent of our budget being reduced.

And so just to kind of go over it at a high level there, our 2026 budget um is at 3.3 million dollars, um, and that's about 200,000 down uh comparative to 2025.

Uh if we're looking at the percent of change, you're gonna see 5.71, and that's just factoring in the chargeback.

So we did have a reduction in chargebacks, um, but then we also had a reduction in uh uncontrolled account, which is where the four percent lives.

Okay.

All right, and so in order to uh keep all our employees uh staffed, we kind of had to do some moving around within our positions, and so for CARETER 1, our budget is uh 2.7 million dollars, and just for context, majority of the council's budget is tied to salaries, and so that makes about 83 uh percent of our budget.

Okay, all right, and so in order to uh keep all our employees uh staffed, we kind of had to do some moving around within our positions, and so for carater one, our budget is uh 2.7 million dollars, and just for context, majority of the council's budget is tied to salaries, and so that makes about 83 uh percent of our budget of that uh in the increases that did include um insurance increases as well as two percints cola for staff as well as for our counselors based on ordinance, and in order for us to cover uh those cost increases, uh, we did have to do some right sizing of some vacancies that we had as well as uh right sizing uh the council for dam budget.

And so what that means is it doesn't reduce the amount of committee meetings that was being held, it just puts the budget more in line to what we've historically been spending in that area.

So there had been underspend there uh for previous years, and so I just shifted that money to help cover our uh other career one increases uh for carater two, council has a very, very small budget again.

We had underspend there, so I just right size that budget and move some of the underspend from previous years uh to carater one.

Caracter three, uh, our budget is 538,000.

And so when you think of uh our career three budget, 355 of that is chargebacks, and so for the council that's gonna be building authority, that's gonna be uh ISA and our ISA chargebacks.

And so we did see uh a reduction there, but then we did take some of our historical underspend to help cover care one increases.

Moving on to character four, character four for council is a very small budget, so it's about $2,500, and so again, um no real change there for character five.

We did see this is also a chargeback for us uh for OCC, and so since we do use we do have our own council as well as using outside uh legal counsel as well, uh it made sense uh for OFM to go ahead and reduce our care five chargebacks for OCC, and so that was uh decreased by half question.

Thank you.

You know you did that in seven minutes 33 seconds.

That was a record.

Any uh comments or questions from counselors?

Come on.

I I think everybody here expresses gratitude for everything the staff does for us.

Um it's it's very important that some of the things you guys do.

I said, Hey, put put this information on a letter again.

You do it and do it pretty quickly.

That's Roberts.

Specific shout out to Fernanda for doing more on social media, we greatly appreciate it.

Thank you.

Any other questions from counselors?

Nothing.

Anyone but the general public seeing none?

We uh have new other business.

We are speaking through that and draw control uh