Good evening.

Welcome to the animated finance committee meeting.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Michael Paul Hart as a guest this evening, uh representing District 20.

He said I mean that was.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, Derek Cahill, District 23.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Mike Bill, District 24.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Brian Mowery, District 25.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman John Barrett from Sending Council District.

Thank you to her.

Right.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, Nick Roberts.

Four.

Thank you, Chairman Andy Nielsen, District 14.

Thank you, Chairman Dan Boots, district three.

Good evening, Chairman Messiary, Krista Wells, District 11, West Side.

Good evening, Maggie Lewis, District 5.

Good evening, Frank Mescary, District 19, Southeast Side.

First of all, I'd like to thank uh thank you for you for putting this in.

We kind of struggled with finding a place for this meeting.

At first, we wanted to.

The Garfield Arts Department.

Can you hear me?

I can hear me.

Um, we looked at the it was full.

Then we look at the Beach Grove Community Center.

I apologize for the small room, their big room is full.

They have something going on.

We didn't do it intentionally.

Uh we have uh five uh four four items on the the agenda.

First up is proposal one sixty one appoints Mary Allen to the Eco Opportunity Advisory Board because we are here.

You have to step on up.

Ladies one of you have to give a response.

Welcome, Aaron.

I hope you're trying to park this part.

So tell us a little bit about yourself and why you want to be on the uh on this advisory board.

Yeah, um, I was really actually trying to get on this advisory board enough to have with the paying back.

I'm a former civil rights director.

Um I have a passion for equal opportunity.

I'm a former civil rights director, I'm a former civil rights investigator.

Um, former educator, I believe in equal rights, but I also believe in us having the opportunity to look a little bit deeper.

I was one of the first directors in the state of Indiana to hold a diversity conference because I kind of feel like some of the stuff on jobs were related culturally needed, and some people may not understand different cultures.

I bring a lot of confidence to the table in knowing that help needing the job.

Thank you.

Any comments or questions for counselors?

So you sound second, all those things say aye.

You're good.

You can leave or stay.

Thank you.

Uh up next proposal.

Excuse me.

It may be my apologize.

I apologize.

Um, up next is proposal 162.

Uh modify several ordinances related to the human resources conditions of employment compensation, and we can leave for the city and city county for it.

That would be us, sir.

All right, you have the floor.

All right.

Uh good evening.

I'm Abby Hanson, the controller, and with me is Tomana Ellis, the HR director.

All right.

Our proposal covers five different personnel or benefit policy changes, and we're going to cover them each individually, but here's what they are in a comprehensive manner.

First is the cost of living, living applications.

Currently, municipal code requires that the colour be applied to the salary ranges.

Those ranges are a schedule of uh salaries included in the budget ordinance and approved by the council each fall.

The issue has been that for people who have the minimum qualifications required for their job.

Their salary is often set at the grade minimum.

So, say that's true for Tawana.

She's hired in 2025, and on January 1st, she received, she receives her cost of living adjustment, but the salary range also receives the cost of living adjustment.

So she goes up, but the floor comes up too.

So even, and then I come in in March at the grade minimum.

So even though Tawana has had several months to maybe a year, more time than I have had, we are now making the same salary.

The practice this has devalued the experience that individuals have who are staying in public service for year over year.

And it doesn't allow them to advance through the salary ranges.

So this proposal changes the location in municipal code where the colour lives.

It applies the cola to people, but gives the controller the discretion whether or not to add it to the salary ranges.

The second one is adjusting the authority for salary offered authors, offers.

Her municipal code, HR recommends salaries, but the final decision making authority rests with the departments.

The issue is it allows agencies to offer a salary that HR might not agree with.

Luckily, our issue, the issue hasn't gotten that far.

However, the current language has come up in conversations when we're discussing salaries.

HR's role is to evaluate the salary offered in relation to the salaries of other similar positions across the enterprise, which individual agencies are not privy to.

So this change realigns the compensation to be the authority of HR in conjunction with department leaders.

By allowing HR to be the final arbiter of salary offers, it ensures that there aren't disparities between departments.

Departments who have more money and possibly slightly more flexibility versus other departments that are smaller and have less of that flexibility.

I don't want to create the hunger games within our enterprise where people are stealing their jobs that are more coveted than others, although arguably job descriptions are similar.

Today, HR works collaboratively with agencies on salary offers, and that will continue.

There is no intention to change the practice of how we make salary offers, it's simply the language that supports that practice.

There are also some minor language cleanups in that section that just clean up the consistency and the terminology that has gotten a little bit outdated over time.

Okay, and then section three is in relation to the benefit leave donation program.

The city and county recognizes that employees or someone in their immediate family may have an emergency resulting in the employee need to take additional time off in excess of their available base of time.

By providing a benefit leave donation program, it would help employees support one another in their time of greatest need and didn't spray the city and county's commitment to the workforce.

Section four is a few changes to the short-term disability, short-term leave policies.

Currently, employees that need to take time off intermittently for their own serious medical conditions must use benefit leave time to cover the time off work.

Our proposal is to allow the employees to do short-term leave on an intermittent basis.

Also, we want to expand short-term leave to include their spouse, child or children, and their parents.

And this will help employees who feel caregiving responsibilities while remaining engaged in the workforce.

So today our ordinance allows for paid time off if an employee is called for jury duty.

State statute outlines that daily stipend be offered by the courts for people who serve on a jury or participate in a jury duty process.

The State Board of Accounts issued guidance that public employees who are being compensated for their time during jury duty should not forfeit the jury pay, they just shouldn't accept it.

So we discussed that policy change with OCC, but they advised us that we needed to actually change the ordinance in order to be fully in compliance.

So this clarifies those issues, allowing us to update the employee manual and providing direction to employees who are called for jury duty that they need to waive the pay that the court would offer.

Those are all of our proposals in this ordinance.

I did want to mention that we are anticipating being back in the next month or two to make changes to our pension options based on a recent Indiana General Assembly action, a positive opportunity for our employees.

It takes some time to explain the change.

So I didn't intend to like get into it now, other than just to say anticipate seeing for seeing us.

And we will be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Councilor Borders.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

So essentially, you're just trying to update the code to be tracking to best practices with HR, which are already.

Is that correct?

All right, thanks.

Yeah.

Counselor.

Oh, I can stop.

Um, thank you, Chairman.

Um, colleagues that ask for your support tonight.

I've enjoyed working with the controller's office on, I think as the vice president said, uh compliance conformity to best practices, but I also see many of these changes as a town attraction and retention tool for uh the hardworking folks who keep our city running.

So I'd ask for your support this evening.

Thank you, sir.

See, none of anyone's in the audience would like to speak on it.

Seeing none of you saying the motion, so move.

Move and second, all those are there.

Aye.

I move over.

Thank you.

Okay.

That's next to the 163.

So, 19,180,000.

Departments, agencies, various city county funds, and additional supplement and I thought you left.

No, sir.

No, sir.

Still, controller Hansen here to present proposal 163.

Before I get started, I just want to say that I have very much appreciated.

OFM appreciates all the work that we've done with the council's office to get to a proposal that we are all on board with.

Um, it's been a great process.

So, thank you for that.

So, I want to start by getting a global overview of our 2026 supplemental income tax.

We received 75.2 million dollars earlier this spring, and that is for all eligible units that are within the county.

So those funds are then broken down into our income tax buckets based on the income tax rates that existed in 2024.

The allocation of those buckets can be seen in the column, the actual dollar amount associated with each one, and the column that's labeled allocation.

You'll see the bottom three buckets are not uh coded city-county distribution because those are buckets that we cannot utilize at the spring supplemental time.

The amount received to the city county, our budget is listed in the furthest right column.

So looking a little bit closer at the city county distributions, this fiscal is only appropriating a portion of our supplemental that we received, and together the council and the administration chose to hold back 15.1 million dollars of the supplemental for two main reasons.

Number one, to be conservative with our spending in light of the gas tax holiday.

This relief to taxpayers lowered gas, lowered our gas tax revenues that we have budgeted.

By setting funds aside, we reserve the flexibility to address the shortfall in the capital plan rather than canceling and delaying projects.

Now, I should also note that recently the media has reported that the state indicated they will back the lost revenue to local governments.

That information didn't come to light until this proposal was already passed, so we were making decisions at that time based on the best information we have.

The second reason we are not allocating all of the funding is there are a number of other mandatory spending and operational priorities that have arisen since we built the 2026 budget, and we are setting those funds aside to address later in the year when we have a better understanding of exactly how much money we need for different issues.

For example, our staffing in parks is better than we anticipated when we built the budget, and that's a really good problem to have, but it means we need to allocate funding to that good problem.

We've chosen not to appropriate any of the public safety income tax, which isn't unusual.

Those funds will be appropriated at the end of the year to address union contract increases that were negotiated late in 2025 and a few that we didn't finish until 2026 because and so they weren't fully budgeted.

Additionally, we do know that IFD will need additional funds at year-in because of a grant they didn't receive, and then some uh higher overtime expenses.

So that's the situation that we were in making this decision and why not all of those funds were allocated.

So the blue box on the screen represents the piece of the fiscal, where the funds are in the fiscal.

Now I'm gonna go through the different priorities that this fiscal does fund.

I grouped them by appropriation type, like what's their greater purpose.

So it is kind of skipping around a little bit on the actual proposal.

Starting with animal care, they are having they need a $350,000 appropriation.

They had a legal settlement that necessitated additional budget because of its size.

The case is originally from 2021 and it's from an incident that occurred in 2019, so it's pretty old.

They were unable to absorb the cost because this settlement represented about 40% of the flexible character free budget they have, so it just wasn't something that they could float for uh any period of time.

Next is ISA for $800,000.

They have network and server infrastructure that was originally purchased with federal relief funds.

They have reached or they are reaching the end of their life in less than a year, and we need to purchase new equipment in advance of the end of the current life because you can't run, you can't run them right up against each other and turn one off and turn the other on.

Really have to have some overlap.

Um, the other issue is it's leased, and so we are going this year.

We would have two leases at the same time, and so we're gonna go ahead and just do that with the spring fiscal, and then we will get the additional cost into the budget for 207 forward.

Next is $600,000 for the Office of Education Innovation, which will fund the fall 2026 Circle City Readers.

You will remember that we put one semester in the 2026 budget, and I'm happy to record that the program worked with 500 students over the last school year, and for students who were assessed at both the beginning of the year and at the end, 31% had an above average growth rate, so it's a very successful program.

We really want to continue with that, and we are looking to put the next semester into the coming year's budget.

Uh, last on this slide is my office.

We are asking for a hundred thousand dollars to do a city county building assessment.

So last year we did a fiscal last year's spring fiscal included funds to do a facility assessment of Duval, and in an effort, it was successful, and in an effort to create a prioritization of the buildings that need to come next.

We need some money to be able to assess our buildings, identify what work needs to be done immediately, what can be done in the next two to three years, and what is the useful life of our building.

So, starting to build out that capital plan and having you know a longer term look at what our needs are.

So, this assessment will help us allocate dollars that we need for repairs and plan for building replacements as needed.

Moving on to housing and homelessness.

The first one is $5 million for the housing hub, and that's a really big number.

So I want to take a little extra time to explain it.

Originally, that facility was conceptualized in 2000 or 2021 or 2022.

The city secured a location in 2023.

We received a 20 million dollar grant from Indiana Housing Community Development Agency.

I think that's the title, IHCDA, in 2024, and we finished up the design last fall.

In that time, our consumer, the Midwest consumer price index has risen by 14%, but yet we hadn't changed the budget of the facility.

So our con our construction costs had ballooned as we hit the end of the design phase.

So we had two choices, and we really explored both of them.

First, we could value engineer the project costs down by reducing the materials that we were using, like going from sealing concrete to wood frame construction.

But given the need and the use of the facility, we knew that more durable building materials would allow this to be long-term sustainable.

The second option we had was to reduce the square footage, but that would have meant knocking off an entire floor of the four or four floor building.

So at that time, while it was a tough decision, I did advocate that we increase the project budget.

So this is us uh basically making that payment or allocating money for that.

Next is a million dollars for our continued commitment to the streets to home Indy program.

This contribution brings our total commitment to eight million dollars for the next phase, and luckily we've been able to keep our commitments ahead of when these funding deadlines are needed.

And then finally on this slide is a half a million dollars for homeowner repair.

Last year we allocated two million dollars in the spring fiscal for this purpose.

DMD brought this program in-house in late 2024, and they've been using just federal funds for it.

Those funds have a lot of compliance requirements, which can make it difficult to move quickly doing the repairs.

The community response to the program was overwhelmingly positive, and at the beginning of this spring, we had a hundred and eighty pending applications that when DMD was financially planning for all those applications, they realized that there was going to be a shortfall.

So we were left with the choice to either deny applications because of failure of funding or to allocate additional funds to it.

So this fiscal along with federal funds will allow us to continue processing the applications that we've received and still setting some funds aside for emergency repairs.

Next is public safety, $600,000 to have been allocated to mobile cameras, six mobile cameras for the parks be able to move around as needed to their locations, and then uh stationary camera investments at eight parks.

Next is OPHS, a combination of youth programming for $300,000.

So first, the National Institute of Criminal Justice Reform launched a youth violence reduction initiative at the end of 2025.

And this funding will allow the program to continue through the end of this year.

Secondly, the it funds an expansion of summer in the city, which OPHS announced a revamping of last Friday.

Approval of these funds will allow the program to expand to additional partners and locations, and then finally, it funds similar summer in the city programming during fall and winter breaks from schools, trying to expand our youth engagement opportunities.

Moving on to quality of life, we are allocating 250,000 to beautify 37 parks that are not currently covered by DPW staff or our keep Indianapolis Beautiful Partnership.

Next is 200,000 for pool maintenance.

Parks has a pool maintenance budget.

However, when they're the liner at Broadworth Pool was planned to be replaced, and there were additional issues identified at that time that were more costly and unexpected, and also a sand filter has to be replaced, which is very costly.

So this is allowing that work to be done, and then lastly, $80,000 for a payment system upgrade today that parks aren't able to take a tacticay, which is apparently a very frequent complaint from residents, and so this small one-time investment will allow them to be able to do that.

Okay, finally, infrastructure.

We are allocating $8 million, which is our annual residential uh residential street match that is in the capital improvement plan.

There is $700,000 for the residential snow policy, and that meaning the policy that four inches residential streets are cloud.

If you'll remember, we set aside excuse me, two million dollars originally last year for that purpose.

They spent $700,000, $1.3 million essentially went back into the bank.

They have reappropriated the $1.3 million through the Department of Public Works.

The public works committee, sorry.

And then we are basically just refilling the bucket with the two million dollar threshold in advance of the coming winter.

And then finally, in a very similar vein, there was kind of a perfect storm of issues with salt this year.

We use nearly double the amount of salt that we have used in average in the last three years.

And there was also a regional shortage which forced us to pay about 20% more per ton.

So we spent a lot more money than we were expecting on salt.

Yeah, it's not spring or winter.

So this million dollars will replenish our salt barns to capacity before we start our next winter season.

Thank you, Andy.

Anyone who councillor Roberts.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, one very frequent, and by the way, it's all very good.

One frequent complaint I get, at least for the parks in my area, is the illegal dumping with the recycling bins, especially at Psalm Park and my neck with the Council Roots know this problem very well.

Um I was wondering with these six mobile cameras, if that's going to be going towards more general public safety issues, or if there can be also used for the legal dumping issues for the things.

Okay, okay.

I would toss that to my parks friends.

Hi, and uh good evening, counselors.

Brittany Crown, Any Parks Director.

Thank you for that question, Council Roberts.

Uh, the cameras, obviously, Andy Parks takes public safety very seriously.

It continues to be a top priority for us with the mobile accessibility, having these additional mobile cameras, it will allow us to respond to any number of public safety concerns.

Um, protection of assets is included in that, protection against the loss of life or injury to our staff or visitors is a top priority.

Um, and then protection of our assets, including remediation of some of these ongoing nuisances that our department sees will also be included in that.

So we we typically make these decisions based on our internal reporting processes, and we also get feedback in collaboration with IEPD around where the uh most logical locations for these cameras will be, and we appreciate any and all feedback from um constituents about what they're seeing and and being collaborative and how we can approach those problems.

Thank you for your question.

Thank you.

Uh, two questions.

Um, madam control, and then the second one's to you, right?

So the first one's to you, madam controller.

Um, how much does it cost us per month with the gas tax holiday?

And then um when you said media reports have indicated that we would get payback.

Was those media reports quoting the actual legislators or what was how confident would we have communication from the state house that that's an actual fact, or are we is it aspirational that we're gonna get the payment?

I believe Shay can tell me if I stated this incorrectly.

I have read about it in the Capitol Chronicles, so you know, proximity to the state house.

I believe Governor Braun indicated it.

Maybe not outright, maybe more in like, oh yeah, we're gonna have to deal with that.

I I don't remember exactly which way.

Um we are losing about three point seven million dollars a month, and that's that's money that otherwise we're going into the roads, yes.

Thank you.

Um, Director Crumb you and I have an email exchange this week that I think was illuminating to me, and I think it'll be useful for folks here to hear it.

Just I didn't, I guess I knew it would you write it down and help me understand it.

Um, with more specificity, but could you just sketch out how broad and um uh impressive our overall product's program is?

I think with this time of year, people also always weigh in because that's when the pools are and the splash pads are getting up and running, but also it's a pretty significant effort that you and your team put in place to um execute on that.

Because you just sketch it out so you'll understand the scope of what you're dealing with.

Absolutely, and um, our aquatics programming lives within our operations and programs division, ran by deputy director Kim Campbell, who does a phenomenal job leading her team and the entire staff.

So across our park system, we um obviously have outdoor and indoor pools to get our outdoor pools up and running.

Um, our work really begins back in January, near the end of January and February, we begin um sketching out the number of staff that will be required.

So the staff on our own that's that's a huge undertaking.

Um, the mechanical issues are a secondary piece to this.

Uh, but but the staff being a primary way that you're making sure our pools can be open.

We have uh multiple hiring uh incentives and trainings that we that all of our lifeguards undergo.

Uh we have preliminary requisites that are required for all of our staff that work in pools, and we do multiple rounds of training for those staff before they even hit the water, and then we do make sure everyone is certified in the water safety as well.

Um so getting all of our pools staffed up is our first challenge.

Second, uh, we begin noticing operational issues once the last freeze has been scheduled.

Um, operational issues within parking uh pools it are are difficult because we are dealing with aging infrastructure across all of our pools.

We begin filling the pools as early as we can, but often that's not until uh late April, early May, and that varies depending on the weather.

If we have a very rainy season or long-lasting cold weather, it becomes a significant challenge for us.

Uh once we get the pools uh vacuumed out, uh, we have the the filling and we start testing the motors themselves.

Again, being a very aging uh infrastructure that we have and are in parks, we start hearing and seeing the costs, if you will, the the machine pieces themselves, and we identify if they are pumping chlorine correctly, if they are um processing uh I think our mountain controller mentioned the sand filter, so are they able to extract and remove debris that will further damage the machinery or cause an unfavorable uh water quality situation?

We are also dependent on our collaboration with other agencies like the health department and and the contractors that they work with to test water quality in all of our pools, and all of these happen in a very tight coordinated timeline.

And if anything is slightly off with those being mechanical issues, especially staffing levels, are our qualified applicants the ones applying, or do we have to dismiss applicants uh due to their inability to operate in the water and then the water quality results as well?

All of these factors and those three categories contribute to a fairly complex um and heavy lift for our any parks team.

So if there's any more specific detail that I would provide, thank you.

Yeah, and we do appreciate, I'll add if I may, um, Mr.

Chair, we we significantly appreciate the patience of the public.

We never go into a pool season wanting to not open pools or wanting to to close pools by any means.

We always start off with the most positive mindset and go through our meticulous um hiring processes and checklists to make sure we can open pools safely and cleanly.

Um, and when that can't happen due to these various factors, it's disappointing for all of us.

So we we deeply appreciate you know the patience of the public, the patience of this council body and and all of our uh council council members.

So thank you again for the question.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilor Wills.

She said, I actually have two.

That's okay.

Um thank you so much.

Controller Hansen.

My question is for slide six with regard to the OPHS funding for a little over three hundred thousand dollars that grant for the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform.

Um character three contracts, just question about the percentage going to organizations, and then if someone from OPHS could answer those identified organizations and partners, that would be of interest.

Sure.

Oh my god.

Hi, Council.

Sorry, I'm on the maybe on the wrong side.

So the identified partners for the YBRI program, the youth violence intervention, is uh voices, and they've been partners with us for in various capacities for a long time.

They're also elevation recipients.

Um, and then for our currently for our existing program that just started last weekend for summer in the city, we are partnered with Let Them Talk, and we uh went through a procurement process to identify that partner.

Um, if we receive additional funds, if if we if you all are um uh vote to give us those funds, we would then uh we've already identified some other partners, other grassroots partners that we uh feel would do a great job and would provide us with other locations and additional activities.

So let them talk is providing youth with um dance activities, competition, um, some engaging activities around like talking with one another, um, and so we're looking at are there sports activities, are there other uh things that that our youth would want to engage in?

Thank you.

I think they definitely do, and I I asked that question, um Madam President, Mr.

Chairman, and Madam Controller, because we're already thinking about the budget obviously for 2026, and so um identifying those partners and and those things as we move forward would be super helpful.

So I appreciate that.

And did I cut you on?

Sorry.

No, did I answer your question?

Well, you definitely did.

Okay.

I had an I had like a kudos and a dovetail into uh the vice president, um, and I just want to kind of shout out the training that our our staff does who work for the aquatics program, um, and the incentives, the equipment, everything to make them feel safe to be able to do their job is super important, and it is very rigorous training.

Um, I speak from experience because my I feel safer now that my daughter can save me, but right now not all the pools are open, and what that means is some of these libraries are traveling around, and she is supposed to be a gus, but she's fallen in love with everyone at Riverside, and so just shout out to all those on teams.

Um, but driving all around the city and making sure that families are safe and cooling off.

So thank you for that question, um, Vice President Barnes.

And with that, I yield my time.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

Controller quick question and then a question for Director Cronus well.

Um, have we seen the Duval Center assessment report from last year?

Yes, what if anything was done with that?

Okay.

I cannot give you super specifics because there was the list was pretty comprehensive of what they did, what they reviewed.

They it cost us 3,500 to do.

That meant we were able to allocate 96,500 to repairs and updates.

We have spent $51,000, which addressed 74% of our immediate issues and 4% of our short-term issues, because they kind of categorize them like that.

Some of the short-term issues that remain are more than we have left, and stuff like HVAC, some roof repairs.

There's a third thing, uh, some concrete work in the front of the building.

So we were able, and with the money that we have remaining, we feel confident we'll be able to fix all the remaining immediate issues.

What's the payback period?

I know at one point we were considering relocating that center to a new facility.

I assume this money we're putting into is giving us a positive.

Yeah, the payback report came back and said, sorry, go ahead on this.

The uh assessment came back and said that it is it has a 50-year useful life remaining on the facility.

Okay, good to hear.

Um, next, Director Crohn, if I may.

Um, you talked about the uh the eight parks that are getting permanent or stationary camera system.

Are those new or are they maintaining current systems?

These would be new cameras.

Do you can you off the top of your head in English parts?

I can, sir.

Thank you.

Uh and our chief technology officer is also in the room, so I may look back to him to make sure I'm giving the correct information.

Uh, these uh permanent camera sites are Bel Air Park, Broad Ripple Park, Auxiliary Building, excuse me.

We had some arson um there, and that's a high need for us.

Eagle Creek Park Administration Building, the Ellenberger Park Center and Pool, Indy Island Building and Pool, Rhodius Park Pool at Southeast Wade Park Center.

Great.

And then briefly on slide seven, we talk about the beautification of parks.

Um, can you just the quarter million dollars?

Can you just on a general level describe what that work is going to entail?

Yes, and I can provide more details uh with with contract details after this meeting.

Um essentially, there are contracts that we have with EBW.

They manage um a portion of our grass and trash maintenance as I believe um you all are aware.

And then we also have support and beautiful beautification efforts from community partners, from corporate partners, as well as organizations like Keep Indianapolis Beautiful or KIB.

There are still parks because we have so many of them, nearly 220 parks that still aren't quite getting um attention that we would like them to see.

Last year for the fiscal, we requested a similar amount to supplement and bridge that gap.

Um so this is to cover additional landscaping contracts that we do bring in on top of those existing partnerships.

Great.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Can I ask a question like he's sitting in the mic?

Is that okay?

So one, thank you for your presentation and your partnership.

A couple of questions.

One, I our thoughts, uh, thank you for the $8 million that goes towards our infrastructure.

Um also thank you for holding some dollars back.

I don't want to overlook the $3.7 million that we're losing uh monthly because of what's happening um at the state with our gas, and so as we prepare to have this conversation about infrastructure, I think that's an important piece to the process.

My question is, and I uh I see this in the PowerPoint here, but not in the uh not in the ordinance itself and not in previous fiscals.

So this $8 million uh is officially going to the capital asset life cycle and development, which is just sort of like general uh public works road money.

And last year it was labeled as CIP plan commitment, just the projects we were doing.

Why is it labeled annual residential streets match?

Are we doing something different with it this year?

No.

Okay, so same as always, it's just got a different way.

Okay, any other questions, counselors?

Anyone in front of the audience to speak on this?

Okay.

So mine's on the public safety side.

Um, there's two things that I think are most important to people.

It's public safety and infrastructure.

And I heard your comments about waiting until the end of the year, but I think there are probably some prudent things we can do at this time.

Uh, specifically around recruitment.

And I don't think that changing our human resources is gonna lead to that much security efforts inside of uh IMP.

So what efforts if any were taken in consideration towards police recruitment to utilize our spring fiscal dozzle dollars?

I cannot speak to what IMP is specifically doing other than anecdotally.

I ran into one of the Chiefs and we spent some time talking about this.

They are revamping their recruitment section and changing the stacking and and just kind of reevaluating their entire philosophy.

But I only know that because I ran into her, and so I cannot give you any more specifics in addition to that.

Okay, so I think, Mr.

Chair, it's I think really important for us as we consider the use of these dollars, and we look at, I mean, do we wait until the end of the year?

There's 15 million sitting there, or do we do something now about it?

I mean, have we had that?

I know I haven't had the conversation with the chief.

I've had it in like a hallway conversation where it was essentially a I've seen some really cool things down in Fort Worth where they did essentially um like public awareness campaigns, and and they were able to gain 3,000 police officer applications.

But I've I've mentioned that to the chief a couple times.

Uh I think this is a really good time to do that.

The weather's great, it's great for recording.

It would be great to try and like use these dollars now to recruit officers instead of waiting until the end of the year.

I mean, maybe they have something going on, maybe they don't, but I think it's just a prudent effort for us when we're looking at this opportunity as well as you know, any conversations that we have in our public safety committee uh to consider how we help get those numbers up.

GPS signal laws.

And oh, yes, thank you, Chairman.

And I know I have to address you, but I agree in line with uh counselor Hart's comment.

Part of the spring fiscal package for members who sit on the public safety and criminal justice committee tomorrow night, there will be a package for which we're making a $2 million appropriation to ensure we stay on um uh squad car uh replacement cycle.

Uh we you know heard pretty loud and clear that you know the conditions of the vehicles are are inadequate.

I know this council and and and this administration have done a lot of good work to make that happen.

We've kind of gotten a uh not necessarily a hiccup, but just like we want to continue to replace those those vehicles.

We weren't able to do so alongside the budget last year, but tomorrow night in public safety there will be uh uh robust appropriation that to at least address one component of I think that uh that's important for IMPD officers.

So just wanted to make that note, thank you.

Thank you, Abby.

Thank you.

No other questions.

You know, from any audience to like speak on this proposal.

So, yeah, we are excuse me.

We have sweet from the public, yeah.

Okay, good evening, uh Chairman Miscari, members of the committee.

My name is Addison Pollock.

I serve as the director of community engagement with ARP Indiana.

Um I'm just here to speak on one tiny sliver of proposal 163 on behalf of our 100,000 members of Marion County.

Um, we're in support, rise in support of section 15, which allocates the additional um half a million dollars to the Department of Metropolitan Health and for uh the 180 applications in the homeowner repair program.

Um so this is a huge priority for us, strengthening the city, strengthening the city's home repair efforts, um and this investment represents a meaningful uh meaningful progress.

Uh, as Indianapolis continues to face housing affordability challenges, and as 86% of Hoosers, 45 plus want to remain in their homes as they age, this funding uh will help ensure safe, stable housing for residents of all ages.

So even though this is an important step, uh the demand for owner occupied repairs and accessibility modifications continues um to outpace available resources.

Um more than 500 homes have not been approved for the city's home repair program since its inception, and nonprofit partners regularly manage wait lists for this type of assistance.

So to better meet this growing demand, um, we would recommend the city in partnership with community organizations explore options like establishing a one-stop shop referral network, uh increasing flexible local investment such as this, um, so we can uh help households uh without the federal eligibility constraints and uh offer grants alongside loan products and uh as well as invest in those local nonprofits that can help uh stretch our public dollars.

So uh thank you for your consideration and uh we support the uh this proposal.

Thank you.

I guess we do the loop is just chair.

Um I just had a question on that homeowner repair, reminded me uh when you said that.

Have we taken a second look, you know, uh within the proposal to that ordinance to see about that borderline predatory language of they have to say 30 years in their home if they get any kind of repair done?

Because that that's to me, that's we talked a lot about that that night.

I haven't heard anything else since I can't think of a single thing in a house that lasts 30 years, so I don't know why you can make somebody stayed after 30 years.

You may not know the answer to this question, Director.

I appreciate that or the controller, but um I hope that it's something we can come back to because this is something that needs to change.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Anyone else really can't speak?

Go ahead.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, and I apologize for uh my tartiness, but I want to piggyback off the uh counselor um Ryan is because I just met with a group yesterday about homeowner repair and they help those that are 62 and over.

And we're living longer, and I have to agree with him.

I can't, I mean I own my own home as well, and nothing lasts 30 years, and why do we have to wait 30 years before you know we'd be able to help someone?

It seems like we should be able to take a look at that.

And then I'm not sure, and I probably gotta go.

Well, I am gonna go back and do my research.

I'm not even sure if there's an age requirement in there, and if there is an income level, but I think it's something that we definitely need to take a look at, especially giving, um, giving when we talk about the homeless issue, the homeless epidemic that we have here in Indianapolis.

So I definitely think that's something that we should take a look at.

Um then the other thing um just want to shout out to um deputy director Brittany Crohn and all the work that they're doing.

Um everybody's talking about the parts, and you named the A parts, so I cannot wait.

I represent District 15 on the far east side, so I cannot wait till we get all the amenities that when you uh councillor Wells when you mention Oh Riverside, I'm like, oh my god, I can't wait till we get to the far east side to be able to experience the same type of parts that other parts of Marion County is experiencing, and so um deputy Andre has been very good.

I just had a meeting with everybody on Friday, and so we're just steady working through that progress, and our quality of life plan just rolled out on last Friday, so all of that is uh rolled up into that.

So I'm very excited about the parts department and what what we're gonna look like moving forward.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions from counselors?

Anyone from the public?

Mr.

Go ahead and state your name.

My name's Dave Grenoble, and I'm a realtor in Barring County in the state of Indiana.

Something you all need to consider on this proposal.

People don't stay in their houses 30 years very often.

Actually, the average three years ago was seven years, and that was an average that went all the way back to 1965.

It's up to 10.

So when you start talking about 30 years, it sounds like a long time, but the majority of people don't.

Now, they're gonna stay a little longer now because housing is completely unaffordable.

And there's nothing any of you or any government agency can do to improve that other than subsidy, and we don't need to spend any more tax money.

So when you start talking about this project with the $8 million, it's not a 30-year thing.

People on average are staying in their houses 10 years now.

Thank you.

I like to entertain a motion.

So, remove and second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Closed.

Same good, we're good.

All right.

Up to the last proposal.

The county takes a second.

In time state and local funding.

This is a presentation only.

Mr.

Nielsen, you have the floor.

You want the microphone club?

I talk pretty loud, but I'm happy to do whatever.

But I but maybe we can set in between me and uh our CFO.

Okay, we don't go back to my president.

I'm sorry, yeah.

So uh before we get started, one, thank you all for being here this evening.

I do want to take a couple seconds to say thank you to our CFO, our chief of staff, all the council team members who helped us in here.

The 13 uh sponsors of the proposal, Vice President Bark, Lear Evans, Lip Jones is here, and our assistant leader Nielsen who did the deep dive into the numbers.

I will say that no elected official wakes up and say, let's raise taxes or any type of fees.

So we have put in a lot of thought and effort into this proposal, but this is where we're at.

The number one issue that we hear all the time is the infrastructure problems of potholes, the outside.

That's the one topic that continues to come up over and over.

So proposal 192 establishes a long-term funding source for infrastructure and allows us to take advantage of that, and I'll say airful gift that we're receiving from the state of Indiana.

It allows us the opportunity to take advantage of the $50 million grant that the state has offered the city of Indianapolis.

Again, this is our plan.

However, nothing is as edged in stone.

So we're open to ideas and want to continue the conversation.

You will hear this proposal in three different committees.

All counselors are welcome.

Again, there this is not etched in blood or anything like that.

So again, if you have ideas on how to make this better, um, we want to be a partner with all the counselors and administration to assure that we get that $50 million so that we can have long-term funding, a resource that we can tap into on the regular basis to ensure that we are fixing the potholes and the alleys in our community.

And so with that said, I'll turn it over to our assistant leader, Councillor Nielsen.

Thanks, President Lewis.

Thank you, Chairman Discarry members of the administration of your finance committee, uh those in attendance today.

As the president said, uh, this is going to be a robust conversation, and this is just uh step one.

So I appreciate your all's patience look forward to answering questions uh about our plan today.

So today we uh just an overview of what we're gonna cover.

Uh we're gonna do a little little brief overview of infrastructure needs and current funding.

We're gonna highlight some of those uh state changes and really the genesis of why we are here.

Uh we're gonna go over the details of 192, proposal 192, which again will be heard in public works and in rules, and we'll also talk about how that fits into a broader plan that the council uh is history to the public as a public accountability pledge as well.

So, first, uh again, you know, you'll hear me say this a lot, but uh the president said uh infrastructure affects everyone as counselors from all nine townships.

I think it's universally the issue we hear the most about, and I look at all my colleagues and think that's true.

Uh the city currently invests in infrastructure each year, but maintaining and improving a large urban transportation network requires sustained and predictable funding over time.

Again, infrastructure work is supported through a combination of recurring on budget appropriations and one-time funding sources, as we talked about in the spring fiscal.

Additional predictable funding can strengthen long-term project planning and delivery.

Next slide, please.

So oftentimes when we're talking about the infrastructure challenges that our city is facing, we often talk about center lane miles versus total lane miles issue.

So certainly road funding formulas relied heavily on center lane mileage.

Meaning that if you have a two-lane road bi-directional, uh, a local unit of government is compensated, has provided state revenue, the same for a road that, for example, may have six lines, right?

And putting that into perspective and at scale in the city of Minneapolis, we have 30 roughly 3,400 seven miles in the county of the 8,444 total lands.

So the city of Minneapolis, by and large, through the state road funding formula, is compensated through distributions at about 40% of the lane miles that we actually are responsible for maintaining.

So, uh, and then on the next slide, we'll kind of get we'll do a little overview of of where existing resources are coming from.

But again, proposal 192 is focused on current local um vehicle user fees.

These are user fees that were put into local ordinance in 1992 and have not been touched since.

And proposal 192 is not implementing a new fee, it is raising existing fees.

So currently, passenger vehicles, trailers, 9,000 pounds or less, gross vehicle weight, light trucks, 11,000 pounds gross vehicle weight.

They pay a wonky formula that is 10% of the rates assessed for 1996.

So in 1996, the state legislature came in and cut state rates in half, but they allowed the local units like county county governments like ourselves to continue to assess those vehicles on the pre-96 rates.

So if you went and you looked at your vehicle registration fees right now on the county side, you say, Well, counselor, I'm paying 20% of that.

Well, it's because you're paying 10% of a number two ago.

So it's a fun mathematical exercise, but it's also very confusing.

And it does not provide a somewhat stable source of revenue.

The county option wheel tax also implemented at the same time, applies to heavier vehicles, heavier trailers, and heavier trucks, and those are assessed at a flat fee that you see below.

What's important to note that vehicles pay either the SERT tax or the wheel tax, not both.

So I think oftentimes when this issue is talked about, whether it's on one side of Market Street or the other, we commonly refer to both of them as the wheel tax.

But what is important is you do not pay both of these fees.

You pay one or the other, and as you can see from how they are assessed right now, it's generally based off of the weight of the actual vehicle or the apparatus that's being used.

100% of the revenue is restricted by state law for road and street purposes only.

Revenue generated by the wheel tax and by the surf tax cannot be used for other purposes.

Can't be used to build fire stations, can't be used to buy police cars, can't be used to invest in our parks, has to be used on roads.

Certain vehicles are exempt, like government vehicles, I think that makes sense, certain religious organization buses, and funeral equipment that is used for funeral purposes.

And again, these fees are assessed when you register your car every year.

Next slide, I won't spend too much time on this, but this is uh snapshot from the 2026 DPW budget.

Um, as was discussed in the previous proposal, we do receive a large portion of our infrastructure funding right now through the gas tax.

The suspension of the gas tax is a very serious concern, and that's why you know the council and administration did work closely to ensure we were putting enough uh funding aside to be able to fulfill that to fill that uh potential gap.

But right now we were receiving about 15.7 or for this 2026 budget, excuse me.

We're estimating that we're going to receive 15.7 million from the combination of the SERTAX and the wheel tax combined.

So, part of the reason that we're here is the past two years in General Assembly have uh been uh it's always busy, but has been particularly busy as it relates to infrastructure funding opportunities for the city of Indianapolis and funding constraints on local governments in and around the state of Indiana, or in the state of the right.

So in 2025, uh there's this bill called uh House Bill 1461 and House and Rule Act 1461, which really set the stage for the conversation today.

It provided a $50 million state funding opportunity for the city of Indianapolis subject to a local match.

It also provided some equity in uh the road funding formula that we'll get into a little bit further in a second, also increased our local capacity to raise revenue through those dedicated revenue sources in uh 2025.

Uh the legislature also passed a Senate enroll act one, which uh has kind of put pressure on local governments to rely less on property taxes and more on income taxes and other user fees like the wheel tax and the sur tax to in order to meet basic services.

Fast forward this year, Senate Bill 179 revised eligibility for the match, match timing and certification rules, and House Enrolled Act 1210, which is kind of the companion of SEA 1, made some additional changes to how local governments receive other funding.

These are things that we are actively still trying to sort through, and all of you on the council will remember that we had a fine, I believe it was $44 million dollars in last year and this year's budget, excuse me, because of the impacts of SEA1 alone.

And then next year would be the first year of eligibility, which again we'll get into more in a second.

So again, 1461 creates a path for Indianapolis to receive $50 million in new funds annually in additional state road funding, subject to a required local match.

Second, it changed distribution rules to better reflect total lane mileage instead of relying on center lane mileage for part of the community crossings matching grant formula.

I encourage everyone who's watching to go online and take a look at the road funding formula in the state of Indiana, and you will see that it is a spaghetti and shape that is very challenging to follow, of which community crossings is one piece.

So the new community crossings matching grant program does a number of things.

It will continue to preserve the ability for local units of government to provide to get matching grants from the state of Indiana.

The second part of the formula is the $50 million the city of Indianapolis is eligible for.

And the third piece, the tertiary piece of that formula, provides local units of government the balance that's available that year to be distributed amongst local units of government based off of total weight mileage.

It's important to highlight that because that is a significant policy with the state of Indiana that has been advocated for by the current administration.

Every councillor who I think has served on the Indianapolis City County Council, every state representative and every state senator who represents this county, and not notwithstanding other advocacy organizations who have tried to try to provide some more representative distribution of road funding formula for our city.

And then finally that local capacity that I talked about a second ago.

So really the new structure is Senate and Roll Act 179.

So it's important to talk about 1461, but 179 is very important because it changed a number of times.

So again, in 1461, originally it was written that we put in 50, put the new revenue, we get 50 from the state.

50 new revenue, 50 from the state.

The state this year changed that matching requirement that has an escalator loss.

So next year we have to match 50 million, in 2028, 70, 80 and 29, 90 and 30, and in 2031, 100 million and into the future as well.

It also requires that the city must notify the state controller by the end of the calendar year, each year that it can provide the match, and I identify where the funding is coming from.

The opportunity continues until the first year that Indianapolis cannot provide the required match, and that's critically important.

1461 did not have this language.

179 adopted this language.

And the easiest way to say it is there's no mole gap.

In 2029, if we can't provide the match, we don't get to come back in 2030 and get the match, which is emphasizes the need that we need a sustainable source of revenue on budget that is ensuring that we get this money every year, and it maintained again the requirement that this must be new revenue.

So put pretty simply if the match is certified, we get the local match, the state transfer occurs and preserves our ability to receive it in the future.

What's also important is this is an all or nothing provision.

So we don't get to put in 10 and get 10.

And we don't get to put in 15 and get 15.

If we put in 49 million and change, we get zero.

It's all or nothing full match.

Again, emphasizing the importance of providing a sustainable long-term strategy in order to fully recognize this big opportunity from the state of Indiana.

Okay.

So proposal 192 is a tool and a part of council's plan to put a historic permanent amount of infrastructure funding permanently again into our budget.

Proposal 192 again revises those those user fees that we talked about on a previous slide, bringing that wonky surtax level to a flat $100, and the heavy vehicle class to a flat $240.

Again, one vehicle pays one charge, either the surf tax or the wheel tax.

The provision also includes two accountability measures.

First, it requires the auditor to provide the city council with an annual estimate of next year's surtax and wheel tax revenue.

We kind of get that information now through the budget process, but this is kind of formalizes something that's required under state law.

And again, and second to that, the state match certification, that communication between the city, whomever the end of the stakeholder is within the city that does this, but the city compontroller communication is provided to the council in public and also identifies the sources and uses for that match.

So again, this is provides a summary of current and proposed changes under proposal 192.

Again, owners of eligible vehicles registered in Marion County at the time of registration or renewal pay this directly.

This is not a property or income tax increase.

The proposal is tied to vehicle registration, not the value of the vehicle, nor is this assessed income tax time.

And to emphasize again, revenue is restricted for transportation infrastructure and cannot be treated as general purpose spending.

It's also important to note that residents can verify their current county vehicle user fees through the BMV quick quote, or if you're like me, you register your vehicles online, and you're able to see a receipt and an itemized receipt of your registration fees.

Proposal uh 192 again is part of the council infrastructure plan and an estimated share of additional local revenue under existing allocation formulas.

Proposal 192 is also estimated to generate substantial revenue for other municipalities within Marion County.

So currently, since we implement a county fee, it actually gets put into our own version of a formula with which uh everyone in the county is being assessed that fee, but there are allocation percentages given to the city of Indianapolis, Marion County, and our excluded cities and included towns.

That is a formula based 60% off population, 40% based off lane mileage.

So as you can see, the city of Indianapolis proper receives the lion's share of this funding, but other municipalities in our in the consolidation in the county, excuse me, also receive this.

So you see the estimated additional revenues for the excluded cities and included towns.

I won't go through that, because the numbers that we're really focused on at this point is the additional revenue for the city.

So uh proposal 192 is estimated to generate just under $71 million next year, of which $65 million comes from the SERTAX, and close to six million comes from the heavy vehicle tax, and that's just a function of the number of registrations in the county.

Again, the council plan reflects the city of Indianapolis' estimate share of additional local revenue, and all figures are planning estimates and may change based on actual collections.

So what's at stake if no action is taken?

Doing nothing does not pause infrastructure.

We mean continuing to manage a large infrastructure infrastructure network while risking new state funding and facing higher long-term maintenance costs.

Without a certified match, the $50 million annual state transfer becomes unavailable and future transfers are at risk.

Roadway infrastructure requires ongoing investment, particularly as a significant share of the transportation network ages and requires rehabilitation or replacement.

So I know we keep talking about this council in an infrastructure pay plan, but again, the proposal that we're discussing this evening is just one component of that.

The council plan confines local revenue, due state funding, and other resources to support long-term investments in streets and residential streets, alleys, and our transportation network.

Again, including proposal 192, state transfer, revenue growth, and budget efficiencies, and that lane mileage distribution.

We'll get to that here in a second.

But doing so allows the city to continue investing in basic services like police, fire, parks, picking up trash, piling the snow, doing other basic services in local government.

So again, I know that this is a lot of information, but we're gonna get through it.

That uh our plan builds off of the work that we started doing last year, which is allocating growth in existing sources of revenue toward infrastructure.

So that 2027 number takes the 10 million dollars from last year, carries that over and puts an additional 10.

That would grow at a minimum next year by another 10, and starting in 2028, because of House Enroll Act 1210, we'll be relooking at the lit structure, which will allow for additional efficiencies, and we believe at a minimum that we would be able to increase that minimum allocation to 15 million dollars.

I keep saying minimum because these are very conservative estimates, but is a very honest analysis of where we are at with the public as we're just having this difficult conversation.

And so this 855 million over a five-year period is we hope to be blown out of the water by doing additional work by right sizing budgets by finding efficiencies by putting as much resources as we can toward infrastructure.

That new surtax and wheel tax revenue, again, that's 70.95 number that you saw the next year.

We are saying that's going to grow nominally, and what I mean by that is it's it's challenging to estimate year over year how registrations will change in the county.

But what we do expect is that that will grow, but this is just to show a directional growth that's not actually fully based off of like a regression analysis or anything like that.

Net subtotal, that new local revenue, that's the state match.

Those are the benchmarks that we're looking at.

And you will see that we are overfunding quote unquote that match because we believe that's really important, right?

We have a 70 million dollar issue really for 2028.

But what we're showing to the public is we're doing everything we can to address the top issue that we hear about from our constituents.

And also, we have to plan for the unexpected, right?

What we don't need to do is get to 2029 when we hit another economic crisis, or goodness forbid, another pandemic, and we are forced to do a whole lot of things with not a whole lot of money.

We want to ensure again that we are fully leveraging the $50 million investment from the state of Indiana.

Then we get into that state match, $50 million, and then this lane mileage distribution, that's that tertiary part of the formula.

From the 2026 capital plan, uh DBW is estimated that'd be about $4 million a year.

It I think those estimates are could be higher, and it's also again a function of if, for example, no localities choose to apply for community crossings matching grant, all of that money flows down to the third part of the formula so we could end up getting more.

And then for uses, we obviously want to be able to provide real dollars to the projects that are being planned right now and providing additional uh dollars toward the thoroughfare programs and the out years.

And then additionally, as part of our plan, we are committing uh a significant amount of money towards residential streets.

If we understand we're asking residents of our county to pay more, we hear time and again that the condition of the streets are bad and the condition of the street out front of their house is the worst.

And we believe that we need to be doing some more about that.

So this uh this grows to about 65, it grows to 65 million by 2030.

To put in perspective, we're putting around 20 million dollars in the current budget.

So next year we would be tripling the residential street program.

And finally, if you live uh, I mean, anywhere in the county, but especially kind of the old city, you know the condition of the alleys are really bad.

And we currently have no dollars permanently programmed in the budget to address alleys.

This body before this term passed uh appropriations through, I believe it was the spring fiscal that put money toward the alley program.

I think we've seen that to be wildly successful and reflective of infrastructure that our constituents are using, but we believe that part of addressing our infrastructure is also addressing the alleys, and that's why you see that that line item there.

It's important to note that this is a plan.

It's gonna require future collaboration uh with the administration and future administrations, it's gonna require future collaboration with members who sit on this committee and who have the privilege of sitting in the 25 seats in the public assembly room, right?

But this is a public accountability document that's focused on the next five years.

Why?

Because we have to get to that $100 million by 2031, or we're gonna lose $50 million from the state.

So again, this is just summary of what we've seen on the last slide, but we believe this is gonna invest the, you know, are we estimated to invest close to a billion dollars over the next five years?

And then again, the council infrastructure plan supports the currently identified project program for 27 through 29 that report provides more than 200 million dollars annually in permanent infrastructure funding beginning in 2031 that does not currently exist.

Recurring infrastructure needs are often supplemented through one-time fiscal actions, like we've seen with our uh our spring supplemental, which can make long-term planning and project scheduling more challenging, providing a more predictable funding source for recurring infrastructure needs while preserving flexibility to address emerging priorities, major projects, and future one-time investments through the spring fiscal and budget process is preserved.

And it's just important to note that we should be putting every dollar we can towards infrastructure, but this opportunity that's in front of us is so large that we need to be able to pull this into our budget and give the state the assurance uh that they need that we are serious about matching these dollars.

So finally, um, this is review of where we're at and where we're going.

So we're in admin of finance tonight.

We will be in public works on Thursday for the same conversation.

We'll be in a rules the following Tuesday, public works will be at the Pike Township trustees office, excuse me, the rules and public policy committee will receive a similar presentation conversation, and we'll receive a committee recommendation.

Uh, that will be at the Ivy Tech downtown campus at 50 Fall Creek Parkway, I think it is.

Um, and then we will do a final passage at full council on July the 6th.

With that, Mr.

Chairman, I appreciate the time this evening.

Thank you very much.

Um, I think we need the microphone.

I couple comments or questions.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Andy, you really really did work hard on this.

He's working on this for months.

My question is will there be equity, equity within the 25 districts?

Right now, some of us on the south side are getting nothing.

North side's getting everything.

I say it's true.

Yeah, I'm I'm serious.

Yeah.

There are projects in my neighborhood that have not been touched.

And I foresee they may not be touched till next year.

So I know you may not be able to answer the question, but will there be equity for all the counselors?

I my response to thank you, Chairman.

I think my response to that is twofold, right?

Uh one the infrastructure funding that we are appropriating, SCA9 did some other things requiring an NHS management plan to ensure that this is all data-driven.

What I will say is when we put more money into the infrastructure system, it's the idea that we're rising tide lifts all votes, right?

If we currently are spending at X and we multiply spending by four, projects that are a fourth of the way out come into picture, right?

I think that's the idea.

It's part of the reason that projects aren't getting done over a generation, is because we are putting enough money toward infrastructure in the budget.

So to be able to guarantee that all 25 districts will receive funding.

They do now through the capital plan, and I would say that if we are going to multiply that by three, with which we're kind of what we're doing here, excuse me, it's not that much, but that that all districts will receive additional funding, right?

And but it will have to be data-driven.

That's a state requirement.

Um we can't really get around that.

Um, and I think that is from an asset management plan, how we can get the most responsible with the dollars that we have.

But that's the work ahead, Journey.

You know, it is.

This is gonna be a tough bill as well.

I have one neighbor that has three girls all in school.

We have five cars.

Just in my way here, I count the cars.

It's a hundred dollars a car.

It's tough.

Yeah, I I find it very hard for me to support this, but um, you got to respond to that just real quick, Chairman.

Yeah, because I think that uh that's absolutely understood.

But I think residents also recognize that they are you're paying for this one way or another, right?

Every time you bust a tire, bend a ramp and get your car realigned, you are paying for that.

It this this plan does not mean that we are never going to see Puffle again.

Right.

But what it does is it refuses to accept that that's just how it is in Indianapolis.

It refuses to accept that and it puts to paper at a time when 50 million dollars is on the table from the state of Indiana.

Real progress on a permanent basis in the budget, so that we can start to really chipping away at the infrastructure backlog we have, right?

And so what we often do it in capital planning, right, is we issue a bond and then we have a cliff.

We issue a bond and we have a cliff.

And it's not that bonds aren't important, but bonds are a tool, part of the plan.

And what we need to be able to do to be able to you know reach the 8400 plane miles in our county, is we have to program more dollars in the budget, and we have to provide certainty to the state to the state match.

What the state's doing is forcing us to raise the taxes on our constituents.

There are 100 schools that have to have a referendum this year because the state is shortening them money.

So I don't know, I still blame the state for this.

I'm still on defense on it.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Two questions.

The first is more of a comment, Councillor Nielsen, so you can choose to respond or not.

But so I I have four cars.

More than happy to pay the fees associated with this, and here's why.

The as you illuminated, not taking action is a very significant risk because in the last few years, I've had to replace four tires, which one tire is more than the cost of this increase for me annually.

And so that in and of itself is worth it.

Um is the risk we face every single day with our aging infrastructure in a backlog of nearly a billion dollars because pre-people elected before us never took the action to raise taxes to invest in our infrastructure.

We are facing a situation where we just have a significant risk going about our business on a day-to-day um basis.

For example, um, I live in a neighborhood very intentionally that's walkable, and families walk back and forth to our church and our school.

There are sections of sidewalk that are now um dirt.

And I had a constituent mother who who was walking uh her grandchild around the block, fell and broke her angle because of the infrastructure problem.

That's what you don't see here.

Is not only do we have a risk and a danger to our cars, but we have a risk in a danger to ourselves.

So, unless we invest in this, what we're saying to our constituents is your safety is not a priority for us, but your safety is a priority for this, and so we have to take an action and we have to take leadership and we have to meet this moment to make sure that we are getting these dollars that the state have finally put on the books for us to achieve that haven't been there before.

Now, Councillor Nielsen, you know this better than I.

I believe, in addition to this just personal safety risk and risk to the community, there's also a long-term physical risk here in that the worse our infrastructure gets, the greater the risk we have from our bonding capacity in our in our rating from our credit rating agencies.

Am I right about that?

Yes, yes, so uh someone who reads those reports, the most glaring thing in each one of these reports is the largest financial risk to the city of Indianapolis is the state of our infrastructure.

So I want folks to understand not only are these like individual risks we face in walking on sidewalks that are falling apart, but our city itself faces a fiscal risk in our ability to um bond and to have our credit be worthy out there when we go to the market, that's very significant.

Okay, so here's my actual question.

So uh during the General Assembly, um you, President Lewis, myself, um, Chairwoman Jones, others went to the state house to ensure that this $50 million match was maintained and that we were able to keep it.

Um as it happens, we were successful in maintaining the dollars in the budget, but they created this escalator.

And so this escalator, as you very clearly uh enumerated, goes up over five years from a $50 million match in year one to a hundred million dollar match when you get to 2031.

So the only way we can achieve that and get this um $50 million match going forward is if we have a clear, dedicated, focused, and sustainable plan to achieve that.

I just want to, I'm not asking for any um commentary in general on a plan that the mayor has put forward, um, that that suggests we can do this without taking this action.

I'm not knocking it, I'm just stating that that is a plan, I believe, that only achieves this goal for year one.

So I'm asking you, is that accurate or is that not accurate?

And how does this plan stack up to the plan the mayor has put forward?

I would I would say first that's accurate.

Um I think secondarily our plan provides the resources that are necessary to achieve the match while also being able to clearly communicate with the state at the end of this year that we can't achieve the match.

We can't count on dollars that we don't yet know exist in order to program for the batch, right?

We can we can't we can't do that.

In other words, the plan, I just want folks to understand there's no easy answer here.

Saying that we can achieve this in year one and not have a plan for year two, year three, year three, year five, passes the buck to whomever the mayor would be after the 2027 elections, and that individual in that council, whomever, as you say, has the privilege of sitting in these 25 seats will have to continue to make these choices year after year after year to make sure that we are getting the match to get to the 50 million dollars in a non-going basis.

And so to be um uh responsible, we need to make sure that we put forward a sustainable, durable plan, and that's what you presented tonight.

Would you agree with that?

I would, yes.

It it if otherwise we'll be sitting in this exact room having an exact conversation every single year.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Councilman.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh, I sort of, you know, I don't think anybody in this room disagrees that Indianapolis should not be driving around on the streets of a third world country.

I do think there's much better ways to get to it than raising a tax.

Uh one of the questions I had for you is on this estimated allocation of additional local revenue.

There was the two figures for Indianapolis and other municipalities coming out to 78.39 million.

Is that so?

I guess first off, is that what we're gonna get?

2027 we've we've taxed everybody all this extra money and we're gonna end up with that figure.

Yes, so it the the 70.95 is what will come through the auditor to the city.

The extra 7.44 is getting distributed to the other local.

So what about the 2029 when it's 80 million?

So we actually come back to tax again?

No.

No.

Say that again, leader barrier.

I'm just confused how this is gonna help moving forward.

To me, it would make more sense.

If we did something like this, if we had it tied to something so it gradually went up with whatever it's tied to rather than we'd have to come back and revisit this again, because what we heard tonight is that this has been the same since you like said, Night two.

Yeah.

Okay, so why wouldn't we have this tied to something so we don't have to come back in future time?

Also, then the second part of that was where what are we doing?

What are we doing to get this extra?

I mean, I can understand when we can get 50 million, but to get up to a hundred and a hundred million by 2031, seems like we're I mean, do we have that many cars on the streets that we're gonna have that much extra income from just cars or are we gonna tax something else?

So a few things.

The re the the the thought process behind why the rates are the way they are, is that in 2028 we have to come up with 70 million.

So that's the target.

We then said the heaviest vehicles, the ones that are doing the most damage, they should be paying their fair share, right?

So that's how we got to the rate there, and then we just through algebra and solved for X, and said that's what the that's what the passenger vehicle would be.

We do believe that with an increase like this, that that is that that is a real thing, right?

We were not minimizing what that is, but we're also saying is okay.

If we can find 70, right, then we have to do the hard work within the budget on an annual basis to get to those higher numbers.

Right.

So just as you'd be kind of walking you through the thought pattern of the proposal design, which which was that.

It's like this the scary number is really a 20 the 2027 for 2028, but we should be doing the hard work of continuing to find efficiencies where we can, but in in light of SEA one, there just isn't the butt there aren't the budgetary resources to be able to do that, right?

But we should be able to go to the community and say we will find the rest of the match by doing the work.

And if sometimes if that means that we're gonna have to look really, really seriously at budgets, then that's what we should do.

So I can understand the policy design to want to provide an escalator or want to somehow tie it to an inflation adjustment.

But I but I think given that it hasn't been touched, this is an increase, right?

That we have a responsibility to the public to also shoot on lock at the same time, and I think that's what our plan does.

I appreciate that.

You know, uh we're talking about you know doing creative findings money in the budget.

One thing we heard just a couple weeks ago from OPHS was a glaring black eye that said that we were throwing money around and had no idea how it was being spent.

I would hope that we would go back number one with OPHS and see how we cut their budget because they should be paying some of this up.

We don't know how to say we don't know how to send their money.

We've seen that they don't have proven how it's been spent in a wise manner, so there's no reason I think it should continue to receive more and more money of the harder taxpayer dollars.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Counselor Councillor.

Councilor Woods next.

Okay, thank you.

Um, thank you for your hard work and your presentation on this.

I think it's it's long overdue, and it's a conversation that I frankly and candidly think should occur probably with the public in a longer time frame, not just over the course of a week in public settings.

I appreciate everybody who's here tonight.

Um, but the meetings that are are engaging the public are all in the evening, um, very tightly packed, difficult to hear, and so I just want to while I thank council staff for helping us be here tonight.

I think we definitely have some accessibility and equity issues as we discuss this.

Um, not everybody can get to a public meeting at 5 30 p.m.

Um, and if you were on vacation as a citizen of Indianapolis this week, um your voice will not be heard through the public hearing process, and I find that disappointing.

Um, this policy I feel um the title is investing in Indianapolis's infrastructure.

Um, but as I look at it, I feel that the burden is really on motorists and and auto users, which is I'm not necessarily against, but I am concerned about the equity and how it is applied to small business owners who have fleets to um as chairman Miscarry referenced those of us who have uh teenage drivers and older vehicles paying the same on a 2026 brand new vehicle versus an older one, um, and really leader Maori.

What you said tying it to something being a little more um excuse me hybrid in our approach where we can maybe spread that burden to all users of infrastructure, not just those behind the wheel, because I think there are um, you know, trail and cyclist advocates who would say um you know we want to help support our fair share too and not um entirely have this burden on our small businesses and families who I think would feel this the most.

Um Mr.

Chairman, may I kind of step through the presentation and ask a couple questions?

Let's go.

Okay, thanks.

Um, I already mentioned that I feel um that the businesses in the wheel tax could be very significant, especially right now with the cost of fuel, um, it's really difficult to operate uh small business, and I had a conversation with the constituent about um the cost of doing business, and some people would say business owners pass the cost of business on to their consumers these days, but I know a lot of small businesses, especially on the west side and speedway and Claremont, um, don't they absorb a lot of those, and this would hurt them, especially a small plumbing company who has a fleet of vehicles.

Um but I do agree with my colleagues and constituents that the state sort of put us in this position by kind of dangling a carrot of really what I feel is our own tax dollars.

I believe we do fit pay our fair share here in the city of Indianapolis, but we need more money, and so I appreciate Councillor Nielsen's work on this because we do have to leverage and move this uh wheel and excise tax forward.

Um but I I don't know if if that full move is enough if we need to maybe look at a hybrid approach.

Um finally, Mr.

Chairman.

I representing Speedway and Claremont appreciate the annual projection of over a million dollars, our towns need that, uh, desperately.

Um so this is something that I think would be incredible, um, but not enough.

So I know I it seems that I'm talking out of both sides, but that's what infrastructure and and kind of have our hands tied does for us as as decision makers and leaders.

Um, so my questions that I'll be asking on Thursday for DPW will be can DPW absorb this amount of money and actually get projects and get work out the door, and what are we doing as we work with the administration to make sure we size up and scale up that operation?

Do we have staffing facilities, hiring um, because it takes really specialized, highly trained, experienced engineers to do some of this, even just contract work.

Um and with that I'll use my time because I'm on public works and I'll ask more questions, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you, Chairman.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Okay, of course, we can.

I I appreciate Councillor Wells' uh some of her concerns.

I think I I want to address um state law does not allow us to target how we assess the fee.

So we have to charge all passenger vehicles the same rate, so we can't charge a brand new vehicle one rate and a 10-year-old vehicle another.

We have to assess one fee or no fee.

So I just wanted to kind of address that because to be able to do this in an equitable way is is very is very challenging in that.

Um I'd also say that again, not to in any way to overemphasize the impact of SEA one, but SCA one was primarily a business tax cut, right?

It was veiled with some relief for residents, but with very much a business tax cut, right?

That's we see that shift on tax burden going from that's why I brought up SCA1 of the state making a policy decision for us to say we don't rely less on property tax and more on user fees, you know, the the vehicles and and many of those fleets no longer because of exemptions and other phase outs are paying a three percent property tax.

They are not paying anything.

Um they're still using the roads.

Um I think that was where all the the questions that uh issues I wanted to address in your comments with the Council Wells.

Can I follow up with the question?

And he doesn't have to get there.

I just want to know what I'm curious about.

I'm curious if you looked at the local income tax and something similar to what Councillor Maori was alluding to, where like it would gradually go up and then sunset.

Or doing a hybrid of the both of them.

Yeah, I think raising the income tax is equally as controversial.

I mean, yeah, because I think what we're saying to the public is this is a user fee that is 100% dedicated to the thing we want to pay for, versus we could raise income tax, or we could cut services or a hybrid of all of those things.

We think this is the one that is you have a vehicle, you are you are contributing the deterioration of the infrastructure, you're the one in case, right?

And I think that that's the that is the theory behind the user fee itself.

Um, and actually I think preserves the ability for future councils and future administrations to say discipline and the budget because this is a dedicated user fee for that purpose.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman, and thank you, Councillor Nielsen and CFO Aris for all the work you've done.

I know this has been very heavy lifting.

Um, just a general comment for the public.

Um the bad guy here is a supermajority of the State House.

They forced our hand, they've given us no choice, and not only if we don't follow their lead, we'll be penalized, and they've been in as much told us that.

So your uh IR and angst in the public needs to be directed to the supermajority of the State House.

Um, they have again forced our hand, and we having seen uh very little coming uh from uh as an alternative to the mayor's plan, um, we have to have this done by September 1st, or it's all washes down the drain.

So uh I again commend you for being so proactive and getting on ahead of this and having sustainable model, um you know what concerned me about the mayor's has already been mentioned.

It got him to the end of his term, and then he's done because wash his hands of it, no true model on what to do years two, three, four, and five.

This model is sustainable, the numbers have solid uh calculations behind them and will get us years one through five and get us to the goal line, and I think that's why it's uh uh very respectable um uh proposal.

Looking if you could, and a question and also another opportunity to dress this uh because it's the one I hear of the most, the equity argument, and that is this is more of a uh a regressive tax model instead of what most people would prefer a progressive, meaning those at the truly the lower socioeconomic levels will be paying more percentage-wise versus those who own a brand new car.

Uh it explain again why we cannot do that and why we are forced to make it a regressive model.

Um the way that state law authorizes our ability to raise revenue here, does not allow us to do it in a targeted way.

We have to choose we have we have to choose a rate that's applied to every classification of vehicle, whether you're in surtax, wheel tax, you could apply different sub rates, but but it's to say on a passenger vehicle, whether it's a brand new BMW, or it's a 15-year-old Honda Civic, right?

We have to apply the same rate to those vehicles.

That is that is something that's out of our power that is that's authorized by the state.

So we have no choice in being able to provide more targeted fees.

Again, to your point, uh Chairman Boots, uh, for maybe you know, those who could pay even more than the maximum rate, for example.

Yeah, all right.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Oh, sorry.

Thank you, Councillor Nielsen, and uh director candidates for audio's hard work on this.

I know that you've been working on this for quite some time, and trying to make sure your eyes are uh eyes about it and T's across.

Um I have a couple statements, and but I'll start with my question first because as I was, you know, posting about proposal 192 and what was before us, um, some comments were made, right?

And one of them I didn't think about was what if we don't meet that budget to match the state?

And what I mean by that, and you may have already answered it, but I understand the way to re getting to that is by assessing this hundred dollars on, I guess, regular vehicles and a 240 on the businesses.

But when I think about that average everyday person, and we already have some people running around, you know, driving around, and they don't renew their license.

Are we taking a chance on more people not renewing their registration and could possibly be we may not lose that money because we have to look at right now?

I understand the gas may not be as high coming 2027, but we think about the education referendum that's before us, you know, property taxes and things like that.

That's a question.

That's that's a real big concern.

So, while we're sitting up here saying, okay, we're gonna raise the will tax, but then we impringing something else on top of them when they may run, you know, be driving around again with expired license plates, taking a chance on being stopped by the police.

So I guess I want to, you know, just a question to you what if we don't make that match that money that the state has given us.

Yeah, I think, first off, I you know, it's a it's incumbent on on law enforcement to be helpful and ensuring people are are registering their vehicles, and would encourage everyone not to do that because tax evasion and that's what that is is very serious.

Um, I will say again, though, that the provisions under Senate Roll Act 179 is a user or lose it.

You know, we don't have Mulligan, we don't get a partial match.

This isn't that we are just trying to get the full 50, but we can get 10, right?

It is an investment that otherwise, unfortunately, in the capital plan, we will hit a cliff.

And the conditions of our roads, we will hope every day that they look the way they do now.

We that is that is a reality that we are facing because, as the vice president said, there's always been a good reason not to do the hard thing, and now there's an incredible incentive to do the thing we should have been doing a long time ago.

Part of the reason that the roads in the city look the way they do is since 1992.

We've said we've done enough, and that's not an indictment on one person, that's an indictment on several administrations, several hundred counselors probably, right?

But this is an opportunity to, again, as I said in the presentation, to reject that reality, to not accept the status quo that the condition of our roads need to be this way, and is a responsible plan that constituents that community can hold us accountable to.

I do appreciate the fact that you um you highlighted in the presentation that we hadn't had a raise and since 1992, and that that is really um disheartening, you know, because since I became a counselor, I've been yelled at about the paho.

See, one of my streets don't get fixed.

Uh, what happened to my taxes that I pay to get my fifth uh my street fixes, but since 1992, everything has the price of everything has risen.

So I could uh I thank you for pointing that out.

While we're thinking about um taking money from other areas, I'm a very much advocate for OPHS and the work that has been done.

Um I will say this.

While I understand there's some questions and some concerns around the audit that was just released, again, it goes back to the staff, but not the work that has been done with the OPHS.

And so I will be if we're thinking about trying to take money from what helps saves lives, um, I would be strongly totally against that part.

And then going back to counselor uh Wells' question about people not being able to make it to the council meetings at 5 30.

We do have a couple other meetings scheduled, and if I'm not mistaken, we're gonna do one more uh meeting outside of our committee meetings.

I do encourage, and I'm a big per, I'm a big fan of organizing.

That's how I got into these spaces is by organizing and contacting my elected officials.

So I encourage everybody, tell your family, tell your friends, tell your mother, father, cousins.

If you want to voice, even if you can't come to these meetings, email your counselor, call your counsel and make your voice be known because just because you cannot be present does not mean that we cannot hear you.

And if you're not contacting us, then we we're we're gonna vote the way that we're supposed to vote because we're not hearing from our constituents.

So I want to make sure that I put that out there, that yes, you might have been on vacation.

These big we have the videos, you can still go back and watch them, and we do have a few more meetings coming up, and I do suggest everybody contact their uh their counselor to let them know, you know, to express how they feel about this proposal.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Real quick, um, I just wanted to commend Council Mr.

Once again for doing this, really.

Um, for all the reasons you said, one thing that hit me that I just can't stop thinking of is what you said.

If we don't do something about this 10, 20 years from now, I think we will realize we need a generational mistake and telling the statehouse to know for more funding for our roads that is by far the number one issue we hear about, and like you said, I always come back to the status quo is not working.

I don't think anybody here agrees that what we're doing right now on a roads and not, and this to me is an important step.

It may not be perfect, like you said, there's always a reason not to do it, but quite frankly, I'm willing to pay my 100 dollars for it.

I don't make a lot of money, I drive a 200 prola, right?

Like I'm not raised uh native cash, but and really to your point too, people ask, I pay all these tax where are my money going?

Well, the reality is because of the road funding formula that you lay out very well, the money's not coming to our dollars or our city, it's going to rural Indiana, and this is the first step towards finally limiting the generations of disinvestment in the city's roads.

So I really give you and obviously our CFO can disdue.

Thank you very much for doing this.

It's not easy, but it's super important.

Thank you very much.

Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Uh, what you can do, questions?

Yeah.

Andy, where did you come with the matrix?

Uh I'm at an actuary.

You come up with 50 million dollars.

How many cars were in Marion County?

Do you have a number?

Yeah, it's easy.

That's good.

And Marion County, that's a really good thing.

That's a good estimate.

About 900,000.

900, or just under that.

I think it's like 850.

Okay, 792,000 in city of Indianapolis, so take our excluded cities and towns.

Perspective on the heavy vehicles, they're about 29,000.

Okay, so they're so with that, how many millions, how many millions of dollars are we raised?

So we see it's 28 million a year.

Okay.

Okay, but what was your first time?

Sorry, and so we're gonna raise about nine to uh how many millions.

So between the two, it'd be uh 70.95, 71 million dollars or something.

So why are we making it 100 dollars and we're gonna go over the 50?

Because next year is the big number.

Put it in perspective, like the if there are 800,000 registrations, right?

For every five dollars on the fee, you raise about four million dollars.

Okay.

Right.

So it's like if you were to backtracking that, right?

The difference is if we were just making the 50, right?

If we were just making the 50, we could say the doc we could say taxpayers dollar a month, or we can tie that to next year, or taxpayers would have to go up two times, or we can again take a dedicated fee and put more money towards infrastructure now to be able to infrastructure placing infrastructure right now, is cheaper than doing so in the future, right?

It is that second year that is very challenging.

Alright, thank you.

Yeah, thank you.

Councilor Harden.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, I just want to touch on a couple points.

Um, you know, I heard sidewalks come up a couple times, but in this uses sidewalks are not an expenditure whatsoever to see uses for planned projects, residential streets, alleys, but not sidewalks.

Yeah, correct.

So the state money that comes from the state of Indiana, the 50 million dollars has to be used, you know, our interpretation has to be put.

They have excluded uses, excuse me, but it's used for for pavement for actually doing the roads, but what we're talking about here is uh uh none of this money is necessarily earmarked for that, but as we know, some projects oftentimes include things beyond streets, but it's not a dedicated sidewalk fund or anything like that now.

Okay, and I guess what's interesting to me is you know, we look about the various taxes that are coming up.

Um, you've got what's going on in IPS right now, right?

Where they're there's they're able to levy their own taxes moving forward at this point because of um, and this is a new subject, but uh Senator 125, right?

There's a result of uh essentially referendums across the state that are going to occur, and I know there's some even here in I know Beach Road is gonna put it through a referendum for their school funding this year.

Um, so those communities are going to see those things, and I'm sure multiple school districts across Marion County are going to see referendums on their property taxes.

Uh when you were speaking and you were talking about the funding sources in the matrix that's 27 through 31.

Did I hear you correctly that there's an expected increase in lit in your plan as well because we also have the ability to raise that in a couple years because of Senate Bill uh 125 as well?

Yes, uh the change in the lit structure paid from SEA one is um was was delayed a year because we originally have to work on it next year for uh Senate Bill 1210.

I think that it's a combination of that will be an important time where we're already going to be doing a lot of right sizing in our budget, and again at a minimum, and that's two years down the road, we should expect growth in those revenue resources, but no, it does not include a lit increase, it just it just includes that we will be doing probably the most comprehensive work we've ever done to the structure of the budget since early 2000s, right?

So it's gonna be a real opportunity for us, I think, to hit reset in a lot of ways, start from like what are we doing and how do we balance the books because the way that the lit structure is going to change pretty dramatically, and we're going to be forced to do all these sub-rates, like when the controller was talking about uh what our current rates is that that's all going to be different going forward.

Because what's interesting to me, just for folks listening when I look at this table, you know, we get to the 70 million match and then it just stays 70 the whole time.

But then we still have you know a gap every year, and then we get to that 100 and we've got a 30 million dollar.

What changes in 28 is the ability to raise lit.

And what I want to be just transparent to everybody about, because I don't know, right?

I didn't hear this together.

I want to be clear if that is expected, or if we're just delaying that conversation until 2028, and what we have now is potential referendums this year in schools, people in center township are going to see it go up because of that new school corporation.

You've got this coming this year, and then do 2028 and expect it to lit.

That's a lot for people to take on, especially in the fact that the property taxes are up.

Um, this is in regards to like the 1992 statement.

Property taxes are up, income taxes are up.

I mean, people are making more but they're paying more.

So we have seen additional dollars come in, and and I, you know, I empathize with supermajorities.

Um, I happen to be in a super minority on this uh council, but I mean I've seen it the other way around, right?

Going on the next for 12 years, three terms in a row, um, where there's been, you know, the mayor of the Democratic Party and Republicans in a super minority.

So I can equally say that the prioritization of how these budgets have been in Indianapolis has not been adequate on the city budget for our road expenditures.

And I say that coming from a position where I know my well, he's not here today, but Counselor Bain, from our caucus has a proposal two years ago to reduce countywide spending across every agency with the exception of public safety by one percent, and it will was able to come up with more than a hundred-plus million dollars in dollars that we could reallocate towards roads, and so I think there's more than just what we have the option here of you know potentially raising will tax, and which leads to me to the other point of you know, I've talked to the legislature, right?

Like there are challenges.

I will agree there are challenges.

I'm not a fan of the other road matching toward the five or the lane mile lane miles uh formula at all.

But as a matching, it doesn't have to be new, it doesn't have to be a new tax to you.

It can be dollars that we haven't spent on infrastructure in this city today.

So when we talk about OPHS with the prime example being used, but any of those dollars can be taken from there, spent on roads, and that would qualify towards the matching program.

That has to be a part of this conversation because I mentioned just a handful of taxes there in the next two to three years that are somewhat going to happen, right?

And again, because of the folks of the state, right?

That is a reality.

But we've got to take that into consideration when we're looking at what we're going to do, and what I have to see is I need to see other comparison models that we've tried, specifically in cost reduction models, to move money over early on before I can get behind supporting any sort of increase on people because I think there are dollars that we can move and save to make sure that we're getting those matches, and then additionally, I think the part that you know Council Mauer is speaking on, you know, we have the ability to charge a certain dollar amount for these taxes, the surtex, the wheel tax.

But you might this plan goes straight for the max, right?

It doesn't actually it's not true.

Well, it's a hundred dollars is the maximum of 150.

Yeah, so okay, yeah, so we're going for 70 a year or 50, right?

We are we are not gradually getting our way to what we can ultimately get.

We're putting a big burden on people when there's other burdens coming in other parts of town.

So these are some of the concerns that I've got really early on in this conversation.

But I I really need to see comparison models of cost reduction in other parts of government before we keep asking for more because when I'm talking to my constituents, I've got beside Minneapolis, I'm just thinking of Washington Square Mall area.

They know once they give the money, they're gonna keep giving the money, it's just always giving them or always giving more, always giving more.

And I can tell you, when I get my map from TPW every year, I get one little sliver line, maybe two little sliver lines, and it probably looks the same for everybody in here.

Maybe I get four little sliver orange lines on a map.

It's hard for me to go back and justify two miles, right?

Each little slivers, maybe a quarter of a quarter mile, and that's the reality of what we're looking at here.

Um I think we got a little cost reduction if we're gonna try and you know make a compromise on something with these folks because I don't see, I don't see our half putting in the work on trying to reduce cost when asking them to pay more.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh yeah, and I think Chairman and uh Councilor, I appreciate those comments.

I think what's important on that budget efficiencies line is that is the work, right?

And so, as you know, when the budget grows, there are contractual obligations that we have to fund.

Um we also, for example, in our spring fiscal, have 12 million dollars in operations that we need to pull into the budget, and I think as we're looking at existing sources, as we've discussed have that nauseum now, that growth, the ability to do that is in the area.

There is there is the pressure on that.

I I don't disagree with the assessment of I think what's going on in one of our departments.

I think some of those previous models that would um uh maybe do across the boards because actually preserve OPHS funding.

And I think an important part is also that there's only about 500 million dollars in our 1.7 million dollar budget that is truly flexible.

We oftentimes say we have a 1.7 billion dollar budget, but there's really only about a half a million that has the ability to be used for any general purpose that government can spend money on.

And so when we are looking at cutting those sources, we're not necessarily just looking at OPHS.

We are delaying construction of firehouses, we are delaying purchases of vehicles for police.

Like those are the real things.

We're delaying the ability to open pools and parks, and I'm not saying that if this doesn't pass, that's where we're headed, right?

Because this is a $50 million opportunity that we have to leverage because it's the number one issue here about from constituents, as the vice president emphasized it's the largest risk to the financial health of the city of Indianapolis.

And I just think it's easy, oftentimes, to just say we'll find the money in the budget to cut, and I just really want to emphasize to the public that you hear 1.7 billion, but there's a 500 million dollar pot that's really what we're doing those for.

And those dollars are also being allocated towards plowing your streets, pegging up for trash.

When this is the reality we are in, it doesn't mean that we don't need to be more efficient, but I just also want us to be cognizant that there's just not a ton of money lay running around.

Right?

We should every single year be looking at that, and that's what I know you are committed to doing because every single member is here to do.

But I just want to be really clear with just like what that means relative to the size of our city budget.

Thank you, Councillor.

Any comments or questions from the counselors?

I have one more question.

Go ahead.

Councillor Neilson.

Going back to uh what counselor Hart said, is there a way that we with me having one of the developing areas?

Is there a way that we can I guess implement to have sidewalks, you know, part to be a part of this budget?

And all the reason why I bring that up, but you know, two reasons, like I said, I represent one of the development areas, and then also because of the amount of fatalities that we're continuing to see with the hidden runs, and I do think sidewalks is gonna be very important as we move forward.

I would say, counselor, that the ability to fund those things is contingent on our ability to do everything else too, right?

So if we want to start talking about how we chip away at the sidewalks, or we continue to try to invest in our plan on Vision Zero, for example, to be able to do those things.

We also have to take care of the dang roads, right?

And that's what this plan is really focused on is taking care of the roads, right?

Um, but our ability to expand those things within our budget, we have to the money has to obviously has to come from somewhere, right?

And so that's the ongoing conversation, and I think that that's a priority that we hear about from our constituents as well.

Thank you.

There we go.

Okay, it's weird.

Um, so we're gonna if you were going to sign up, the clerk will make a statement before people start speaking.

Go ahead.

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

It's important that we each observe the following ground rules.

First, each speaker will be limited to two minutes.

Second, any public comments must be reasonably related to the agenda item under consideration.

Third, speakers who stray away from the item under consideration, so we come unduly um repetitive protectors 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 reasonably efficient manner will be removed.

Please reminder that some types of threatening speech board and sentiment to violence are protected, are in part protected by the first amendment at all.

We will deal with those issues if they come up, but we don't think they will.

And now, Mr.

Chair, if committee members ask for consent to adopt these rules, we can proceed to public comment.

Alright, do we have a sign-up list somewhere?

Um, my budgeted up here.

The first three things are Aaron Race, Judy Beach, and David.

G.

Yeah, G.

I'm Aaron.

It's a grillable, just like France.

Okay, well that I'm gonna read it.

Okay, that's my problem.

That's fine.

I'll have you hold that.

Yes, please.

Okay, I think it's fine.

Are we okay?

Yeah, we can't.

Okay.

So I am in race.

Um, I've lived in my home for 24 years.

I have a craze hot holes in my neighborhood where the patch does not last even six months.

Um, it's time to think outside the box.

Um, what if potholes didn't have to be an ongoing problem bleeding funds from the budget?

I think it's time to explore places that do things better than we do and replicate what they're doing.

Um, a quick Google search will confirm in China because they're known for having roads with no potholes.

So why don't we send a committee to China to learn how they do it and use the formula that they use?

Let's think long-term so that we're not bleeding our budget every year.

If you must implement this tax, please make it temporary.

Put a deadline on it.

With energy costs, fuel costs, grocery costs, and debt, insurance for pitches, and rent, school expenses, increasing taxes, just don't be room for families and individuals on fixed incomes disability SSI to survive.

It may not mean much to some.

And looking at you, because you have no problem paying this, but I do.

It will be painful to so many.

Have you considered a convention tax or a rental car tax or a hotel tax?

Those people use the roads on a regular basis.

It's not just local residents.

And I'm also going to mention that the city has a tort option.

If you report a pothole to the mayor's action center, and it does not get filled, you can call in a tort, and they have to pay your claim.

No, I didn't.

I had a broken ass on the reach to it was drawn all the way across.

You have to give us 30-day notice and prove that you get 30 days.

Prior to when you hit a big city.

We're not answering any questions.

We don't need the answers.

Anyway, those are my ideas.

I think they decision to look at what China is doing.

I've known that their roads for 15 years have had no coal sort of next.

Thank you.

You see the next thing?

Who is the next day?

I think it's me.

It's Jody, not Judy.

Don't be surprised.

Okay.

Are we ready?

Okay.

I'm a small business on the south side.

I have 16 registrations.

You're going to kill me.

And the business in front of me has already said he's moving his registrations to his address in Kentucky.

The semis and trucks you're talking about are not registered in Indianapolis or Indiana.

They're parked on Kentucky Avenue.

Indianapolis is spending money luring companies like Alanco and building the Alanco Street, I mean Henry Street Bridge.

We want to have that bridge if they didn't move here.

So when I go to the bank, they ask to see my financials.

And with Indianapolis, I'd like to see yours.

Because like Mr.

Hart said, we need to look at your records because I am quite sure we can fix your deficit.

You just get a bunch of small business owners and we'll fix it.

So that it's ridiculous.

You're gonna you're gonna kill us.

David G.

Okay.

My name's David Grenoble.

I'm living beach growth and I do have a question, which I know you said you weren't gonna answer, but that's okay.

I don't know what party any of you are part of, and I don't care.

And you're absolutely right.

SB1 Roger to all of us.

It didn't just roger you, it didn't rotate the townships, it didn't the exclude cities, it rodered all of us because our taxes aren't going to go down under SV1.

Until the state legislature addresses market value, our property taxes will continue to go up.

So all you're doing is adding another tax to me on my registration.

Now you can tax and build football stadiums and build basketball arenas.

Why do you have to tax us more on our cars?

And have you figured in attrition?

How many people move out of the county?

How many cars are you gonna lose?

And here's my last question.

How's this gonna affect Beach Grove?

Because Beach Grove's already made a proposal to institute a $25 rule tax on top of what you guys are doing.

And I heard they can't stack it.

I don't want to be double taxed.

We already paid double tax in Beach Grove.

Because if I live in Perry Township, Beach Grove, my tax rate's 4.23.

If I live in Indianapolis, it's 2.4 up.

So because of UNAGA, we get double dipped all the time.

So you're telling me that if Beast Grove Institute's $25 tax, we're not going to get the $100 excise?

You're not, no.

Thank you.

Carpenter.

I need to relocate the beach program.

Thank you for letting me speak.

Is the hundred dollars going to stay for I don't know, five years, ten years?

Is it?

Can I get an answer?

It's a permanent increase.

It's a permanent increase.

Forever?

Like most taxes.

Yes, there's no sun.

There's no sunset.

So nothing right.

Until the next one.

What is lit or whatever you were saying?

Local income tax.

Local income tax.

Okay.

And is there any accountability to the people who are supposed to be working on these projects to be responsible and do the job right?

Warranty.

We should have some assurance that they are not going to cheat us as much as we are paying to have this fixed.

And we are on, my husband and I are on Social Security, that's all we have.

I'm 81 years old.

I do not want to have to go back to work to pay taxes in order and to pay for my living.

But that's what we're facing because we are taxed on tax on tax.

We left England so that we because they were taxing us all the time, right?

And we're doing the very same thing.

250 years later, because people end up getting paid too much, CEOs or whatever you want to.

I don't know if you guys get paid, but people are getting paid too much.

And they're not, and I don't think they're doing the job right, and I don't think they're worth the money that they they get paid.

Thank you.

Excuse an old man.

86 years old.

I want to do want to thank uh Madam Chairman Lewis and Mr.

Holland.

And uh the council members for allowing us here.

Um we've been out of the country for for a while.

We came in two weeks ago, and uh, we were hit with this immediately.

We were totally unaware of this tax issue.

We are now very much aware.

Thank you very much for your presentation that cleared up some questions, and kind of muddied other questions.

Um, it's unfortunate that we've had 34 years of irresponsibility at various levels for various reasons, it's happened, right?

It's unfortunate that we must now face it with the current conditions that we currently have.

You did answer the question, will with escalating from 50 million to 70 to 80 to 90 to 100 million over the next five years, you have under your plan that says that there is no, there's not going to be any change in that value break, right?

Correct.

Okay, just uh it's rechated.

Yes.

Um, how did you arrive or how does I, as I said, an 86-year old man, and I had a difficult time grabbing hold of it.

I I would really love to have that thing to be able to go home with it and sit down.

I ran a two and a half million dollar business here in town for 30 years.

Uh a painting contract.

So I'm a little familiar with I would like to be able to evaluate.

Okay, well.

We have we have a two-actual three thousand-pound travel trailer.

Thank you.

Would we recharge for two dollar two hundred and forty dollars?

Yes.

I'm sorry.

We have a two uh we have a two, two actual 30,000 pound travel training.

I I so for the for trailers of that weight, you actually can receive a if you go to the BNV, you can have a permanent registration for light trailers.

So if you're not doing that, you should do that.

So $83 one-time fee, and then you're exempt from any county or municipal rates.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Right there.

And that's just a good question.

I can talk to you afterwards.

Use the microphone.

We're a lot of people have a lot of questions.

Uh thank you.

Uh all council persons for hearing us out and being here for that.

No, no, you're going to have to change.

Um I just want to comment.

Uh, thank you, uh, Ms.

Wells, uh Council for the small business comment.

Uh, Mr.

Barth, I completely understand that $100 is cheaper than a tire, but I've bought three tires so far this year, so you know it's uh it's uh, you know, it's $100 on top of that is that salt injury.

Um, Sir Hart, thank you very much for your suggestion.

I agree, like I teach my children, you know.

If you want the new video game, but you want to go do this other fun thing, you have to make a choice.

That's why we pay an allowance and teach them how to how to be on budgets.

Um, the frustration I have with the $100 wheel tax is the fact that unless we're gonna build a massive wall around Marion County and only have Indianapolis residents drive on Indianapolis roads, we are being unfairly levied to pay for roads that are being used by all of these.

Look at all these warehouses in Plainfield and up at Levin and in Greenwood.

All those fleet companies that are registered out of state that avoid that $240 charge.

They're beating our roads up, Lord knows.

You drive on 465 or any interstate in around the Minneapolis, it's in those trucks in the right lane and nobody will get out of the left lane because it's all trucks in the right lane, and those trucks are beating those roads up, you know, pretty good.

So I feel like there needs to be some way to share the wealth, and everybody who uses the roads uh pay a portion of it.

Um I don't know, I didn't know about the state situation, states, but you uh you have the most unenviable job in the state of Indiana right now.

So, thank you for doing everything you've done because this has been very enlightening, and I'm glad that that other citizens have recognized it.

But there has to be a better solution than just analyzing the residents of Indianapolis and Taylor Meyerstein and the right too.

David Kinson?

David Kaye.

Taylor, I think, that's my cost.

That's what it's it.

Good evening, Chairman Maskery and committee members.

My name is Taylor Feierstein, and I'm the director of healthy communities with Indianapolis-based nonprofit, helped by design.

And before you this evening, uh representing our board of directors, staff, and coalition partners in testifying in support of proposal 192.

Uh help by design supports proposal 192, even as we know that state law restricts matching funds from being used for sitewalks, bike lanes, greenways, and trails.

Despite our disappointment with the state law's multimodal exclusions, we believe that graduated increases to the county option, county option wheel tax, remain the city county's best opportunity to leverage the state's $50 million commitment while identifying the sustainable local funding source to tackle deferred roadway maintenance for years to come.

As Councilor Nielsen noted, Marion County adopted its current wheel tax rates in 1992.

I was an infant when that happened, and here I am, uh 34 years later advocating.

So since 1992, Marion County has added hundreds of miles to our already 8400 miles.

Freight and commuter traffic have increased and vehicles on our streets have become larger and heavier.

These factors, plus a general lack of political will, have contributed to the current state of poor repair on local streets and roads.

We will not get there without substantial dedicated investments in the quality of our infrastructure.

We believe that it is imperative that the city county council uh pursue every available path to invest in safe connected streets that benefit residents and visitors alike.

In closing, I appeal for your support of proposal 192, a public commitment to strengthening our financial resolve, tackling deferred maintenance, and freeing up more resources to build a safer, healthier, more vibrant Indianapolis for all.

Thank you.

David K.

I don't see the AK.

Someone's watching it.

Tina Snap.

Yeah, front.

In front.

And for instance, my name is Steve Stan on the foreign position.

I can end up with your job, as long as that you were cut out for you.

The streets do you fix?

I agree with you on that.

I know it's costly, but I feel that you're targeting the wrong people to pay for it.

As you pointed out, in 92 and on seems to be when we started having street problems.

I grew up in the 70s, 80s are as a teenager.

I'm 65 years old.

And there was only the 500 and the Pacers.

We didn't have street problems.

We didn't have crime problems.

Now we got the Indy 500 for your 500, fever, pacers.

Get embarrassed, I thought.

And all these sports arenas.

Do you I went to the 500?

Do you know how many out of state people bring buses, campers, RVs, trailers that travel?

How many was that that track alone last Sunday that travel our roads?

Their stuff is carrying our stuff, but the state is capitalizing off of it.

We're not, our gas gets raised every time there's an event in town, and outsiders are coming to town.

We are paying more in gas.

We can't afford it because we're on Social Security.

Barely keep it above our head.

And I think somehow, I know you need that money.

Keep from the people that actually can afford it.

That are books in office that's dragging all these out of staters with all our big vehicles tearing our roads.

And back then, city were never allowed to go through neighborhoods.

Well, the neighborhoods are this and that.

They keep taking it.

I see cinemites on down side streets.

You want to water tour up?

And I'm glad she brought up China.

I called, I'm going to say which new station, 2018.

Down at Thompson and Madison, and before Dark Sunday, it wasn't public.

The old road was going.

The party in front of us, two flat tires.

I said, Look, something's going to be done about this.

I said, Talk to Maryland, DOT.

Maryland do their roads are the smith as nice.

But that's actually on the side.

And they only have to redo them every 10 years.

They don't have to pay all those city workers and keep filling them.

They don't have all the construction.

They miss, I don't know what they tried when they sent you one in 2019.

Pretty sure Maryland uses rubber tires that went foreign electronic because what's the next thing?

Um, and I just want to say elections matter.

Elections matter.

The people that did this to us are on 200 West Market Street.

They are on the ballot this year.

So we need to make those full calls to find out why it is in our communities.

Why have we shifted to the local communities?

Because I will say this.

The property tax that was the waiver, the cutoff point for businesses was $80,000.

$80,000 for businesses.

It is now two million.

Two million.

They don't have to pay taxes on two million dollars of their property.

That's not regular building.

It's not just that.

It's all the equipment, everything that's in the building.

Two million dollars that's being shifted to us.

And the lower the value of your home, the less that tax cut that was also part of that bill, is the less of that is going to affect how much you pay in property taxes because it's got a lower basically we have to have more lower than the prior taxes and cut.

So you still don't have to pay them.

But this is happening.

But we do need to make sure that we are looking at who put us here, and that is the street capital, the state capital.

Every time they're going to pass a bill against our city, they just simply say that this only affects consolidated cities.

Guess how many consolidated cities are in the end?

So people who live nowhere near Mary County, our decision against us.

So we make sure that we go, go here and high road.

I'll open up by saying that I'm a cyclist, I'm a bus rider, and I'm a driver.

I did drive here.

I do want to say that since 1992, not only have cars gotten more fuel efficient, which means that less money per mile driven on the roads to fund roads, they've also become more heavy.

In fact, when you look at the stats, the amount of damage that cars do to the roads now versus in 1992, just based on weights, two and a half times more.

So when you talk about like when folks talk about roads that used to be like this, I mean go back to 1992 and show them one of those Ford super whatever trucks now.

They've never seen anything like it.

Um I do want to say that drivers seem to want to have their uh cake and eat it too, right?

Roads are expensive.

Right now, they're subsidized.

Our gas taxes and registration fees do not pay for roads.

So I am asking you to pay your fair share.

Maybe that doesn't get us all the way.

There's still fair share to be paid by trucks and out of state donut counties commuting in, but we have our fair share to pay too.

And also uh for the folks who have four and five cars, I don't feel a lot of sympathy, but we have a seventy million dollar budget here.

Um maybe we can think about carve outs for folks who are struggling and may not have as much money, right?

So that we still have we will cushion about that 50 million for the first year.

We need to figure out how to get to 100 million.

100 million dollars by 2031, that's 20% of that discretionary $500 million that you mentioned.

So it's not nothing, right?

It's 20%.

That's a huge amount.

And once again, if you're cutting programs to get there, you're just subsidizing cars even more than they already are, right?

So talk about double damage.

All right, thank you.

I'll pay my bike tax when we get the fatalities down below ten per year.

Stay out of the road.

I rather my bike lane, the career much later.

You don't have anything to work with.

I'm not generally worried about on the road commitments is I'm happy with it, but there are projects like the red line that restrict lane use.

We got one lane, and and I don't see a lot of people riding the bus, and we got those close stations right out in the middle of the road.

That is not pure genius.

And there's a like in the vulnerable in front of the school building, high school, or middle school.

There's uh the new medium that went in there with nice little greenery and stuff in it, but it canceled out a lane and slows traffic down.

What's the use of that?

That sort of thing that's just it's like political correctness and putting a nice and goosey glossy glamour on everything, but the slows traffic down, which is contrary to the vertical roads.

Can we stop doing the glitz in the glam and concentrate on functionality?

Lastly, Mike Moshier.

Okay, did you scroll?

I've been sitting all the time.

My name is Mark Mosier.

You know about one.

Um, there was a slide that you've shown the the required local match increases over time.

And you said, you know, in order to meet the match, you would examine the budget.

I believe you said that to examine the budget to see if we could meet that match, even though the rates were not going up.

Am I correct if I understood you correct correctly?

You said okay.

And then I heard you say uh later on in the discussion there wasn't much in the budget.

So it seems to me like how can you examine the budget, and there's not much in the budget to meet that local match.

I guess I'm confused when you said those two things.

They seem to contradict each other.

And also, you know, I drove, I live on the south side, and there seems to be a huge disparity on the roads as far as what's on the south side and what's on the north side.

I travel up on the north side, they got really nice roads up there.

There's no chuck holes.

I mean it's beautiful, but you go down here on the south side on Arlington and some of those places, it's horrible.

And why is there such a disparity between the two sides of the city?

There shouldn't be.

There should be equality, no matter what kind of economic clash you're in.

There should be equality across the whole city, and there shouldn't be such a disparity in the way the roads are repaired.

That's my comment.

Well, it's been a late evening.

Thank you very much for all your comments.

Um President Lewis, would I make a comment?

Thank you.

Again, thank you all for being here.

Four quick comments, and thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh one, I agree with you.

Uh Councilor Hart, we do need to uh walk and chew gum at the same time.

We do need to look within the budget.

I do think there's opportunities for cuts, and also I think it's important that we understand that we are at a point in our city either we reduce services or increase revenue, and so I think we have to be honest about where we are as as a as a city.

So I'm open to having that conversation with you.

And again, as I started uh the conversation or started our meeting with, I think it's important that all 25 of us engage in this conversation, right?

We all have to own it.

It is our name that's on the ballot.

So again, I welcome the opportunity for us to continue this conversation collectively.

Secondly, sorry, Councilor Wales, if you were on vacation this week, we do have a meeting next week, and we're looking to have a fourth meeting in the community.

We hear over and over how hard it is to get to the city county building.

So we felt like it's important that we take the meetings outside the city, and then we still get in kind of our hands slapped.

So again, we're trying to accommodate everyone.

So again, this was our attempt to bring the meetings out to you all versus you try to find a parking place, parking spot at the city county building.

So I asked for a little bit of grace as we try to manage both.

Again, the next few meetings will be in the community.

We'll make sure there's plenty of seating, there's air, the microphones are working, but again, we're trying to accommodate as many individuals as as possible.

I agree 110% that uh the burden shouldn't be on Marion County, however, as you heard, uh elections have consequences.

We, the city county council, cannot do a commuter tax.

If we had a commuter tax, I think we could solve for a lot of things, but we as a body, we cannot enforce a commuter tax.

That comes from our colleagues on the other end of Market Street, right?

So again, elections have consequences.

I encourage you to find out who your state rep is and have a conversation about why do we continue to put the burden on the folks of Marion County.

And then the last thing, um, I started the conversation with this.

I I encourage everyone to bring your plan to the table.

This is a plan that was created.

Thank you, uh Assistant EML for all your efforts.

But again, if you have a plan, let's talk about it.

But again, right now, this is the only plan that's on the table.

So I encourage you.

You don't like this plan, give us something to respond to.

Let's have a conversation, but you do not get to just say no, no, no, and poke holes through the plan.

The only plan that this body has been presented.

So again, I encourage you to go to the draw board and bring us something that we all can have a constructive conversation about.

Again, the community, thank you all for coming out.

I encourage you to stay with us.

Again, nothing is etched in stone.

So there's plenty of times for you to have that your voices be heard.

Reach out to all of us.

If you don't know who your counselor is, you can call President Lewis.

I'm available to have a conversation with you.

So again, thank you so much for joining us this evening.