Business session.

Our first item is approval of minutes from business session of January 15th, 2026.

Is there a motion?

They moved in second.

Is there any further discussion?

Hearing none.

All in favor indicated by saying aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Motion passes.

Our item for today is discussion of the budget.

Submitted budget presentation.

Give a shout out to Councilwoman Andrea Boo, our finance chair who's virtual with us today.

And uh take it away, finance team.

Good afternoon, Mayor Lucas, City Manager Vasquez, members of the City Council.

I'm Brenton Saturley, Deputy Director of Finance.

I have with me here today, interim director William Choi and budget manager uh Teresa Danielson.

And we're here to discuss the fiscal year 27 2027 submitted budget.

Over the course of the today's presentation, we'll be revisiting the original five-year forecast we presented to city council back in October, as well as the city's fund balance policy, steps taken during the budget formulation process, and the role priority-based budgeting played in this in the submitted budget, an overview of the submitted budget itself, as well as revisiting budget investments and key key changes within the budget, and then walking through the budget document and upcoming budget dates.

Mr.

Mayor, it's kind of hard for us to hear.

Can you pull the microphone closer?

Thank you.

Sorry.

Holly down a little bit.

Yeah.

Yeah, and talk more directly into it than you.

Perfect.

Better?

Better.

Yep.

I'll try not to turn around and like.

So looking at the five-year financial forecast from adopted by the city council back in October.

Originally, the city estimated that fiscal year 27 would have an operating deficit of almost 100 million dollars with an ending balance of 169.4 million dollars.

This was 42.6 million dollars below the 25% balance target.

City's fund balance policy itself states that this the general fund reserve should not be lower than 17% or above 25% of general fund operating expenses.

Um this fund balance policy is the guiding principle for staff when developing budgeting and financial planning efforts.

It is incredibly important, particularly when we uh have discussed the city's finances with rating agencies, and in fact, last year Moody's noted that a reduction in fund balance below the 25% of target could lead to a downgrade of the city's ratings.

Stepping into the budget formulation and priority-based budgeting process.

Uh immediately during the discussions regarding the financial uh forecast, the city manager took steps to address the fork to address the operating deficit.

Those included directing departments to build their budget around a 0% targeted growth rate, limiting funding requests for mandatory expenditure increases or changes in service levels only, and submitting all requests to fill vacant positions through the position review committee, with exception for aviation, water, fire, and those covered by the CBA.

Or those positions covered by CBAs.

This review process remains in effect with additional exceptions for certain high turnover positions like maintenance positions or uh the to be established department of community service uh safety.

Other general budget assumptions included a two percent salary increase for non-represented employees, a five percent increase for health care costs, sufficient funding to meet the actuarily determined pension contributions, and a 10% vacancy rate utilized to account for uh employee attrition.

Additionally, the direction was given to make sure that priority-based budgeting was used across all funds as a part of this year's budget development.

Just revisiting a little bit about the process behind priority-based budgeting as part of their department budget submissions, departments scored all programs based off of their alignment with the citywide business plan and basic program attributes.

Those include things like cost recovery, how the program is able to recover costs through charges for services, demand, increases of demand or decreases in demand could impact the program's um program attribute score, mandate requirements, whether it's fund required by federal, state, or local government, population alignment, how well it serves the targeted population that's meant to target, as well as reliance.

Are there other entities beyond the city that could provide the same service at a lower cost?

After departments submitted their budget their budgets, those programs were then also scored by peers, including other department directors, deputy directors, and members of the of the city manager's office.

Approximately 75% of a program's final score is based and weighted towards the citywide business plan, meaning that 75% of each program score is based on the goals and objectives set by the city council.

Following the score, programs are distributed almost like a bell curve, where further and in one of four quartiles.

First quartile representing those programs that are most aligned with the goals and objectives of the citywide business plan, second quartile being more aligned, third quartile less aligned, fourth quartile least aligned.

Again, programs from all funding sources, special revenue, general fund, and enterprise funds were scored as part of priority based budgeting this year.

Slide eight out reflects that bell curve type distribution of program scores, where you see about 31 programs reflected most aligned with the citywide business plan, 76 more aligned, and then less and least aligned programs.

It's important to note that while these programs are distributed on a bell curve, the funding itself does not necessarily follow that same curve.

So looking at just general fund programs, 10% of funding from the general fund reflected in the most aligned quartile of program scoring.

Those programs included examples like public works, solid waste, neighborhood programs, municipal court, um, as well as various others.

More aligned programs reflected 34% of general fund expenses, included things like housing, tenant advocacy, homeless prevention, and various police programs.

In the least aligned category represented about 5% of general fund expenses, and that reflected city manager communications and neighborhoods environmental quality.

Now, all that being said, priority based budgeting does provide provides a very more detailed and granular approach to how we view our budget.

There is a programmatic breakdown within the budget and took a more much more detailed approach at reviewing how the city spends its money, and that's reflected in the budget book that you have before you as well.

Each of those program scores, sorry, each of those program scores are reflected within the program pages of the budget book.

There'll be a chart at the beginning of each program page that reflects what quartile each program is aligned with.

Additionally, there's more data-driven decision making as part of priority-based budgeting between the programs, the information you collect as part of the basic program attributes, and the scoring with the citywide business plan enables more informed decision making as the budget is reviewed, and allows for a more programmatic by program decision making for as opposed to across the board reductions or increases of funding were to allow for it.

Moving on to the budget overview itself, the budget submitted for fiscal year 27 totals about 2.5 billion dollars.

That includes 1.7 billion dollars from governmental activities.

Business type activities totaled $878 million, and that includes expenses associated with water and sewer and aviation department.

Breakdown of expenditures by appropriation type.

Again, governmental activities totaled 1.7 billion dollars.

Personnel services, including wages, pension, and health care make up the largest portion of governmental activity appropriation spends, whereas in business type activities totaling $878.1 million dollars, the largest portion of expenditures are contractual services.

Revenues across all sources totals about 1.6 billion dollars.

Earnings tax being the largest portion of governmental activity revenues at 379.3 million dollars, followed by sales tax, totaling 337 million dollars.

It includes sales tax directed towards things like public safety sales tax, capital improvement sales tax, uh, public mass transportation, property taxes totaling 209.9 million dollars, directed towards general obligation debt, the general fund, UZM fund, and health levy fund, followed by local use tax, totaling 114.6 million dollars.

Governmental activities by goal area total about 1.7 billion dollars.

That includes $733.9 million for public safety, the largest funded goal area within the governmental activities budget in both all funds and general fund, followed by infrastructure and accessibility totaling $347.5 million.

This slide provides further detail of those expenditures of those governmental activities spent expenditures by goal area, public safety again, making up the largest portion with police funding, followed by fire, and then public works is the third largest expenditure category.

Slide 17 provides an out summary going kind of the next step down.

We've got started budget as a whole, governmental activities, and now the general fund, general fund revenues total $833.3 million dollars.

Largest portion of that again is earnings tax, followed by utility taxes, uh local use tax, and property taxes.

There's an additional $46.4 million transferred from other funds to the general fund.

That includes reimbursement for ambulance services, administrative charges, as well as repayments from the public safety sales tax.

Slide 18 provides that breakdown of expenditures within the general fund, totaling about $844.2 million dollars.

Again, the largest area of expenditures expenses within the general fund is public safety sales is public safety.

There's in addition to the $844 million of expenses, there are $90.4 million dollars transferred from the general fund to other funds, and slide 19 provides a breakdown of those transfers.

General fund is usually is typically a fund of last resort to help balance funds that do not have sufficient revenues to meet expenses, and you see that with the darker blue shaded funds in terms of the funds that are supported by the general fund to meet expenses.

Street maintenance fund transfer totals $28.3 million dollars.

There is a requirement that seven and a half percent of earnings tax be directed to street maintenance fund, and that is what that transfer represents.

This slide compares slide 20 compares both the forecast presented back in October to what we have submitted before you today.

So I'm gonna focus on the far two right columns of this of this table.

When we presented the forecast in October, we estimated a beginning balance of 270 million dollars and 837.8 million dollars of revenue.

That was compared to total expenses of 938.6 million dollars for that estimated operating deficit of 100.8 million dollars, resulting in a fund ending fund balance of 169.4 million dollars.

Again, about 54 45 million dollars below the targeted uh the targeted 25% operating expenses.

The submitted budget today has revenues estimated to be uh $879.6 million dollars, total expenses $934.6 million with a revised operating margin of $54.55 million dollars, $54.9 million dollars with an ending balance of $218.5.

That is $7 million above the $211 million $25% targeted ending balance.

Slide 21 provides a breakdown of the steps taken over the last several months to close that operating deficit.

Includes so starting from the 100.8 million dollar operating deficit estimated back in October.

Um total revenue increase of 34.6 million dollars, reviewed department programs, eliminating historically unspent funds, reviewing one-time programs and increases for savings of 19.1 million dollars.

KC Live debt was estimated to originally have grown at a steep rate in fiscal year 27, planning on refinancing that for savings of 10 million dollars in fiscal year 27.

We originally utilized general fund appropriations to support ERP implementation costs, and in lieu of that, or uh would be issuing uh bonds to support implementation for savings of $8.8 million, and then eliminated management class positions that have been vacant longer than one year for general fund savings of $1.2 million.

There are two major cost increases included in the budget that were not originally contemplated in the forecast.

That included additional $13 million for Kansas City Police Department and $14 million for the Department of Community Safety.

And that brings us to that revised operating deficit of $54.9 million.

There is still a structural imbalance within that.

However, as mentioned, um the operating budget has an estimated aiming balance above the 25% fund balance target.

Um still be ongoing and reviewing programs going into fiscal year 28, um, as well as maintaining the continued review of vacant positions through the PRC.

I'd mentioned earlier an elimination of department positions that had been vacant longer than a year, or management class positions that have been vacant for longer than a year.

A table on page 23 provides a breakdown of those departments with those eliminations.

Generally, departments are able to maintain a 10% vacancy rate with exceptions for fire in Kansas City Police Department.

Slide 24 provides a breakdown of Department of Community Safety Expenses.

Ordinance number 260076 was advanced from finance governance and public safety this last Tuesday, and total expenses are about $26.3 million for $148 FTE.

That includes $11.5 million of salaries for administration, correctional officers, and maintenance, with remaining costs going towards contractual services, including inmate contractual costs such as health care, food, laundry, general operations, including employee training and uniforms, startup costs such as radio security equipment, IT, fixed costs like electric, telecom and software, maintaining funding for contracts with other facilities, and then debt service costs for future design studies associated with expanded projects at the site.

The funding breakdown for the Department of Community Safety includes $19.1 million from the general fund and $7.2 million from public safety sales tax.

About $6.1 million from the general fund was transferred from the Office of City Manager.

Getting into the budget investments and key changes across all funds, and starting with finance and governance, totaling $141.1 million.

The largest areas include general services and finance.

Major investments and highlights include the $8.2 million net savings from funding implementation of ERP replacement.

Very happy to discuss any of these items with anybody at any point in time.

Housing and healthy communities totals $309.1 million dollars.

Major items include parks and recreation, public works, and Department of Health.

Housing and Healthy Communities includes $12.5 million of bond proceeds from for year 4-4 of investment in the Housing Trust Fund, as well as $3.9 million to provide annual control operations through neighborhood services department as and achieving $2.2 million in savings via reduced contracts by bringing that service in-house.

Also maintaining $250,000 to continue providing free trees for residents following the completion of the canopy cover KC initiative in fiscal year 26.

Inclusive growth and development totals 172.7 million dollars.

Major areas include conventional entertainment, city planning, and economic development.

Funding includes $5 million related to capital improvements at the T-Mobile Center, including security system replacement, AV and IT equipment upgrades, and general building deferred maintenance.

Infrastructure and accessibility across all funds totals $1.2 billion.

Again, that includes our enterprise funds for water services, aviation, and then we have public works from the governmental activities side.

Major fundings and investments include $5.7 million available for snow removal, aligned with fiscal year, um fiscal year 26 budget, actually.

Maintaining adopted fiscal year 2026 budget amount due to flat sales tax projections.

Funding sources include $39.4 million from KCATA sales tax and $38.4 million from public mass transportation.

Public safety total of $742.5 million, including fire $336.6 million and police, $363.5, as well as the new Department of Community Safety.

Major items include 4.2 million dollars for additional staff, including 50 new officers, 10 call takers, and 10 dispatchers, as well as 6.6 million dollars for our 27th pay period, including $6 million from the violence prevention fund.

$26.3 million for the new department of community safety, and then those repayments back from the to the general fund from public safety sales tax.

Debt service totals $429 million with $5.2 million increase related to planned issuance for 2026 geobond projects.

Capital programs include $34.9 million for neighborhood preservation projects, including those submitted by residents through PIAC.

$30.9 million dollars for street resurfacing, sufficient to refund for funding of 300 lane miles throughout the city.

The current fiscal year, fiscal year 26 was a final year for 10 million dollars of geobond funding.

This is a net decrease of 5 million dollars, but does backfill 5 million dollars from what would have otherwise been lost from that geobond funding now.

Stepping back into the budget document and overview and budget process itself.

Um budget document is broken down in and there's tabs for each of these within the document that you have before you today.

The transmit a letter would be my first stop to get more information on the different pieces that make up the budget, as well as the city overview, citywide business plan reflects what you all adopted back in October.

Um program and activity pages as previously mentioned, those do include the uh breakdown of scoring and program alignment for each of the programs within the budget, and then finally fund schedules.

This provides more detail um regarding the funding within each uh fund and the city budget.

I won't go too much into the how to read a schedule.

There's more detail in the budget book as well.

Um, but uh the I do want to draw your attention to item two.

I mentioned the program alignment and where it would be referenced for priority-based budgeting.

Um you see that with this example here uh with the highlighted darker shade representing where the program falls.

Again, these tables um within each program page also reflect the funding breakdown by appropriation type, um sub program, and fund source, as well as FTE for each program, and a more detailed look at the changes within the budget associated with it as well.

Um my personal favorite part of the budget book is the schedule, and that provides a breakdown of the revenues, expenses, more operating margin, or year-ending balance, as well as the final ending balance for each fund.

The amendment process is broken down into two steps.

Um, amendment A developed by the Office of Budget Management, generally a more administrative changes or corrections to the budget.

Amendment B plus, my understanding is last group and went all the way up to E.

Um, but uh this these would be amendments sponsored by the mayor or council members.

Um we just asked that you're submit these in writing, um, preferably through email to the city manager, finance director, deputy finance director, chair of finance committee, as well as the OMB at KCMO.org email address um, and I'll provide more written instructions following today's presentation.

The deadline for those is March 12th, 2025.

We do have three department budget presentations scheduled starting February 25th, February 26th, and March 5th.

That's a Wednesday and two Thursdays here in this building here in this room from 8:30 to 1230 p.m.

As well as three public budget hearings, um, February 23rd at Ruskin High School, Monday, March 2nd at Guadalupe Center Community Center, and then Saturday, March 7th at Winnatonka High School.

Before I move into questions, I would like to recognize the team behind me from the budget office.

If you all could just real quick, Stan.

I would not be able to do this without this team, and we would not be able to be happy here with the budget book before you end this presentation without them.

I also just want to recognize I see a handful in the back behind me, um, as well as I'm sure there's many others listening online, but this is a citywide effort.

Fiscal officers, department directors, deputy directors, all have a role in putting this budget together, and we would not be here without them either.

All right.

Thank you so much.

Wonderful presentation and wonderful work throughout the year.

This is the magical time.

We start the questions, the most fun part of this process for the next six months.

And it was or six weeks.

I didn't realize we kept the flowers, by the way.

This is elaborate behind us.

All right.

Any questions?

Um councilwoman Robinson.

No, all right.

Any questions?

But I wasn't gonna go first this time.

Go right ahead.

It's okay.

It is your honorable spot.

So I sent you my question, Mr.

Mayor.

So this is FYI.

Um, okay.

Um I did have a question.

So on slide six.

Um there's been, I don't know if we've gotten any official communication regarding the budget uh formulation with staff and like what that communication was.

So were there any additional assumptions?

It says in here that there was a to build their budget around a zero percent growth target.

Were staff um told to decrease their budget by any percentage points?

Reflexes.

There was no direction to provide to direct for departments to decrease their budget as part of budget submission.

We did ask for departments to provide um potential budget cuts, but those were reviewed on a programmatic basis with the city manager's office.

Okay, so they were they weren't told to decrease your budget by I'm just gonna throw out a number of six percent.

Um, but they were told to give you budget uh and so can you tell can you give us a little bit more uh information about what that looked like and how that's reflected in the so there was no direct reduction to the budget itself or no direction to departments to decrease their budget by a certain percentage?

That would actually be very contrary to the priority-based budgeting process.

Um but instead we did provide targeted reductions of recommended or program reductions by department, but each of those reductions were reviewed with the city manager's office.

Not all department reductions um proposed outside of the budget were accepted or included in this sub in the submission.

Okay, so can you kind of give us an example of how we were able to follow the trail and follow the track there?

So we gave across the board a citywide budget reduction target of between um 45 to 65 million dollars in the general fund, so asked funded departments from the general fund to meet that target proportionally to their share of the general fund itself.

So for the finance department, I think our target was about three million dollars.

Uh we then looked at our budget and looked at vacant positions, unspent funds, areas that we could identify savings, and then um submitted that after the budget submission to the budget office for review with the city manager.

Okay, so now I'm a little bit more confused.

So you said you didn't give a percentage reduction, but you did as a department, like for your department, it was three million.

The other departments have budget target reductions.

So it they were asked to provide areas that they would take for reduction based off of that target.

However, it was not included necessary, it was not required to be included in their budget reduction.

Each program was reviewed by the city management manager as a reduction for the budget, but just because it was submitted by the department did not mean it was included in their submission or in this in this budget.

Well, I'm gonna let my colleagues pick up where I left off.

I asked that question over and over again.

I'll get the answer.

I'm pretty sure in the next six weeks.

Um, so on the slide 21, you talk about eliminating management class positions uh vacant more than one year.

So um is there a way that we can get a list of which um positions were cut?

I know that we did, you know, we've lost us um a great deal of um staff over the last several years, and I'm would like more information about like which um positions were cut.

And then the last question I have is um around the oh um on slide 29.

I have two more questions.

Slide 29.

The 1.5 million dollars for dangerous building demolition, is that an increase to their current budget, or is that the total amount that they'll receive?

The original funding for building demolition was all one time.

I think it totaled about two and a half million dollars, but that would have been zeroed out from the budget as a one-time program.

This would have be reflect a decrease from what was funded last year, however, an increase from what would have been a one-time reduction.

That makes sense.

Yes, um, that does make sense.

It it is an area of concern because when you look at the resident satisfaction surveys and the number of dangerous buildings that have gone up, particularly um in the third district, and the fact that we only have the 1.2 million um is uh challenging.

I do want to spend just I just have a couple of questions on slide number 36, uh, which talks about um funding our amazing um police department and also the settlements for the city's legal expense fund.

So um how did you get the direction to use the violence prevention money?

Six million dollars to support um our the KCPD.

It was a broader discussion around funding uses and ensuring that the general fund balance not below drop below that 25% target.

So but you are aware that that is to implement the blueprint, right?

The Kansas City Blueprint.

It was a part of a five-year funding plan with the funding originally taken from the general fund, um, which is why it was utilized here.

So you're paying the fund back, but you're not using it for the purposes in which it was intended to as of right now the fund balance would be zero after the fiscal year 27.

Yeah, I hop in.

Okay, I'm just gonna answer one thing for you.

I'm good.

Oh I do plan to, and I've discussed with the mayor pro tem, but I not that we're doing amendments already.

I plan to have a piece of legislation that reimburses the um violence prevention fund so that it is not that's great.

Um and then just and uh the health their health insurance.

Does that do we procure the health insurance for the PD or does that do they do that separately?

Police is on their own health insurance plan.

Okay, so we have no control over this 4.5 million dollars.

We just they just tell us how much it is and we pay it.

It is included in their 25% total, so it uh pensions themselves is the only piece that's excluded from the general like as a general fund payment, but excluded from the 25% calculation.

But health care they have is included in the 25% total for police.

Yeah, but it says it's a 4.5 million dollar increase in their health insurance.

So there there was there is a 4.5 million dollar increase for police health insurance included in the budget, yeah.

And I just wonder if there's any savings, you know, around if we were all together and on the police on on a uh health insurance plan.

I just that just seems like a huge increase, but I just wondered if it was a separate if they they procured their own that that increase is um we've had several discussions with the police department as well.

Um I think it was actually a higher increase in that, and they had several discussions with their health insurance provider to bring that closer in line with the five percent increase that we have within our budget as well.

Oh, and that did happen that represents a five percent okay.

That's really good to know.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you, ma'am.

Councilman Ray.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, I I want to get a little more context on how we use priority-based budgeting as a tool.

Um so for instance, street maintenance um is given the score of two for more aligned with city goals and program attributes, not most, but more.

I can't think of anything more basic we do other than street maintenance.

Uh, and so I was surprised to to see it score that way.

And so can you help me understand how something that seems that critical to what we do would not be scored as most aligned?

So the the the scores themselves are based off of reading through the program goals and objectives within the citywide business plan.

So it's program director, department directors, deputy directors, uh fiscal officers reviewing these programs, scoring them based off of uh how they read the citywide business plan and the directions and discussions with uh with um with council.

I think ultimately like these it it's the way the the goals and objectives are written where it's harder for some programs to find alignment in multiple goal areas where it may you may think it would be a highly aligned basic service of city government, and I'll actually give a different example of this would be um many programs within the fire department fell within the third quartile.

Again, I would say that that is something that's probably a basic city service that we would provide.

However, there's really just one objective within the citywide business plan that the fire department can find direct correlation with that their programs, so it often will rank lower with priority-based budgeting.

So I wondered that.

So the deficiency, if you're going to call it that is lies more with how we've outlined our priorities rather than uh how the scoring was conducted of those priorities or those factors.

Um that's interesting.

Um, because we talk a lot about basic services and it's definitely a learning lesson for us as we've been scoring these as well.

It's why we reopened the citywide business plan last fall to try and address some of those shortcomings with pro with how it relates from the citywide business plan to the scoring process, um, and we could definitely continue that discussion going forward too.

Yeah.

Well, and I you know, the I think the challenge with some of the very, very basic things we do is um maybe we don't always feel a strong need to state how important um street main maintenance is because you know we kind of take it for granted.

Whereas if you have something like homelessness services that I think scored most, we've all made statements about it.

Um we've discussed it quite a bit in the plan.

Um, and so I wonder I wonder if it's a matter of weighing some of the factors differently that go towards what is a basic service, you know.

So, for instance, street maintenance, nobody else coming to do street maintenance but us, while there are a lot of other organizations that provide you know services to help homeless folks, and that's maybe not a good example because I think it should be ranked uh as a as a most aligned, but um I wonder if there needs to be a conversation around you know some of these very basic things and um how we're weighing what makes them basic, and no one else is going to provide the service.

Um, it also always ranks very high in citizen satisfaction scores and and so on and so forth.

And I think that's another important factor to consider as well.

So priority-based budgeting that we have implemented up to this point reflects best practice nationally, but perhaps maybe there's some best practices that we can make it our own for Kansas City, whether that include scoring aspects from the resident satisfaction survey or um internal service survey results related to departments like finance general services to complement those scores as well.

There's a variety of approaches that we can continue to take and evaluate this process overall, just because you know we've done the first year of score, the first full year of scoring across the board, doesn't mean we're done with like how this is being implemented as a city.

I think there's always opportunity for improvement and any feedback from council, I would welcome as to how to improve this going forward.

Okay.

So my next question on that, and I'll use street maintenance as an example is uh so it scored as a two.

Um did that score impact the amount of funding that it received this year.

I I would say for street maintenance, the key thing that we will focus on was the loss of the 10 million dollars of geobond funding and trying to mitigate um the loss of that funding and ensure that we maintain comparable level of resurfacing efforts as have has have happened in the past.

Okay.

I think that it is a priority of residents from the resident satisfaction survey.

Let me ask in a generic way.

So let's say it's not street maintenance, let's say it's sidewalks or something else that I think everyone would agree is a very, very basic city service uh receiving a score of a two.

Would that theoretical score impact the amount of funding that it would receive?

So maybe I can ask as answer to that question, and it's easier for me to relate it back to uh the resurfacing question because if um the the two, which is you know, which is and it might seem like it's not most aligned, it's definitely more aligned.

And when we're looking at specifically at street resurfacing, this was an element where we said, well, we cannot go below, you know, we can't drop below the number that we were at before.

So we we actually found resources to make it meet at least what we thought was a reasonable amount of um funding to be allowed to uh for street resurfacing.

So in some respects, yeah.

I mean, even though the score might not seem like it's the highest, it does also reflect the fact that the the amounts that we're proposing reflect the fact that we do think it's important to fund it to a higher degree, and we actually did work pretty hard to increase what we thought was available for street resurfacing in the current year.

So you established essentially a floor that you didn't want to go below.

Is that correct?

Correct.

I mean, we also looked at well, what can we accomplish with the resources that are available?

Uh, and what is the expectation of the public to your point about what you know how important this uh specific service is.

Yeah, so in my theoretical example, would a score of a two impact impact where you would set the floor?

I I don't think it would be I don't think that that that exact correlation, I don't think it exists, but um because we're using the scoring system to identify priorities and funding aligned with those priorities, and maybe I'm just making it too simple, but I I guess I just want to make sure if there is something that is very, very basic to what we provide, and because of either how we as a council have stated our goals in the citywide business plan, or if it's more of you know how certain factors are being weighed, I would just hope that we weren't uh using that score to fund something very basic and critical at a lower level, or not increase the budget at a uh certain level because it didn't score as high.

So my takeaway from priority-based budgeting has really been more of a programmatic by programmatic basis.

So looking at it from the standpoint of like using the example of a sidewalk program, um, I think looking at the funding currently exit in existence for sidewalks, what we're able to accomplish with that, and whether or not there's a need for additional funding given the limited resources in the case.

I think a better example would be the street maintenance recognizing this as a top priority and making sure and seeing the fact that one of the funding sources for that priority was going away and making sure that we were able to try and offset that loss of funding as part of this process.

I think the bigger aspect from my perspective when we're viewing this budget is more looking at each program as an individual basis and what we're able to provide with the services provided, or like road resurfacing or action provided as a result of the funding.

Um as opposed to doing across the board five percent increases for all contractual services or across the board five percent decreases for all services.

That simply just did not happen.

Um there was no across the board decrease taken.

Yeah, it was a programmatic by programmatic, very thoughtful discussion and the decisions that happened in this budget.

Yeah, no, I get that.

And and and I would say going into priority-based budgeting, I thought it was going to be kind of across the board standards.

Um, so I get that.

That's and I'm talking about a very specific item here that I think it is about street maintenance, but it's also about the scoring.

Um, so let me guys are making me dust off my cross-examination skills.

So let me ask you this way.

If street maintenance had received a one and was most aligned with city goals and program attributes, would it have been eligible for a greater level of funding?

I mean, I think to the extent that funds are available, yes.

Uh, and I actually want to I'm gonna call back uh the comment that council member Robinson made related to a bill and demolition or uh you know dangerous building demolition.

That was one that uh I can't remember the scoring, but it didn't it was it was ranked high as a priority to the in the in the process if I remember correctly.

So we couldn't drop it to zero, right?

Because it had been a one-time out appropriation.

So we found the resources to make sure that at least we met that uh that we met that uh you know that that was what we thought was a identified as a priority.

So is it a is it a dollars to score correlation?

I don't think it's I don't think it kind of works that way.

It's just uh comparing program by program with each other to see well uh tree planting, very a very you know uh popular program, something that people really want to see.

We can't drop it down to zero because we thought it would, you know, that it was still high priority for the public, and it's identified as a priority by some of the council members too.

So it is it is a combination of factors that goes into uh assessing each individual program relative to their score, but also relative to uh the funds that are available.

Yeah, so fair enough.

You're you're comparing everything to the resources you have available.

Uh street maintenance is at a two.

If it were at a one, would you have been more inclined to within the resources you have identify more resources uh for that service?

I just speaking broadly, I think it would be looking at not just being able to whether or not there's resources available, but then also looking at the limitations within the program itself.

Like if we were to throw a hundred million dollars because it ranked a one, can that program actually get a hundred million dollars of work accomplished with the resources on staffing purchase procurement, the budget side, like is that even reasonable knowing what we know about street maintenance?

And the answer would be no, like we don't have the resources elsewhere within the city to support that kind of program.

So managing the expectations across the board and what we can provide despite a program representing a one.

Okay.

Um just one last I have a whole bunch of other questions about other stuff, but can follow up in email and we'll have plenty of opportunity to talk through certain things in the future.

But I there is one statement that I did want to make.

So submittal deadline by March 12th of 2025, I think is what that rule is going to be.

Sorry, 26.

Um I'm going on the recognition, I see Malik Jackson there at Channel 4, uh, so I know he'll hold me accountable on this and state that if there are any budget amendments after that date or filed on the day we are adopting the budget, you can count me as a no vote.

Don't even come and ask me for my support.

Count me as a no vote.

Uh Councilman Duncan will be next for us.

I if I just may briefly I'll amplify the comment on keeping our schedule of all those steps that we've worked on for years.

Councilman Duncan uh third.

Um cur with Councilman Ray's point on that.

Um I had questions uh similar to Councilman Roth or Councilman Robinson.

Uh this is a big binder and I appreciate it.

I think what would be helpful is what are the programs that we're eliminating by department?

What are the positions that we're eliminating by department would be helpful so we can see that very clearly.

Um then discretionary the for public safety on page 36.

Um first I'll ask I see an increase in the settlements for the city's legal expense fund.

Do we have a do we have a separate account for for lawsuits in general?

Where is that where is where are the lawsuits in general, not just for fire and and police, but in general, how are we funding those?

We do maintain um a legal expense fund uh in the law department.

Uh and it is funded, I believe, through the general fund.

It's cost allocated to uh water serve water funds, um general fund, uh various other funds depending on like historical or estimated future uh lawsuits during the the year.

Um this would the police piece would be a new piece per an ordinance uh filed by the the mayor.

Okay.

Um that's all my questions for now.

I have a meeting with you next week, so it's 30 minutes, but I think we should probably make it in an hour.

I think we have meetings with all but two of you, and I will be following up the two of you that we do not have those scheduled yet for those one-on-ones, too.

Mayor Pro Tim.

Thank you, Honorable Mayor.

First of all, congratulations uh on your first uh budget presentation uh fellow bear.

Um I know this is a tough room, especially on a day like today.

Um I want to um ask there's a couple things that I always ask for in budget season uh to receive the vacancy rate, current existing vacancy rates.

So the vacancy rate is actually if you go to the slide with the department reductions, that is a vacancy rate of current filled positions versus the budgeted positions in fiscal year 27.

So that's the vacancy rate is c calculated based off of the budget versus filled positions right as of like the end of January.

Yeah, so that was gonna be my question.

Uh so that is the current vacate or was the vacancy rate as of uh the 29th, January 29th.

It's the vacancy the the vacant positions as of January 29th compared to the budgeted positions so um in this budget, if that makes sense.

It doesn't.

Oh so no, uh so uh I'll normally what I like to see is what are the what's the average the vacancy rate that the department is experiencing?

Yep.

Okay.

And so how is that how is that different from what I what's in this?

There's more because the uh at of the management class positions were taken in fiscal year 27, those that were vacant for longer than a year, the vacancy rate position would actually be higher currently because those positions are reflected in fiscal year 26.

Yeah, okay.

I do want to see the difference.

I want to see that without those positions being removed.

Okay, yeah, because that's not as transparent because you ultimately um then you've removed those vacant positions as a part of uh the budget, as a part of the next year's budget.

So I would like to see what it is currently, you know, with those positions in there today versus um, you know, and it you can this is this information is fine, but I would like to be able to compare absolutely we can just have more transparency there.

Okay.

Um the other thing is uh along councilman Duncan's request.

Can you also provide information on any new positions or new programs that are in this budget?

Uh the the biggest pieces would be the uh we can provide the detail for sure.

Uh Department of Community Safety has uh about 120 new positions.

Um there are the 50 funded police positions through the police department, the 10 call takers, the int 10 dispatchers.

That's the primary crux of where the new positions are, but we can go back and double check.

I don't I will I don't recall any others offhand, but we'll go back and look and probably okay.

Yeah, if there are any new positions, um, because I I know uh there's probably I know I'm sure there were decision packages that came through, so if there were any that are recommended, I'd like to see that as well, in addition to what councilman Duncan asked for.

Uh in this uh priority-based budgeting in that process.

Did the council review and uh approve the metric that you all are using to score and make the recommendation of how these departments score, you know, one, two, three, or four.

Did that come through the council?

So I I believe the council uh resolution was to adopt uh process of priority based budgeting.

Um we worked with the lead expert in priority based budgeting and followed his recommendations.

Uh there has been no policy adopted by city council for any priority based budgeting.

All right, thank because I have uh similar concerns as councilman Rhea with uh just you know maybe it's a part of understanding the detail of that, but I I think um definitely since it sounds like you know, I know we've been transitioning through this uh for the last three years, and I know you know we've had transition in the finance department, so I think it would be beneficial if the the uh council had an opportunity to review and approve those.

So I I would actually like to recommend even that we have a power that we create that policy so that we're all on the same page going forward.

We're happy to share a draft uh policy.

Okay, okay, thank you.

Um let's see.

The other question, so is there uh salary savings calculated into these assumptions or required or require salary savings?

We assume the 10% vacancy rate um citywide, except for with fire um and police that has been assumed in previous budgets.

Okay, okay, you use different language.

Okay, I just wanted to make sure because last year or in this budget, I think it was a required seven percent that went into the budget.

So it's 10 percent it was 10 percent in the current year and 10 percent this year.

Was it okay?

So just wanted to clarify.

So the language, so yes, so there's a mandated 10 percent.

Um, how does that align?

How does that align with priority-based budgeting if you require every department across the board to have a 10 percent salary savings or 10 where they can't fill 10 percent of their positions?

How does that align with priority-based budgeting?

I I would say it's more a reflection of just turnover within departments itself.

Um, the position count within the budget has been historically high, and um we've utilized that 10% vacancy rate um based off of what departments have been able to fill.

And yeah, I'll just add Tammy Queen um city manager's office.

I'll just add that the 10% represents pretty normal vacancy rate for an organization of this size, and it's pretty easily achievable by departments.

I will also supplement kind of the comments on the um priority-based budgeting to kind of sum it up as I don't think we're where councilman Rhea, you know, is is kind of interpreting the budget to be.

I don't think we're there yet with priority-based budgeting.

I think we're still really in the infancy of this um program, and I think we can do a whole lot more to do exactly what you're talking about, which is if this scores a you know, it's least aligned, then why is it here?

We need to really think about why it's here.

If it's most aligned, does it need more funding?

We need to do we get rid of the least aligned in favor of the most aligned.

We did not do that necessarily in this budget this year.

This budget really got us to the programmatic levels by for all funds of the city.

This year we did all funds, but we did not necessarily make funding decisions based on that most and least aligned.

And so was that most and least aligned?

Is that a best practice amongst other municipalities that are doing prior priority-based budgeting?

So we we followed working with uh the expert on priority-based budgeting and follow those guidelines.

And in fact, I think we utilize the graphic that you see in the budget today, is one that we pulled um from a different uh city that utilized priority-based budgeting as well.

Oh, that's a yes.

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

I I have a lot more questions, but I'll just just to save time and allow my colleagues to ask theirs.

I'll I'll end with um more question around the recommendation to deplete the violence prevention fund at six million dollars, which means ultimately that fund would come to an end if approved effective April 30th.

Correct.

For the whatever the end of this is the end of fiscal year 27.

And so um my question is what is it, what can you further explain what necessitated that recommendation?

So I mentioned it was really driven by sorry, I'm driven by the fund balance policy itself.

So we are within six, seven million dollars of that 25% target, um, which is very close to being below that 25% fund balance target in the general fund, recognizing the impetus of the violence prevention fund was in fact from the general fund, is why we went to that source for this purpose.

Be especially given it is a one-time funding source for violence prevention fund, the function that we are paying for is a one-time program, it's the 27th pay period for the police department, so that is where the alignment between the two occurred.

And so only the police department has a 27.

So their pay periods operate a little different than ours there.

So, like City of Kansas City's pay period, I think is today.

KCPD's is going to be next week.

So fiscal year 28, all of us will have a 27th pay period.

All right, so I obviously being um which I can't find the page right now with uh the most aligned, least aligned, but I know that every corner of the city wants to feel safe and be safe where they live work and play, and removing the six million dollars out of that violence prevention fund is a no-go for me, so I'll I'll I'll state today that I'll I'll be looking for an amendment on that as well uh to make sure that we can continue.

We we're having great progress with improving public safety here in Kansas City, and I believe that the these dollars funding the the violence prevent the violence prevention funds, which funds the blueprint for violence prevention, is a part of that success.

And so I just want to go on record as stating I am adamantly opposed to taking the six million dollars that you don't have to respond.

Okay, but I do want to have a meeting so we could talk about where where else we can find those funds.

Councilman uh Bond Willet.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, I just wanted to echo Councilman Reya's comment about the March 12th deadline for amendments.

I am also taking that pact to vote against any amendment um that that comes from the council uh beyond that deadline.

So I just I think it's very important that we have ample time to review those.

And so, you know, in the the last couple of years we've had amendments happen pretty once several actually happened while I was in the ER with a daughter with a broke horrifically broken arm.

Um the week before the the week before the budget adoption.

I really do not want us to be back in that position.

So and since our uh finance chair is not here today, and I know if if she's online, I I uh maybe she's hearing this, but in on behalf of Councilwoman Boo, um let's please honor that March 12th deadline uh for the sake of the budget for the sake of this hundred million dollar potentially uh fiscal cliff.

Uh it is important that I think we am off to just be prompt with our potential amendments.

And I say that, and I you know, I'll probably be the first one to violate it.

Um just kidding.

I will not uh violate my own policy.

Uh anyway, March 12th.

Uh that is that is the self-impose, this this body self-imposed deadline for amendments.

Councilman Willett.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh thank you, finance team.

Thank you to uh finance chair boo and uh for all my students who are watching on channel two.

When are they ever going to use their algebra skills?

This is when real real world learning right here.

Um I'll read all 500 pages by Monday.

Um couple questions.

First, it's more towards the city manager and mayor.

Um how was that is this the manager submitted budget, or did you submit something to the mayor's office, and then some changes made.

How is that done?

You know, I might actually ask Matt to explain it because we've done charter work in this, and he's the best one to understand how it all lays out.

But I do think that some mid-20's charter amendments um modified the process somewhat.

Yeah, I want to get the uh the language in problem, but uh those lawyers bill time.

So that's right.

So uh as I fill time here.

Remember that under Missouri's general statutes that govern political subdivisions, chapter 67 mandates the city has a budget officer.

For us, that is the city manager, and then that's modified by the charter provision in Article 8.

Um I think it'd be Article 8, right?

Right, so 804 is the submission by the city manager.

Um the manager submits this annual budget, includes the revenues and appropriations.

Um that uh yeah, it's I'm defining it right here.

While he looks, I'll say this and I'll just let you know if I'm wrong.

Okay.

I think that my predecessor in a charter review had it changed such that it became it was named in like one position, the mayor and the manager's budget, and it has something to do with when it is submitted to different folks.

I've been told before that it used to be actually I'll just be wrong, but um it was either submitted to the mayor, and the mayor would then send the transmittal letter.

Tell me if I'm wrong or right.

And the mayor actually drafted the transmitted letter, but the mayor didn't really draft the budget.

And so it would be a bit of a mayoral interpretation of what happened.

What we changed in 2013 by the electorate, I believe, was that the mayor comes in earlier, the transmit a letter is then from both, and then that's how you proceed.

In the practical form of it all, um, there's really just too much for any mayor, and we don't have the staff to um to do all of this, and I don't actually know what he does with his days.

But um so I mean I think the core charter function as described is still that the manager's staff and others promulgate the budget over the course of a year, and then mayor and council coming in and our later steps.

Yeah, and I and I think there's a there's an additional sort of I think there might have been and we'll say it's a failing permit.

I think that's the best rationalization of the difference between section 804 and 805 of the charter, because obviously 804 says the city manager's got this responsibility.

It's an extension of state statute in chapter 67 that he does this, he does this through the finance departments uh through the budget officer.

But then if you go to 805, clearly B, it talks about appropriations as suggested by the mayor, the council may modify them.

And I think that there was some there's either a disconnect there or the intent here is that there's a joint uh um uh work on the part of the mayor and the manager's office to produce this document if you read 804 and 805 together.

In in all practical.

Unfortunately, I wasn't here in 2006 when they amended the charter.

Yeah, six.

Thank you for that.

On for this budget in front of us, was this something that was 100% completed by the city manager's office with no tweaks from the mayor's office before it is presented to us today.

I wouldn't say that.

I think the way that it is worked in every year that I have been here is I mean, obviously, because uh the mayor gets to be part of a drafting, both of the transmittal letter.

I think there is then also review earlier.

Um there's an annual meeting with KCPD and um earlier in the cycle, and so I think there's a more iterative process.

That being said, um the budget is uh close to pretty final document as I understand it, um kind of well before we get here, and so I don't think this budget reflects any um anything taken off or added in a particular interest.

I'll note as to this mayor.

The longer we're in the position, the less intrusive we tend to get to, which I think staff probably appreciates.

The earlier budgets I was in, and then were more financial challenges I think we faced then too.

We were a good deal more active under Acting Manager Rouse, probably the first year or two of manager Platt.

I think it's it's different now, what the finance team is doing.

And I don't pretend to know much at all about priority-based budgeting either.

Thank you.

Now, question about the budget itself.

So I know we've already talked about and I've heard some of my colleagues' concerns about the violence prevention fund, but that money would be going as of right now in the budgets going towards police officers' salaries.

There's still six million dollars in this budget for violence prevention funds in fiscal year 27.

The proportion that goes to police salaries is what would have been in violence prevention fund in fiscal year 28.

28.

Okay.

But so this is what I'm already trying to, I'm already seeing that's kind of set up and framed that you're talking about police salaries and violence prevention fund, and that's I know for from several of our colleagues that's probably not what we want to be fighting over that.

I I don't I don't think it's an and or or it's not a this or that, it can be a both in that case scenario.

So I just don't like how that's framed already uh right now.

I think the police budget um I I wonder if we can be I don't want it to be this or that on that one.

I want us to go make sure that we actually have the full uh money that we need for the salaries because trying to fix that aspect of it will hurt our uh police budget in the proposed sense.

So it's gonna get a little bit complicated.

Obviously, you're not gonna find our solutions today.

That's why it's a long longer process, but I just want to point out that um that's something I'm gonna be watching and making sure that we're not gonna just be taking money back from police and putting it in there.

And I don't like how that's pitted up against each other.

Council uh councilman curls, then I'm wrong.

Council uh councilman curls.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um I I won't get into a lot of questions this time, um, but I want to say thank you for this budget.

Budget season is always interesting and challenging to say the least.

Uh and I'm sure after I read the 500 pages like my colleague, Councilman Willett, I'll have plenty of other questions also.

Uh but uh I'm curious, and I brought this up in uh our finance meeting on Tuesday about uh the new department of community safety, the 26.3 million dollars.

Uh I know that we had some discussion about that, and uh just a couple of questions uh because I I believe I ask about where this money was coming from.

I believe that the indication was from the general fund, if I'm remembering correctly, and then I believe uh public safety sales tax, which is actually listed in here.

Uh but and I like some more detailed information about that because it looks like we're taking 5.5 million to repay the general fund after we take the money out of the general fund.

It I I mean you can answer it briefly now, but I'd like to have some extensive conversation about this, and then as well as that, uh, how is this going to be funded going forward?

I guess.

I know we talked about the amount of positions that you guys had listed and maybe scaling those down as well to Mayor Pro Tim's point about uh positions.

Uh so uh I I just have some concerns about this new department that we are creating.

So there are a handful of ordinances adopted by city council over the last several months that paid for uh design functions at the correctional facility.

Uh or um I believe designed with the CRC as well, um, as well as $500,000 for police foundation, where the intention was written in the ordinance that the city manager would include in his fiscal year 27 budget a repayment back to the general fund for those expenses.

So that 5.5 million dollars repayment from public safety sales tax and fiscal year 27 is a reflection of expenses that were paid through ordinances this year with directives to include repayments from public safety sales tax.

So that's what that piece is kind of set.

Not directly related to the operations of the corrections uh or the front street detention facility, but instead of uh related to the design and construction associated with that.

Okay.

The funding sources itself, so it you are correct, it includes uh 7.2 million dollars from public safety sales tax for operations and 19.1 million dollars from the general fund, six million dollars of that general fund operations was already included in the budget.

It was previously in the city manager's office and transferred to the department of community safety for operations of the detention facility.

Uh the remaining was funding that over the course of this budget process, we're able to identify funding out of the general fund to support operations of community uh department of community safety.

Okay.

And then going forward, is that where the source of this uh budget or or for this new department is going to be coming from?

So that split is what I would anticipate in future budgets, how we would be uh funding it.

However, I mean ultimately it's a the decision making of this body uh to determine that as well because it looked like you dedicating X amount of dollars.

I don't know how much data is coming from the public safety sales tax fund.

We always seem like we take a lot of money from public safety sales tax fund uh to do numerous things at some point.

I mean that net really kind of get to the depletion point of public safety sales tax.

So in the in the budget that we have submitted um around an ending balance of about three million dollars in the public safety sales tax for fiscal year 27.

Um there is that one time transfer of the five million dollars and continue to evaluate in that in future forecasts what that looks like.

And happy to have a broader discussion about public safety sales tax as either individual discussions or another presentation here.

Yeah, I'd like to know exactly what we are funding out of the public safety sales tax, what our plans on funding out of the public safety sales tax going forward, uh somewhat of a projection so that we can kind of our identify exactly what's priority and what isn't, uh, and as I say it, I'll I'll stop there and I'm sure I'll have more questions as we proceed with this process.

Thank you.

Yeah, girls to that point.

Uh I believe last Friday would distributed a memo uh outlining a projection of expenditures from the public safety sales tax uh to include uh this this item was included in those projections, but also all items that are programmed, you know, or contemplated for construction uh down the road.

So I think we do have the projections.

We'll we'll have to recirculate that again.

You said we sent that.

We sent that, yes.

Okay.

Lost in my emails, and I'll look for thank you.

Council Councilman Rogers French and Robinson.

Just very briefly, I have one very specific question on page 289 on health and medical care.

I'm just looking through and actually um it's got the allocation by program uh for a total of 32 million, which is basically the same as last year, but it's it's all kind of lumped together instead of allocated by provider.

I'm just curious what's up with that.

What why why it's broken out that way as opposed to a provider?

Instead of being broken out, it's just all the it's just all under special projects.

I can just health department.

Yeah, I believe this is the health levy.

It's the health levy, it's the the providers to safety net providers, payments to safety providers.

Is it that you broke out the program in 27, but it wasn't broken out in 2026?

I think it was broken down by providers.

Yeah, so it I think it should be broken out.

We we can break it it was combined.

Um I think it helps work class.

Oh, okay.

Yeah, I thought we wanted this broken out.

So certainly we can certainly do that in an amendment.

Thanks.

That's a little councilwoman French.

Uh yes, thank you.

I don't want to thank you guys for for all this and thank the finance um department and for putting this all together.

I know it takes a lot of time and and a lot of energy and to give us that what is 900 pages, it's not 500.

I looked at 900 pages.

Um, I really want to show my appreciation and balancing that with um council direction also.

So we had directed you to look at priority-based budgeting and and see how that would apply.

And so I share in the concerns of of my colleagues as well, and so I won't belabor it as much because we've talked a lot about that.

But um, my understanding of the priority-based budgeting would be to develop a metric, then that we would prioritize our budgeting.

And so I appreciate um director Queen's um comment saying this is very much in the emphasis stage that we're kind of learning and growing.

I just my concern is that we are scoring in a way that we're still learning and growing from, and it seems to be very subjective.

So we're we're having to score a one or two or three, but then we're also taking into account our past knowledge and knowledge of our citizens or you know, satisfaction survey and our community feedback, knowing that even though it's scored, you know, two, it might really be a one, or it might when it the time comes, we might push a little bit more budget to where you know it's it seems very subjective.

And I've mentioned several times in a lot of our um business sessions or one-on-one um set you know, meetings, that it really would like to take in account those citizen satisfaction surveys and our community feedback, because to me that is our priority-based budgeting.

So when we look at and we talk to our communities, they prioritize emergency services, they prioritize housing, they prioritize street maintenance, sidewalks, that's what we hear time and time again.

But yet those are scoring lower within our priority-based budgeting metric.

So I kind of really want to understand where those metrics came from a little bit more.

I think that's where a lot of this confusion is with with the council, and we weren't really privy to that, or that wasn't really shared with much of us.

So if we can continue to collaborate and work together as we move forward into another budget season, I know we've you know kind of task you with this, and that it's it's a lot more than just black and white.

Um, but those are you know, some of my concerns is when you talk about priority and we go out and talk to our community about priority-based budgeting, but they're not seeing their priorities put into those scores and the metrics.

More comments and questions.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Robinson.

Um, thank you.

I wanted to follow up on some of my colleagues' commentary regarding the budget deadline.

Um, and I know that there were some significant changes um at the 11th hour, but in addition to that, um, there was some um some trust in our administration that those budget items that we had talked about throughout the year would be in the submitted budget and they weren't.

And um, so I do want my colleagues to be reminded of that um that when we um make those contracts or those communications with our staff that we expect for those to be followed through, and if they're not, we need to utilize the full budget process to make sure that those things are included.

Um I would like to know from our city manager, because we do have you now in the seat, um, how is how do you want us or prefer for us to make sure that those things that we've talked about are in the budget?

We shouldn't have to go digging through 900 pages to ensure that the things that we're committed to are are included.

So what assurances or processes can we go through to make sure that um those things that are the manager committed to were actually in the budget and we don't have to be flustered on the floor um on the day of the budget passing.

I think we'll probably get make sure um get communication back to you well in advance of March 12th uh to make sure that uh the items that have been highlighted uh as priorities um by the council throughout the year and through the various directives are either reflected on here or we have a plan to address those uh as as wouldn't by yeah some uh some programs I can think specifically of a commitment that was um addressed with respect to you know development on prospect, you know, we have to find X amount of dollars.

Um I don't believe it's in here yet, but because we don't have a funding source for it, but we are still you know coming up with a plan to address that.

So but we will definitely uh you know we'll highlight all the items uh that are in the budget that have been requested throughout the year and also highlight what what we just couldn't make it and then we'll continue to work to try to find those you know to fill those requests.

Okay, and that's I think it is important for us to highlight those things.

Um I know that the finance department oftentimes do it does a good job of letting us know what ordinances were passed that were included or not included based on those ordinances, but we do need to to we need your help in terms of making sure that we track all those things.

Um and then they you may have already addressed this.

I just want to make sure that either in this um budget document or on your list of things um that you gather from us today that you will include all of the scoring sheets for all of the programs.

Is that on your list?

The you scored all of the programs.

We can provide the scores.

Okay, please provide that.

I think it would be it it should have been in the book, quite frankly, from a um from a point of transparency so that people will know that you know these are the programs that score well, these are the programs that didn't, but certainly we need to have some awareness of that if you can include that.

Um I would, you know, my recommendation would be that it would be actually included in the budget so people can follow along on those scores so that when we pass the budget, and this is maybe more for our our chair or budget chair, um is that people can see how that all sausage is made.

Absolutely.

But you'll provide that to us.

Okay.

Thank you.

Councilman Ram.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, and Councilwoman Robinson, I actually really do appreciate that commentary on items that we expect to be in the budget, but then don't see them until a later date.

It would actually be really nice to get a list of all the budget items that are associated with council advanced ordinances throughout the year, and that shouldn't be difficult to pull because I believe that's one of the scoring requirements for uh priority-based budgeting is if it's uh mandated, and so that would be very helpful uh to receive as well.

You know, those items aren't my issue.

It's the 100 million dollar budget amendment being debated two days before committee that's about to bankrupt the city that I think is problematic.

Yeah, um, that I'm talking about.

Um so just wanted to comment that, and then the other thing I would add uh on the staff side.

If you were involved in printing or binding this 900-page document for us, will we raise your hand real quick?

Okay, thank you guys so much.

Uh I can't overstate how much I appreciate this.

In years past, it's been difficult to review the budget in a timely manner, and maybe that has contributed to some of the amendments that have come later in the game.

Um I'm just simply not gonna scroll through over 900 pages online.

Having the actual document here uh is going to make me much better in this process moving forward.

So thank you all for doing that.

Hopefully, uh, I don't see any band-aids on your fingers, so hopefully there are no paper cuts involved in this.

Thank you.

Um Councilman Duncan.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh brief question.

Um 331 million dollars represents 27.2 percent of the general fund for allocation to KCPD.

Do we know what 25% is?

25% would have been I have it with me.

There it is.

251 point 251.4 million dollars.

250 what's 251.4 million dollars.

Okay.

I mean, one way to put it is that you know we're we're using violence prevention fund to fund officer pay.

Another way to put it is that we're using the six million dollars from violence prevention fund to fund settlements at the police department, which is 5.9 million dollars.

That's all uh other questions.

Oh, uh council, we'll start with councilman O'Neill and we'll finish with you, Councilwoman Boo.

Councilman O'Neill.

Yeah, just a just a quick question.

Um, I think I've asked for this before, but I haven't received anything.

I would like to see, and I I would assume that many of my council colleagues would like to see departments submitted budgets versus what the submitted budget uh that that actually came out today.

I'd I'd like to see what was requested and what actually was uh was determined to be in the final budget if that's possible.

Everybody's nodding affirmatively, okay.

Good enough, that's all councilwoman boo, the chair of the finance committee.

Yes, thank you.

And I want to thank staff for the work that they've done to get um get us to the point we are now.

Um just a couple of comments.

Um, and I think last year we had a um a landing page uh somewhere that we could have all this information we qu we requested, and hopefully we can have that as well.

Um on the priority-based budgeting.

I think we had a presentation last year that perhaps we can re-um circulate as we have this discussion on passing an ordinance or a resolution that adopts a policy, because I think it helps um um explain some of the um the the scoring that was involved, one of which involves our um citywide business plan, and I think as we talk about our citywide business plan, you know, in the in the next uh cycle, um we want to make sure that those citizen satisfaction surveys and our citywide business plan are um are aligned because the priorities-based budgeting takes into account the citywide business plan priorities and goals.

And I think as we talk about our citywide business plan, you know, in the in the next uh cycle, um we want to make sure that those citizen satisfaction surveys and our citywide business plan are um are aligned because the priorities-based budgeting takes into account the citywide business plan priorities and goals.

Um so I think that's one thing that as we as we discuss the citywide business plan, we want to make sure that that aligns because that's going to set some of the matrix for priority-based budgeting.

So just wanted to throw that out there as well.

Again, thank everyone for the hard work in getting us here.

The hard work's not done yet, so we'll uh we'll keep going for six weeks, mayor, not six months, right?

Yeah.

It may feel that way, but other questions and comments from council.

I'll just say while like half the folks are gone.

Uh, I appreciate the discussion on when amendments will come.

I share Councilman Raya's view, and I'll probably give this speech a few more times to remind people.

The fund balance that we have is essential.

While I don't expect another pandemic in 2020, we would have had to lay off lots of people if we did not have a fund balance, which in no way was where we are today.

I mean, a lot of this stuff is done with some level of care.

Maybe there are disagreements on it, but I would even encourage to the extent you have a large amendment.

Maybe think about where it can come from.

I know legislatively it seems somewhat, and I'll say it too, because I've probably done it over the years.

It seems simple to say 10 million more for sidewalks.

Be great, be popular, the public would love me.

I may call them quit Lucas sidewalks.

I don't know, but but that 10 million comes from something.

And so that's that's kind of why that's why this is difficult.

And this is, I think our first year we were blessed with ARPA funds at the beginning of this term, still kind of floating around.

Um now we're just budgeting in scarcity, and that's natural.

But um I would just encourage us to be mindful of that to all the points raised.

Um there are some requirements with substantial budgets, there are some with different, and and perhaps there are ways we can find cost savings through all of that too.

But maybe not.

I actually like the budget the way it is too.

But anyway, that's all I got.

Any further uh discussion?

All right, hearing none, we'll uh thank you guys so much.

Discussion of ordinances, resolutions, or other items prepared too late to be on today's document.

I'll just share this.

There's been a lot of community discussion about uh potential veto of an ordinance passed last week in alignment with another ordinance passed last week.

So my understanding that at least one of the ordinances passed last week puts us on a pretty accelerated time frame for review of energy code standards that has a nine-month deadline by which then the city manager has to come to us with a new ordinance.

To the extent there's a concern that that delay would allow folks to drag and other such issues, and I understand it indeed voted in that position last week.

I think the ordinance that suggests we do need to come to some energy codes proposal for council's review in nine months makes clear that staff and our legislative body will continue working in that direction.

All those words suggest that um I don't elect to uh uh exercise a veto.

We haven't had one since about 2011, I believe, and uh we won't add one today.

Any other discussion on things?

All right, we'll stand adjourned, be ready for legislative session.