I know you bought multiple tickets.

I think my good is she's gonna get back home or are you going?

Are you going?

You also told me last time that you would take me back for the freeway.

So he literally like put me clear on the other side and then took a selfie with all these The only reason why I was remembered is because somebody came and got me and said, Crystal, why don't you send us these reject things that nobody came for?

Okay, with a season that nobody came for.

Well you are ugly.

You are loving Chris.

Right next to place.

Okay.

Well, as long as you know what you're doing.

I used to be impressed.

So we don't like I don't like story.

Literally got a link across the room for me this morning.

Okay, so the action we take it is just already.

Yesterday they saw three though, so yeah.

That's actually a big step.

She was having a big question.

Okay.

I thought you said closer.

He could have said to Texas, like there's a chair writer of Chris.

Yeah, but that's literally what he said.

He's like, there's a chair right here.

I didn't put it like a remote.

Well, next year.

I mean I mean here.

You're so ridiculous.

I am ridiculous.

Okay, so I can't.

We're waiting, we're waiting on council.

Normally I'm not the type that likes to start late, but we uh I've been informed by my guidance here that we need to have a quorum before we can start.

So we have Sebastian and short meeting.

They were across the arena.

Yeah, that's a house that is kind of are you attempting to call either Victor or Debbie?

Just message Debbie asked her if she was coming.

I'm just working on Victor right now.

So we'll see.

I'm gonna cross a few south.

Tickets to give you flexibility for like tomorrow to have a different video.

I'm gonna take my wig chair between us too, so it's picture five.

I think it was like, oh, I don't want to pick that.

I didn't I didn't care.

Okay, yeah.

And just make the whole chances you want.

No, no response.

So we have to wait and wait to start.

We can't even do the uh prayer and a pledge until you get here.

Oh no, I know yeah, I understand that.

Well, let's let's let's do that.

I feel like we're starting something.

So if you would what pleasant is already on.

We got two.

Okay, let's so let's go ahead and stand.

We're gonna do uh prayer and a pledge.

What's that?

You tell him no excuses.

Okay.

There we go.

Dear Heavenly Father, we just thank you for this morning.

Thank you for the many blessings that we receive.

Thankful for uh Doug and his team, Lord, for all the work they have put in to discuss this budget, and just to give uh the council and everyone involved discernment.

And we just thank you again for uh all you do and this special weekend, three-day weekend for a lot of employees.

So give them some rest and relaxation in my name, amen.

Okay, well say the pledge.

I pledge to the flag of the United States of America.

And to the Republic for which it stands when one nation for God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

I guess we will have a recess until we get a quorum.

Okay, and so we wait till we see uh oh.

Okay, not on yet.

So here's Victor gonna join online.

Okay, so we'll just wait to see them and then okay.

And once they pop up, we can we can pick it up.

We need we need Debbie or Victor on.

So how many of you have been to the how many went to the rodeo so far?

Gone, okay.

Are we on now or are waiting?

Perfect.

Thanks.

Okay, and we'll do it.

Good morning, Councilwoman.

Councilwoman Scott, can you hear us?

Councilwoman Scog, are you able to hear us?

Yes, I can hear you.

It's unmuted now.

Council Councilwoman Scott, just confirming that you you are able to hear us.

Yes.

All right, thank you.

You are make the quorum, so you were key.

All right.

Thank you.

Apologize.

Okay, so uh Madam Clerk, if you do roll, please.

Scog.

Present.

Ingula.

Bills.

Present.

Reynolds.

President.

Rodriguez.

Griffin.

Present.

All right, we do have a do have a quarantine quorum, so we will proceed.

And uh this is a one uh theme action item is my understanding this morning, and mainly from our finance department where Doug and Chris will bring presentation.

Anybody else presenting besides you two?

Um as needed, the department uh leads can come up to the podium and speak with their specific projects in case.

Okay, so the action item, and then I'm gonna just go ahead and turn it over to you.

Okay.

Action item is council discussion and vote on fiscal year 2027 capital budgets and grant-related capital.

And we're off uh uh mayor and council.

The um as we did last year, the intent of this meeting is to present the budget capital budget for fiscal 2027.

This budget is the work, combined work of uh Chris Boaz partnering with all of the departments who who generate their particular budgetary requests.

The budget includes capital purchase items such as large vehicles and equipment.

Uh mostly it's made up of projects for water, wastewater irrigation, um, and so forth.

The the intent is to approve this as a budgetary value, but each of these items will come forward back to council during the course of the next year as action items for formal approval.

So if as long as the amount is over fifty thousand dollars, which the vast majority of these are, I don't know if there's really any of them less than 50,000.

There might be one, maybe two.

Um but this is the this is the process to approve the budget, the process to approve the actual uh initiation of the project, I said we'll come back as individual action items.

So you get a second bite of the apple on each of these um projects.

The um goal, one of the biggest goals we've got this year, and we're partly there, we'll keep working on it, is to um bring the budget more in line with what we can actually do during the course of any given year.

We find that over the past years we we have uh great um budgets built, but frequently we do not bring them to completion.

I think in the last couple of years, we've completed maybe 50 to 60 percent of the capital budget.

Um part of that is out of our control if we're dealing with granting agencies or other other state agencies that have an impact.

We have to rely partly on them, but most of it's within our control.

So the intent is to help bring the budget of the capital items closer to what we what we can actually do.

This is gonna be a multi-step process, but it's a good start for us.

So uh Chris will Chris, I gotta commend Chris.

Uh this has been his uh beast to tame, and it's been uh challenging across the the city.

But all of the we've got um most of the department heads here who will join us uh uh with with water wastewater streets and talk about individual projects as you need.

Um the presentation will be done from a summary page.

Chris will go through the outline of the book, summary pages that show the projects, and then as needed, refer back to the capital budget book which you all have as needed as we go through this.

The intent is to get through this in the next two hours to complete the budgetary process so that as soon as we're done, the departments that can then begin starting planning on some of these projects for 2027 and not wait until the successive year to actually begin the planning and hopefully take a second step in finding ways to complete our projects more timely.

And with that, I'll turn it over to Chris Boaz and let him start the process.

And um want to make sure though that everybody online can see the FY20 Capital presentation um page.

We can.

Okay, good.

All right.

So we're good to go ahead and continue, Chris.

Thank you, Doug.

Um mayor and council, just for the record, Chris Boaz Capital and Grants Manager.

Um, as Doug said, this is my beast, this is my baby.

Um, and um I want to address a few things.

Uh first of all, council members on the diet, you have uh a couple additions uh to the what we call our CWP, our capital work plan.

The first one um in those paper in that paper clip section is pages one through 26.

Uh we had a last minute change this week.

Uh and it's amazing how one number will affect so many pages uh of of our book.

Um so that is the first section, and then you'll see that orange um sticky note on there.

That is uh tab 14 pages 229 through 232.

And so uh when we're going through this, we will be referring to those those new pages because they have the correct totals on them.

And so for for those that are online, we'll show those pages on screen if you don't have them.

I don't think they're people online you won't have those pages.

We will save them for you, but you'll be able to see them on screen.

Oops.

Here we go.

All right.

Uh just wanted to go through uh just a high level um of today's process.

Um first off, I want to say uh a couple thank yous.

Um because this this book doesn't get completed without uh help from across the city.

Uh Heather Tefoya and her team over in Public Works, Jerry Celeste, um Parks and Rec, Cody and Jennifer, uh police department, Kelly Karina Trish, Captain Scogland, uh the finance team, Doug Leslie, uh, especially Trinity with their help on formatting.

This book looks a lot better than it did this year or last year because of Trinity's uh hard work on it.

Um so we want to get into the just very brief overview of the CWP.

Our goal for this is to provide council with as much financial forethought so you guys can make the most informed decisions now.

Um and then we're gonna we're gonna go through a few items to note, uh, just administrative items, and then we'll get into the meat of this book.

We'll review the funding sources and summaries.

We'll review how each section is set up, um, and that's the division overview, and then we'll talk about the approvals and how we want to do this.

We can do each division as we go.

Um, as you can see, there are 22 tabs, so that would be 22 different approvals, or we can do one at the end um with any changes that you have suggested.

So that's that is up to the will of the council.

Um, and like Doug said earlier, this is the approval is for the authority to budget, not the authority to spend any project or expense over $50,000 will come back before you during a council meeting, so you will have a second chance to get eyes on each expense over $50,000.

So we move on to our uh items to note real quick.

Uh we have our replacement vehicles are based off of uh Doug Adams and his team's work and their 10-year vehicle replacement plan.

Uh, where possible we've stretched vehicles uh additional years.

Um this year specifically, we've I think we've done a fantastic job of repurposing vehicles.

There have been some water vehicles going to parks, there have been some airport vehicles going to IT.

Um, and so I think we've done a good job to be uh financial fiscal stewards of uh the city's budget.

Uh next we have some department departments and divisions do not have any FY27 requests.

So the first page uh you will see is their five-year request.

Um there are some departments that cannot project out past our next fiscal year.

An example of this is CDBG, because uh each year that their budget is set or allocated by council, so we can't project what we're gonna spend for that specific department.

Uh there are a few combined tabs.

Uh we have dev services admin or development services admin and development engineering, parks and recreation, and then all the golfed funds are combined into one section as well.

So, right here we have an overview of all all of our funding sources.

Um if you'll note we have uh a few that we normally don't have on there.

Uh, as you can see, the the top line uh in the FY27 column uh is general government fund, and uh we have development services, which is about two-thirds of the way down there.

Both of those are amounts are for one specific project, and that is the Purdom drain.

Um we wanted to show you this just so you can see the where the funds are coming from, even though they're technically they will be spent out of the wastewater department.

The funding is actually coming from General Gov development services.

Uh I do want to note that the the general gov portion will be repaid over time.

We're working uh with wastewater to figure out a mechanism on how to do that exactly.

So our our overall total for this year is one million 105 million five hundred and thirty-eight thousand three hundred and eighty-eight dollars.

So right here we have uh we start moving through our summaries.

This first one is for FY27 um capital requests, and this is broken out by the division, which is each one of those rows going down uh numerically, and then the columns going across is we have our funding sources.

So the fund uh that in incorporates uh fund balance and revenue from FY27.

The next column is our gen gov funded.

Those that is our our what we call our 310 fund, that is uh capital that is funded out of our general government.

Next we have our grants column, then we have our impact fees, and then that fall final column on your right is the proposed budget by each division for FY27.

I think this is about the only place you'll see the multiple funding sources.

So when you look at parks or streets or irrigation, wastewater, you see three or four funding sources, their fund grants, and impact fees.

That's a common process.

And it's very common for having one project to have multiple funding sources, but this is the one place you'll see those three sources.

And again, this is uh page nine in the actual CWP book.

Uh the following pages in the book gives you the detail, they give you by project name.

So if you do want to get more detail, you can do that in in the book itself.

Uh the next summary we have is Gengov Capital Requests, which is on page 15 of the CWP.

And the the second column from the left is FY27, it's the one with the brackets around it.

Um again, this breaks down by division what we're gonna be spending, not only in FY27, but this gives us good insight to where we are headed in the future.

And if you look down at the very bottom right hand corner, you'll see the total of 37 or 39,747,146.

That's a little that's a big chunk of change over the next five years, all coming from general gov funds.

So this is where we stress being good fiscal stewards.

Uh this is where we get creative when it comes to phasing projects, uh, repurposing vehicles.

This is where the creativity comes in.

Just for reference, just a quick interruption, Chris.

Will you read that total number again?

Because I'm reading a slightly different number.

Uh the 39 million 747,100.

So this um this is part of that those replacement pages.

Replacements.

Okay, yes.

So that has uh it was a 200,000 dollar request uh or change in the numbers, and that's where that's where that difference is.

But but just the thought the way we use this book.

If you look at the police operations line, you can see that this year uh we've got 1.3 million dollars mostly in vehicles.

Next year that goes up to 1.7, the following year 1.8, the following year 2.3.

Most of this is fed to us by Doug Adams.

He does an absolutely fantastic job of predicting the vehicle needs, and this helps us get ahead of what's coming down the road.

So we know where we need to go.

We know in the next three years, the the replacement value for vehicles will continue to increase and continue to be a challenge for us to meet.

But this gives us the capacity to look ahead.

That's great.

I my only request is that Doug can share that crystal ball with everyone.

Okay, I appreciate that.

All right, uh, next we move on to our summary three, which is um this is the most inclusive summary that we have.

It's the our five-year uh request by division.

This is every project and expense um that that we know about so far uh over the course of the next five years.

Um as you can see it down in the bottom right-hand corner.

That is another large chunk of change, the 360 million dollars.

Um this is just to give you guys an insight of of what is coming down the road.

But if you look at the FY27 column, you'll see the totals matching um from summary number one that broke it up by funding source.

Real quick, we wanted to add this one in here.

This one is actually not in your book.

This is a summary by object code, and uh what our object codes do is they break down the the type of capital expenses.

So we have our land, buildings, other improvements, which is mainly used by our parks department, vehicles, equipment, um, water and sewer lines, and then construction projects at the very bottom.

So this is to give you just a little more insight um on how the expenses are breaking down by type.

All right, so next we're gonna we're almost to the meat of the book, which is our um all the tab sections.

So each one of these sections uh the format repeats itself.

We have a a title page.

Um, sorry, let me start.

We have the table of contents, which has the tab number and the page number that each section starts on.

Each section section has the title page with a brief introduction about the division, and then we have a summary of the FY27 uh capital requests broken out by funding sources.

If you flip that title page over, you will see all of the capital requests over the next five years.

Um and then from there on we start moving into the we call them the project detailed templates or sheets.

That gives you the most amount of information uh about each project, uh the prior year spend, the future year spend, where that money's coming from, what council district it's in, uh just a little bit more of a deep dive on each um project.

So before we start moving through the sections, do we have any questions from council?

All right.

Basically, when you get to the summary or to the end, we walk back down through and as far as which items we want to put on hold or yeah, yes, we can more information about or whatever case maybe.

Yeah, I will I will keep a running total of what changes we want to make as we move through this process, and then um if we want to wait till the end to approve one final number, we can do some quick math and get that number to you before we do the final approval.

Mayor Yes, uh Councilwoman Scogg.

Um I just request that you keep us informed on pages that you're on.

We'll do each each one of the slides has a page and a tab number.

Oh, I can't, okay.

Thank you.

All right.

If there are no further questions, do you want information as we go, or do you want to wait till the end and I think if you have a question about various projects, let's get that as we go.

So we don't have to wait till the get to the end because we may forget.

So as we go through each department, as we go through each department, um look at the list of projects on the screen.

You can determine whether you want to ask questions.

We can bring up the the lead from that department and explain it.

Um if there are no questions, we can just move on to the next department.

And like so the but let me ask a question, let's formalize this.

Uh mayor and president.

Do you want to approve these one department at a time, or go down to the very bottom and improve the total value of capital?

I think it might be more from my perspective, it might take slightly longer, but I would approve it one department at a time.

But that's just me.

Is that as far as at the end or just after each each uh discussion?

At the end of each total department's good discussion, not by project.

Yeah, uh council president, of course, has been at this the last uh couple couple years.

So what I think I would probably go ahead and ask him as far as personally, I think that makes sense.

Well, it's fine to do it as we go as far as the summary.

It's just about as far as that.

We're we're looking at summary pages.

So do you want to work off of those?

We'll work off the summary pages off of the ones that Chris will show on the screen will be the summary pages we will go off of.

They will match identically what's in your book.

Um, and I think we present from those and approve from those.

However, should council want to dig deep into a project, we can go to the book and open up the page where the specific project is and look at the details there if there's a question that council would like to go into and have the department heads come up and explain.

So uh if you don't mind, uh let me put that out to council who are uh present.

Uh what what would be your suggestion as far as how we uh continue with this process anyone?

Mayor surprised, okay.

Go ahead.

I saw Debbie on mute, so I was gonna let her go first, but I think uh council woman by the department by the by the department or project would be my preference rather than holistically at the very end.

But I have a follow-up question after councilwoman Scog.

Okay.

I'm mayor.

Yes.

I'm in favor of project um uh one project at a time as we go through it.

Um I don't know how question uh uh councilwoman scog a question from Doug.

So if you go through each individual project, uh we will probably be here a very long time doing that.

Um we're willing to yes, okay.

That's okay.

Let's let's do um department at a time then yes, department at a time is fine.

Okay, and this is a good thing.

The final result is what I'm hearing is this is just the okay as far as action is going to be.

This is okay to budget, not to spend.

Yeah.

Yes, yes.

Okay, any other input?

Yeah, Mayor Brunner.

Yes.

Yeah, I was just gonna say that same thing too.

This is not a final, this is just uh kind of get an estimate of what we're doing.

So um I'm I'm good with each department.

Okay, so uh let me just clarify.

Are we are we taking action after each department?

Is that what you're hearing?

Each department.

So that's how that's how we will proceed.

Mayor, follow-up question.

Yes, I'm sorry, you told me there was gonna be one.

Go ahead, council.

That's okay.

I uh you've all heard me state it before.

I'm just curious within this budget book with the 105 million proposed.

Are we within our um not spending authority, but do we have the funds available to be able to complete each of these projects?

I know there's gonna be some here or there that we might raise the flag on and say, well, maybe we want to hold off, maybe we don't.

Uh I just want to confirm.

Do we have the capable funds to do all of these and what the purpose of stopping specific problems or projects would be if we have this spending authority?

Yeah, we we have, and I have in front of me uh a list of the fund balances by department, and but typically what you'll see when you go to water wastewater irrigation, the spend is a combination of part operation and part fund balance.

Yes, we have the funding to complete all of these projects as approved by council, should you approve them.

Um we have more projects, however, over the course of five years, we have more projects than funds.

Our challenge has been completing the budgeted projects, but we have ample funds to complete the projects presented today.

So could you clarify for me, Doug or Chris?

How much are we shortfalling ourselves if we start a project this year but can't complete it by year five or have a project that we're planning on in year five?

What's the differential between actual funds and that shortfall?

You mentioned that uh when we look at this holistically, we do not have enough funds in five years.

Well by how much.

No, what uh let me clarify.

We'll have to go through that by department because each each fund balance is different, and each capital request is different.

Uh, for instance, water renewal has got approximately $55 million of fund balance, and I think the capital for water renewal is what?

$31 million.

$31 million.

So they're only spending $31 of their $55 million fund balance, but they have other projects in play this year that will affect that fund balance.

So it's a dynamic question that will be we can answer in a more flexible setting, but the complete answer to that won't be available to you until we share the operational budget on the the 15th of July.

But we've gone through that internally with finance, so I know that we have sufficient funds.

Um but when I say we have more projects and funds, uh when you uh look at all the development projects come before council for uh new new subdivisions, and the big questions are where do we find the funds to do the roads?

You know, the the question becomes long term, how do we meet that best meet the needs of the city?

And that's not the purpose of this particular meeting.

The purpose of this meeting is to identify projects that they can be done this year to in part meet those goals.

But councilman Sebastian, what you're talking about is a very substantial question that should be addressed by mayor and council, but perhaps not in full in this meeting.

Thank you.

Understood.

All right.

Um with that being said, we're gonna move into our tab one, which is page 27 of the book, uh, which is our facilities department.

Uh a couple things that we wanted to point out here, just real quick.

Um for the IH2C specifically, we have just under 900,000 budgeted, uh, as you can see for stucco repair, HVAC, and roof replacement, and that bottom line item, the replacement vehicle uh Fort Maverick with shell for 90,000.

That is actually two replacement vehicles, not just one.

So I just wanted to clarify that.

So currently we have a proposed budget uh for our facilities department of one million three hundred and sixty-eight thousand four hundred dollars.

Does council have any questions?

The biggest item on there looks like it's the HVAC uh replacement or investment in IH2C.

That's the biggest set of uh items for them.

The exterior stuck all the HVAC and the roof replacement, those are coming up to what about a little over $850,000?

That's the biggest chunk.

Let's get let's give it about 30 seconds.

If there's no, let's move on.

Quick question.

Yes.

So how soon can we uh physically go forward on the IH2C improvements?

Yeah, come up here so they can hear put those out to bid immediately.

And that's the whole turnaround.

Mr.

Mayor, point of order.

Could you please uh state your name and your title subject online facilities we could put that out to bid in the next week or two?

It would be uh 60 days approximately before we could see that implemented well that this is for the FY27 budget, so putting that to bid right now is perfect with an execution date of October 1st or thereafter, but not later than that if we can do it.

Well, my concern is is you know we're talking about uh roof replacement, HVAC.

We don't do that October, so then we're talking another year.

So the question is if we have funds, can we begin the project yet this year and get the roof work done and the HVAC done?

Otherwise, we're we're another year.

Interrupting real quick, they cannot hear you.

Okay.

So we can hear online.

Part of the challenge that I see in some of our facilities and our improvements are is our timing.

We approve under one set of months of of the year, but some of the projects are affected by weather.

And so when we approve a project at this point in time, and it's not gonna physically get done for another year, and if there's an acute need on roof and HVAC replacement, it seems like we have to have a mechanism to say, yeah, we're approving the budget, but we've got to be able to move forward.

We got cash on hand to get the job done.

We have sufficient fund balance.

If council decided they wanted to do this now, we could amend it into the FY26 budget and then just not do it in the FY27 to spend the same amount of money just in a different time frame.

We have the capacity to do that.

Should council request that.

So council members, if we're keeping the IH2C and we believe we're gonna repurpose it and we're gonna spend the money on on these improvements, they should be underway now rather than occupying the building at some point.

And then we're changing out HVAC and we're changing out roof, which is a disruption to the occupancy of the building.

So that's what I'm trying to ask the question on sequencing and as far as moving forward in the budget.

Yeah.

Uh will the council do you need discussion from the fellow council persons on how we handle this, whether it be an amended amendment for the right now what we're trying to do right now.

Um council president Bill's exactly right to bring this up.

This today's meeting is to approve the budget.

Right.

And then we can come back, put that on the agenda to get the actual bids going.

But yeah.

Chris, I know you're making notes and all this as far as uh so for the next next meeting when this can be brought up.

It seems like these issues were approved in FY26, and we just postponed doing them because we weren't sure if we were hanging on to the I think the IH2C has been discussed, but not budgeted for in FY26.

Okay, thank you.

Um Mayor Dritter.

Um I also thought that 650,000 was a number we got last year.

So have we repeated that now, or is that just the number we're gonna use?

No, I think if I might, Council President.

We just we have been discussing this, and Council Bill uh President Bills is right on track here.

We've been discussing, but not taking action.

So this is the budgetary process, but if we want to take action, we need to have an action item for council, and we can do that and then roll the differences into the amendment.

But councilman Rodriguez, we've been talking about this for probably six, eight months.

Just haven't pulled the trigger.

Okay, no, that's that's fine, but I just wanted to make sure that we're not gonna get hit with uh with another bills.

Yeah, with an increased price of an HVAC replacement, that's all.

But from my perspective, if we're hanging on to the facility and we're gonna fix it, we need to get underway on getting it fixed.

So I think the facilities can take that as direction to start the bidding process, and then we can bring back the information for an action item this year.

Yeah, Mayor.

Oh yes.

I would be in agreement with uh councilman Griffin.

Uh I would be in agreement with what Councilman Bills has proposed.

And if there are any future um capital projects that are needing to be done within the next reasonable amount of time, I think that we should have that all proposed and highlighted.

I'm going through and highlighting as I can as well to have those just get done in 2026 rather than wait till 2027.

So if there are multiple or if it's just IH2C, if you could flag that for us so we can be aware for an amendment.

So as a point of just process, I would still propose that we approve it for the 27 budget until we finalize it in the 26th and amendment.

That way we're covering both directions.

Agreed, thank you.

Chris.

So is it Mayor Council?

If we're gonna approve by each division or department, this is where we would need a motion and a second and a vote in order to approve the facilities budget for FY27.

Okay, do we have a motion on the move to approve?

Second, I'll second it.

Okay.

We ready for roll call, please.

Gog.

Yes, Reynolds.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Bills, yes, Griffin.

Yes, all in favor, motion carries.

All right, next we'll move on to building safety.

This one's short and simple.

We have uh I believe it's three vehicle replacements for a hundred and thirty-five thousand dollars.

Uh just to note the Chevy tracks is not what we are getting, it's the vehicle that we're that is being replaced, as Doug Adams can attest to.

That wasn't uh the best vehicle to purchase in the past.

So I move that we move to approve safety.

Yep.

Second roll call, please.

Gog.

Yes, Reynolds.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Griffin.

Yes, bills, yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

All right, next we have our development services admin budget and develop and development engineering budget, which is tab three, page 43.

Uh, for development services, again, this 9.3 million dollars is uh part of the funding for the Purdom drain that is uh in the process of um being built, and then we have uh vehicle replacements for engineering for 87,500.

And before council discusses, I want to make one point clear on this.

The development service is the funding point, not the spending point.

In the final budget, we will move this money out of development services and show it as a spend in waste root water renewal.

So it's but this is where it's coming from, and the final budget we will move it to where it's being spent at.

No difference in the value, just where it's being spent.

Mayor Brune, I have a question.

Yes, is this coming from the bond that we passed?

Or is this totally separate?

This has uh nothing to do with the bond.

These this is coming from the development services fund balance, which right now stands at about 19 million dollars, which is aggregated by the various inspections and fees they generate over the course of the last five, six, seven years.

So this is an accumulation of funds, and to me, finance, it seems appropriate that this goes back into the investment process from which it came, meaning contractors and developers pay us the fees and we invest it back into the development of the city.

That's my perspective only though.

Okay, thank you.

Any other discussion?

Move to approve second call, please.

Gog.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Griffin.

Yes, Reynolds.

Yes, bills.

Yes, all in favor, motion carries.

All right, next we have our community development block grant, also known as CDBG, which is tab five, page 51.

Uh these are the code enforcement.

Did I skip that's tab four?

There's no uh capital expense there.

You're correct.

Sorry, uh Mayor Council President.

Uh we did skip tab four because there are no FY27 uh capital purchases.

Okay, great, thank you.

Sorry, sorry for that.

I see that.

I just saw numbers on a page.

Good.

All right.

So again, we're moving on to our CDBG grant.

Uh these are all um projects that Matt has worked with our various departments, uh, whether that's public works or parks, and identifying areas that need to be improved and utilizing our our HUD money um in order to do those things.

So we have a total of five hundred and seventy-five thousand five hundred and fifty-three dollars, all which is grant funded.

So move move to second roll call, please.

Gog.

Yes, Reynolds.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Griffin.

Yes.

Bills, yes, all in favor, motion carries.

All right, next we have uh general government, which is tab six, page 59.

Again, uh this 2.2 million dollars is part of the funding for the Pertom uh drain, and like Doug previously said, this is the funding source in the final budget.

These expenses will be moved to wastewater will the actual expenses were will occur.

And probably worth pointing out that this is two and a half million dollars out of about a seven million dollar total over the next three years.

But this is just the first installment.

Mayor Bruner.

Uh this is what's confusing sometimes when you start switching money from here to there.

This number will actually be in there, it won't be paid out, right?

In 27 the the belief is that with the the very well developed plan to build the Purdom Drain, this money will be leveraged in FY27 to fund a section of the Purdue Drain completion with additional funds coming in FY28.

We have a complete document, Councilman Rodriguez and the council we can share with you when we have and we have in the past and we can do so again, which shows the entire build over time and the entire funding structure over time.

But that's a more complex document.

We have shared it with council, but we can more than willing to do so again.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking.

If we have already approved this, but I don't remember the two point two number.

It's a part of.

No, it's just part of the total okay.

Thank you.

So you do we hear a motion?

So moved.

Second, second.

Yes, Rodriguez, yes, Griffin.

Yes, Reynolds, yes, Bills, yes, all in favor, motion carries.

All right.

Next we have um IT, and um they have just four four items and for a total of two, sorry, tab seven, page sixty-three, uh, for a total of two hundred and twenty-nine thousand one hundred dollars, all coming from General Gov.

So moved second, second.

Okay, roll call, please.

God, yes, Reynolds.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Bills, yes, Griffin.

Yes, all in favor, motion carries.

All right, next we have uh parks and recreation.

Uh the reason these are combined is uh the funding sources, the majority of parks and all of recreation are Gengov funded.

Uh so we have uh quite a few projects for the parks department, a couple that I wanted to point out, uh the or pathway.

Um this has been a team effort between streets and parks.

Uh Crystal has done a great job advocating for this project and um actually receiving advanced funds, so that those funds do not have to come out of the the city's pocket.

Um we also have uh 3.6 million budgeted out of impact fees for the completion of Midway Park, and uh the last one I want to mention was the West Park irrigation, which is that bottom line on the park section.

Uh this is the final installment of 1.1 million dollar total project.

So we have four parks.

We have a total proposed budget of $5,914,058, and for recreation, we have a total proposed budget of $25,000.

Mayor Brunner.

Yes, Councilman.

So uh council, I was thinking about um Lakeview Rose Garden Gazibo 145,000.

I don't know that that's a priority, but I just want to question that see what you all think okay.

We we have uh chief of staff Clay coming up for take that discussion question.

Good morning, council uh claylong, chief of staff.

The 145 was budgeted.

There's a another option that they can do that's less.

Uh the intent of this one instead of buying a package deal uh was to pay tribute to the original home on that facility or on that property, uh, and having the gazebo have some features of that original house that was set there.

Um it is at its life span.

Uh it's a very old um uh gazebo that's there.

So that's the that's the ask that's up there.

I believe the other value or ballpark was around 90,000 to go with the um uh more of a package deal as opposed to having it uh custom built.

So that is the option.

Thank you.

Mayor yes.

I think one of the things that I'm having difficulty wrapping my arms around is what our priorities are, and even what we're able to do if we want to attain those priorities.

If my options are we need to fund more infrastructure improvements, this is directly taken away from those funds.

I don't want to put in a new gazebo.

I want to help uh replace the pipeline on Davis.

Is this something that uh because I think we're dealing with such big dollar amounts and such uh not vague terms?

I think you all have done an exceptional job of putting together the book and the budget, but it uh I what I'm having difficulty is if we're planning to levy in November or asking our constituents to support a levy in November.

Are we trying to find every dollar amount that we can save in other projects to fund infrastructure first?

Is that something that's even discussed right now?

That's I I every budget item that we approve.

I have pause because I say, Well, I don't think this should be a priority right now, but are we talking about two different pods of money and two different uh ways of attaining that money?

No, uh Counselor Mayor may I respond.

The I think that counselor Griffin, that's exactly the right question to be asking.

Um you have this time, and then also when it would come forward for approval, but we do have a significant deferred maintenance.

So I think it's exactly the right question to ask.

Should we be investing in a gazebo when we know we've got uh damaged roads, damaged water systems that need uh more attention?

Um we're presenting with the budgets uh have been requested by the departments.

Uh we're not necessarily advocating for or against any of these because that's the the council's position, but I would look at this exactly from that perspective, counselor, and say not only in this meeting, but when they come to forward for approval to you for actual beginning of the project, um but yeah, challenge it.

And if if it's designed or if the council determines that they don't want to move forward with that one right now, they can take Clay's option or ask it to come back later in amendment or not address it at all until we resolve deferred maintenance issues.

That's council's prerogative to do so.

Follow up President Do we have go ahead.

Councilman Griffin of President.

Okay.

I know, I know I apologize.

President Gales has the floor, please.

So there's three things in my mind that we should be setting aside uh and pooling money for uh the infrastructure deferred maintenance.

One's the 500k on the terminal building at the airport, the other is 400k at the scattering garden and the 145 on gazebo.

So I'm kind of making a list of items to see whether we can pull monies together to help move a couple other infrastructure projects forward.

Uh we still have to work out the management side, the capacity side, but uh just FYI council, those that's one thought I've been working on.

So uh I I need uh clarification.

So is this Doug?

What what would you propose as the process here where we're going approval of the full amount, but then it can uh further down the line that we discuss the individual uh no?

I I think I would I would suggest that if you um look at this and you and you this has questionable value, we don't approve it in the budget.

Okay, um it can come back in as amendment anytime next year, don't approve in the budget reduce it.

And if there is are the votes, and that's what would happen.

And then that becomes part of counselor bill's bucket of money we start accumulating for other issues.

So I think I think council, you understand that.

So uh motion please you want these three items or you want to wait until we get the full list?

Um I well it's by department, so if there are more items in this department you want to pull out okay, rather are your other departments are yet to come?

Yeah, yeah, I couldn't tell if we've already passed airport or airport still.

It's coming, so it's coming be that be the same procedure then as far as any of your list uh okay so I I'd make a motion that we set aside uh the expenditure for the gazebo of 145 second and clarification if I could, Mayor.

Discussion.

Do we have uh either from Crystal or John or Tom, a number that we can actually attain in FY27 on deferred maintenance?

If we focus our full priorities on deferred maintenance, do we have a number that we can take and say, okay, in FY27, if we use all of our resources, all of our contractors, we can do 23 million dollars in deferred maintenance projects or something within the ballpark that I can at least say, okay, the goal's 23 million.

I'm going to find skinny on some of these budgets to go and attach to that 23 million.

So when we request a levy for the next two years, I'm able to say, okay, it was originally 26 million that we could do, but we actually found three or four million dollars within our capital budget.

So now it's only 21 million or 22 million that we're requesting.

Do we have any kind of number like that rather than oh, I just don't want any gazebo because I think we're going to be saving money.

If I think we're saving money and ultimately we're not putting all that money directly into the deferred maintenance projects, I think we're just moving shells at this point, and that's what I'm needing clarification on.

Okay, we have uh public works director Tom Points ready to respond.

Mayor Council, so yeah, thank you for your support on the deferred maintenance.

So we we have provided a list to the mayor's office on uh projects that are needed in water and transportation.

It's it's uh I think it was around 38 million.

Realistically, we could probably only deliver about 20 million, 25 million uh in a year.

Um again, we've also said we need some people if we're gonna do that.

Um one of the things that is kind of important to note um that we need to get some things self-ready.

We we do all of our projects that we design are we just immediately go to construction.

So uh we need about a year in order to get some things self-ready on the transportation side on payment rehabs and and water line replacements, and we're actively working on that right now.

We've got some uh a CAD tech that we hired that he's starting to work on that.

But um, as far as a vote would go is for the public, I think we might want to shoot for next year in May to give us a year to get all those shelf ready things because we don't want to ask for money and then not deliver it so that'll look bad on the public's eye.

So we want we need to be ready for that.

So uh we've got all our lists, we're we got everything in line.

Um if if you choose to give us some more funding for um out of not funding in a gazebo or something, and it adds up to around a million-ish or so this next year we can start working on a pavement rehab.

That's what I would recommend.

Um you know, John's already got some pipes that he's been replacing through the revenue enterprise funds.

We do not have any payment maintenance projects on the on the on, and we need it.

Our payment condition is very poor.

60 percent, 65 percent.

That's not not not okay.

So we need to start working on that, and so that's something that we can focus on if you want to put some money towards infrastructure next fiscal year.

Hope that answers the question.

So clarification if I could, Mayor.

Yes.

Uh my preference would be a single dig project.

So rather than pavement maintenance, unless it's an area where the pipelines we know have some longevity in them, longer than five years.

I I would not want to do unless it's just simply pothole maintenance.

I wouldn't want to repair major portions of the pavement if we're just going to go back in and dig in three to five years to replace the deferred maintenance on the pipeline.

So are these pavement maintenance projects, projects that ultimately have good infrastructure that are just needing repair or fill-ins, or what are you looking at there?

So yeah, Mayor Counselor, so yes, we we do with the one dig policy.

If we're gonna do a pavement maintenance project, we'll have John and Crystal coordinate that we get the pipes replaced and within the project or the pipes in good condition, and we don't have to worry about digging it back up.

We 100% agree with you.

Yep.

Any other questions for uh Tom always has the mic?

Okay, my uh what what I heard from you, Tom, is you're not gonna turn down money this year, though, right?

Okay, all right.

Okay.

Or do we uh we've had a mo a motion in a second, correct?

So we're ready for a roll call.

Reynolds.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Griffin.

Yes, Gog.

Yes, Bills.

Yes, all in favor, motion carries.

Um mayor, council.

Could I um clarify?

That motion was to extract the um uh gazebo, but not necessarily to approve the capital budget for that period.

So that was the motion.

Another motion as far as we need a motion to approve the capital budget net of the gazebo.

So uh the the standing motion still stands.

We just need a second motion.

Okay.

To the I was thinking we had the airport monies in the other end, or it was strictly that vote was because this is just the parks and recs.

Parks and recs still because the approving thank you.

We'll we'll keep we'll keep track of that money, the 145 and any else you save, and we'll we'll designate that as one, yeah.

So far as uh approval of the rest of the parks, uh make a motion to approve.

Second second.

Okay, roll call, please.

Gog.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Griffin.

Yes, Reynolds.

Yes, Bills, yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

Parks and rec uh make a motion to approve that capital budget.

Second.

Can we just we just did we just we just did that?

We just did that one.

Oh, you're talking about the recreation center.

Recreation center.

I'm sorry.

Parts of rec recreation center.

Yeah, oh thank you.

Thank you, President.

Yes, you're correct.

Online.

No, it's a 25,000 second.

Second.

So they would without you having uh present to Chris.

There's a motion's already been made on this.

Sorry, uh Mayor and Council, just for clarification.

Uh Council President, was your motion for uh recreation uh division 6030 for the 25,000 dollars, or was it for the following rec center on tab nine, page one nineteen?

Page one nineteen the recreation center.

Okay.

Total six hundred and twenty-six thousand.

Perfect, thank you.

We got a motion and a second uh roll call, please.

Reynolds.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Griffin.

Yes.

Gog.

Yes.

Bills.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

All right, we move on to cemetery tab 10, page 137.

And council president, as you mentioned, this one does include the scattering garden.

Uh, this is the third installment, which would give complete funding to this project for 486,850 for total capital requests of 501,850.

Yeah, so this is one for me.

If if we're gonna be able to get capacity to get project uh infrastructure work going, uh I see this as one area of Gen Gov money that we would uh move towards that.

I think for for clarity on this particular line item, it's worth noting that this is year three of an accumulating budgetary value that now totals what's the total value on this one, Chris.

So it's like one point one million dollars with prior approvals uh in the prior years adding up to about 700,000.

I don't know how much work has been done on the scattering garden, if any to date, other than design, but this is year three.

So the actual amount you're talking about could be more than 400,000, it could be 1.1 million dollars in actuality.

Do we have anyone that can report as far as progress on the on the garden?

Cody's online, he should be able to.

Yeah, good morning, council um uh mayor and council.

Um Doug is correct, construction has not started, but the project is out to bid with uh bids due on the 25th of this month.

And the 1.1 is the total um the 486,850 would be the final uh funding year to um bring it to the engineers' estimate for construction.

What will be the consequences of not doing the scattering garden, Cody to the cemetery?

Um the plans are completed, we're out to bid.

We would just not accept any of the bids if this funding didn't come through, and um we would wait for a future funding year to start construction to clarify delay is what I'm hearing.

Okay, go ahead.

Yes.

It says prior year construction six hundred and sixty-eight thousand.

Have we done six hundred and sixty-eight thousand in construction on the scattering garden to date?

I think it's been better.

Uh, mayor councilman griffin, no.

How much will we have we spent on the design?

Sorry, um Doug, I don't have that number in front of me.

Um I I can look that up and send it into the chat.

It will be a minor amount of the total spend, but I'm sure we've spent a little bit on the design, which could be put into storage and held on to.

But the reality is if you cancel this investment, you're actually freeing up 1.1 million dollars of total spend, at least or at least shifting it.

And to read Claire Go ahead from my perspective, um, if we can develop the capacity to physically get the work done instead of having more water lines blow up and more issues hit, or an intersection go into disrepair uh or unusable.

I'm I keep looking at wanting to set funds aside uh to then see if we can build capacity of of being able to physically get the projects done.

If we can't do that, then we can always come back and start the scattering garden.

We can come back and start other things.

It's just from a standpoint of time lapse.

I just hate to see us continue to not deal with the infrastructure if we have the ability to deal with some of those priorities.

I realize some of these other issues are important to certain people and they would be helpful.

At the same time, uh I just don't want to continue to see what we're seeing uh if we have the ability to start getting after it with uh a crew, a hot shot crew, so to speak, to can manage the projects and get things done.

So it's kind of a simultaneous down the budget.

Part of it is where can we identify dollars and we hold on other projects and tentatively set that money aside.

But if we're not successful and it's just sitting and not being used, then we come back and take care of these other projects that have been so mayor and council.

What I propose then is that uh we uh approve the budgetary authority as it is, but we list this as a group of spends we can shift uh to the needs if we can meet with Tom and his team later to determine can this actually be done this year?

Because you're exactly right.

It doesn't do us a lot of good to set the money aside and not use it.

It is just a bucket of money that grows.

Right.

So I think we would we can budget this and then come back.

I think pretty confident that there's that they can spend spend the money for uh infrastructure.

That they need another year as far as to prepare for a potential override.

Then it's council's will is how we proceed.

We can we can delete the money, then rebuild the budget and put this into streets, and and you could take the entire one point one million plus whatever else we come up with the gazebo and move that over, but I would still follow back and say, can this be accomplished?

When could this be accomplished given the fact that we have other projects ongoing?

And let me just uh just just take uh 30 seconds or whatever.

My my perception, trying to just be be a citizen out there, but a concerned citizen, is that that if we try to sell in a year, this oh this override levy for infrastructure, if they start seeing even now, because they're they're not they're not aware of the timeline in most cases or whatever.

They start seeing all these extra things, which are wish we could do them, but there's only one pot of money.

The perception in my eyes as as as a citizen is well, why are why are you spending your money for that if you're telling us you need our money for this uh override?

So anyway, that's my just my individual own opinion perception.

Uh thank you, uh Mayor.

So I I want to address the timing of spending the money.

So um I'm taking notes and I'm gonna coordinate with uh John and Crystal so we can we can start designing something self-ready on a payment rehab and a water line replacement so we can spend it in the 27 if you're wanting to direct some money that way.

What I'm referring to is the the larger bucket of override money.

We need a little more time on that one, but we can we can definitely deliver on that on an individual project around the million ish if that's the council desire.

Tough enough to sell uh things that decisions cannot see and uh and but prevention, I think everyone is aware those who were close to the uh pipeline breaks and so on are aware also that we need we need to get on it.

Yeah, thank you.

Okay, motion mayor, yes, uh Sebastian.

I'm sorry, I've got a motion.

That's fine.

I've got a motion to pull the scattering garden and reallocate to streets department second.

Okay, no call and our clerk is ready bills, yes, reynolds.

No Rodriguez.

I'm having a hard time on this one, but I think the better for right now is yes.

God yes, Griffin.

Yes, four in favor, one opposed, motion carries.

Mayor, clarification if I could.

Yes.

I'm pulling the pages out of the line items that we're pulling currently.

It looks like we're at a nice grand total of 1 million 290,000.

Actually, we're at 1 million 300,450.

Tom, how much money are you needing for projects that can actually be completed in FY27?

Because once again, I don't want to just be allocating dollars to streets department for projects, and it just sits in the kitty and does nothing if we can actually do something with this money in FY27.

Councilman, because you're not here, we're making Tom just move a lot here with this crutch.

So somebody get him a mobile microphone, let him sit.

Mayor Councilman is that for infrastructure.

Mayor Councilman Griffin for the record, Crystal Craig, Director of Transportation.

Um, we can uh for a million dollars, we we can right size the project for what's needed.

We have a large list of deficiencies.

Um, and we've got probably a top 10 or 15 that need to be done prioritized based on safety, um, the amount of maintenance that's requiring, and then the average daily traffic.

So we can if you give us you know 750 to a million, we could get something done for that, up to like probably two and a half million.

Um, would get us a good chunk of roadway.

Well, we we just approved get rid of the gazebo and this scattering garden.

I know the scattering garden was just 460,000, but the total budget, if you look at the pre previous years is 668,000 included, you're at about a 1.1 million dollars there plus the scattering or uh the gazebo, you're at 1.3 now or 1.2 now.

I apologize.

1.3 now.

How much capacity do you all have in FY27?

Because I have pages of things that I would say is not a priority that right now I'm willing to give you the funds, but I just need assurances that if we're at 1.3 right now, if we get you up to two, three, four million dollars after we pull a lot of these items out.

Can you get an and actually attain those projects in FY27?

Well, Councilman Griffin, David Bill's uh capacity within public works right now is somewhat full based on a meeting we have.

There's some areas that they have projects that they're gonna be able to move on, or they'll be able to help get off dead center.

If we keep funding and put a priority, it means we've got to put together additional personnel or a different set of crew to help oversee the project.

But it's tough to put that together if we don't know what monies we have.

So to me, we got to keep setting it aside, even if we get up to two or three million set aside, because then it tells us we got enough money to approach things in multiple ways to get these uh deficits, these deficiencies brought forward.

Thank you.

Understood.

I will keep pulling items as we go.

But just for clarity, the mayor and counsel, uh, what you're proposing is technically two actions.

One to reduce this year's current budget proposal by the amount of the scattering garden this year, and to amend the budget to pull prior year approvals out of the fund balance into the budget.

So those are two separate actions we'll have to add uh to make this to build this uh bucket of money to spend with.

Um so two different things going on at the same time.

So clarification, Doug.

So if when there's ever a motion for a deletion of an item in a department, then there needs to be a second motion overall to uh if well no, no, but in this particular case, because the amount the nearly 700,000 dollars that's that the councillor Sebastian refers to is budgeted in prior years, and so in essence has rolled into fund balance and doesn't have the budgetary authority to be spent elsewhere, it would take we can do it.

It just takes two accounting steps to make that uh a reality.

Okay, my question is there is there any further motion that needs to be made?

Okay.

So this is this is down the line then.

All right.

Again, it's not that we're throwing these line items away, we're postponing them.

And if we can build capacity to physically get the projects built, and we can get some of this deficit down in terms of what we've got that we're facing, then it's a postponement of the other, and we're after it.

If we can't build the personnel, the contractors, the team to be able to get the work done, then we might as well stay with building a gazebo, and we might as well stay with these other items, because those items can probably get done.

You're correct.

Because we don't have the capacity to get things done.

And so you'll hear me again, because I'm I'm working on how we're gonna gain that capacity, how we're gonna move uh to be able to get the projects that need to get done.

I think it's atrocious to let water lines continue to blow up every other week or every couple of months and and those type of deals.

So council has two options.

One to approve the budget as it is, and let then let us come back uh and and set aside these funds, say we'll approve the the devolved dollar value, set aside the funds and then come back to council with the plan to not only reallocate them from the budget, but to determine when they'll be spent.

Now, that's one option, or you can delete them now, we can create a bucket, and then you can still come back later.

Um, for you guys down the line, what what um I would I would suggest in this case that the the council um because there's personally I believe we need clarity.

I I know Tom said they can get it done, they can get that done, but in doing that, does that mean something else does not get done?

And I don't know the answer to that or not.

They are working, you know, yeah, we are to get things done.

Can I can I address that comment?

Um so what has changed here recently is we've hired an in-house CAD technician, and so what that has allowed us to do is self-perform some work.

So we don't have to have consultants do it.

And some of these projects that we're talking about are pretty simple designs, and that that we've got a very experienced CAD person that's actually studying engineering, so he he does a lot of this stuff on his own.

So I'm very confident with him in place and another person that Crystal and I are working on to bring on board uh that we can uh do these designs, have them ready and expend these funds on pavement maintenance and line replacement that you're talking about today, you know, in that one to two million dollar range in fiscally R27.

So we we we we've got it, and it's well, that's I'm I'm very pleased on where we're headed because we're able to self-perform some of this stuff where we haven't in the past.

And that was a vision that we had.

Last budget cycle is to put that person in place, and now we've got it.

So hope that answers that question.

Uh Doug, I have a question for you.

Go ahead.

Councilman.

Yes, so uh I know we're uh this is a priority for me as well, so I agree with uh President Bills.

But I also want to recall that we spoke about removing some of that well, I did removing some of this money in general gov over to police.

Personnel that is.

So is that still in the making, or is this specifically for uh infrastructure, et cetera.

Uh if I might uh address that.

Right now, that's a separate issue.

The the capital budget is focused on capital funding, which is a different primarily a different funding source than what we typically use to fund police operations.

So I would separate the two issues uh and not uh in not try and m mingle them together because the capital funding is not necessarily leverageable in an operational setting, if you understand my meaning dedicated to capital, because if we need to stop capital, you can stop capital at any minute if you absolutely had to.

Operational costs are much more difficult to stop if the funding capacity runs out.

So I'm just thinking they just come from the same source.

No, they do not uh General Go.

They well, when we say General Gov, let's let's add a little clarity around that.

So the capital funds from General Gov come from three, maybe four total sources.

Two and a half million of this comes from franchise fees.

That's you look at your bill for electric gas at the bottom is a little franchise fee.

We collect those and we dedicate them to use in capital.

We have interest income, which is good right now, but if we actually complete these projects, the interest income will go down.

And then we have a a small amount, well, about a about nine hundred thousand dollars or so.

We shift from general gov, meaning it comes from property taxes and uh um sales taxes into it.

That's the third, it's only a portion of that that's funded by technical general gov sources.

So you you don't want to put a operational expense into a capital budget because the operational money um may not be there next year.

I mean the capital money may not be there next year, if that makes sense.

Okay.

All right, I got it.

Thank you.

And then if we go ahead and bid the scattering garden and we know where those numbers come in at, and it gives staff a little bit of time to then determine uh are we going to be able to make use of those monies on it on these other projects.

If not, then we go ahead and do the scattering garden.

So we're not lost by finishing up bidding the project.

No, and it tells us where that would actually come in at.

Yeah.

So I agree.

So I'm I'm sorry, I'm being probably a little uh ignorant maybe to a certain extent here.

So do we need to approve the full 501,850 for parks and rec, even though that may be dispersed in another area or not?

Uh um we have two options.

Do that or we pull it out and set it aside and come back for a secondary approval uh later when we have all the the money aggregated.

Yeah, okay.

We we've pulled it based on the motion.

We pulled it taken.

And then we'll come back and aggregate it.

So at the end of the meeting today, we could take all these aggregated funds say we want to pull these from the current sources, reallocate them to streets, and then I would build that into the next iteration of the budget for FY27.

Okay, since it's been about 20 minutes, uh is our previous motion on this.

Is that uh is that going to uh I thought it was to pull the scattering garden and approve only the where you can move on to the I'm just trying to give clarity that we're moving both items forward.

Right.

Cody Cody's online, so Cody have an understanding.

We want we want to still bid the project and know how it's gonna come in.

Okay.

Well and there's other money already set aside, so whether the project starts.

Right.

So you can pull this money, it won't affect affect the the cost of the bid because we have prior authorization to pay for the the bid and the and the design.

Uh it will just if we'll have to leave enough money to cover the cost of any design that we're paying for, and the rest of the authority if council is requests we can allocate into a bucket for streets to use.

It's just complex steps that I don't want to confuse council with.

Finance can get it done if that's the desire.

We have confidence in you.

Okay, all right.

So are we my head's starting to spin a little bit?

Uh we we've had we've had the vote.

Are we ready to move on to the next department then?

We are ready.

So next we have golf, which is tab 11, page 145.

Uh as you can see there are four different divisions that make up uh our entire golf fund, two for ridge crest, two for centennial, uh for FY27.

We have a total golf request of 992,120, all coming out of the golf fund itself.

Move to approve.

Second.

Roll call quality.

Roll call, please.

Gog.

Yes.

Bills.

Yes.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Rodriguez.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

All right, we have 35 minutes and we're on uh 12.

12.

Yep.

Top 12.

Moving.

Four.

Police, we have uh a total um capital request of one million five hundred and fifteen thousand four hundred and sixty-two dollars.

Um, and just wanted to point out there are 12 vehicles that are being requested for a total of 1 million sixty-eight thousand dollars.

The only item that I'm looking at, Mayor, if I could, is the school resource officer radios totaling $56,000.

Is there somebody from police that can speak to the absolute need of that?

Because if not, I'm considering pulling that to throw into the kitty board for maintenance.

Yes, he's uh on his way and he's dressed up today, my gracious.

All right.

Thank you, Mayor.

Captain Eric Scoblin, Napa Police Department.

Uh Councilman Griffin, those radios um are for the school resource officers.

Uh what we have found with communication at the schools is that um uh the design of the schools limits the ability to communicate on their radios.

Um, and so to fix that problem.

Um we talked with Motorola and have tested a radio that uh does communicate uh much more consistently and better, and we feel that it increases the safety of the officers out in those schools in the event of uh emergency to be able to communicate that to dispatch and get resources on the way, and potentially the safety of the students, correct?

I will leave it alone.

Move to approve the budget.

Second roll call, please.

Dog, yes, bills.

Sorry, I thought you said Reynolds, Bills.

Yes, Reynolds, yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Griffin.

Yes, all in favor, motion carries.

All right, next we have our 911, which is tab 13, page 22.

Uh this is for a total FY27 capital requests of 342,120, all coming out of the 911 fund.

So move.

Second roll call, please.

God, yes.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

Rodriguez.

Yes.

Bills.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

Next we have our Nampus Civic Center, which is tab 14.

This is the second portion of the handouts that were provided for you today.

And uh Council Online, we will get you an updated copy of that.

Uh so the original request was for 400,000.

The amended request is now for $600,000.

Uh, just a little bit of uh history on this one in FY26.

We budgeted $250,000.

Uh, and then this year as well, we received an additional $250,000 from the NAMPA Auditorium District.

So with the if you council decides to approve this $600,000, that will get us to $1.1 million of the uh $1.3 million that is needed for this total project, and we do plan on uh going out to the auditorium district again this year to fill in that final $200,000.

Thank you.

That's gonna be my question.

If there was any reason the auditorium district couldn't distribute more than what they committed, okay.

All right, council.

Mayor.

I'm having a hard time with this one as well.

I I understand the need.

I appreciate the need.

Is it absolutely crucial?

And if it is, what's going to be our return on investment in bookings uh to see this money recouped?

Because this is a general gov expense this year.

So counselor uh Griffin, mayor and counselor.

Um it's a very valid question.

Uh how you proceed on this one.

This is part of the deferred maintenance issue in the city proper, not this not the streets and waterways, but the city itself has its own internal deferred maintenance issue.

And um it's going to be uh uh opportunity for council to decide how to move forward there.

Uh if you've ever uh been in those seats, they've been there like 40 years, they are falling apart.

Um they are not ADA compliant.

Uh as and we've been trying for years to find a way to fund this and other methods to replace those seats and uh use that as an asset to the community.

The civic center itself continues to receive ongoing operational support every year from the city to the tune of about 390,000.

I do not see that changing even with new seats put in.

Uh it might you might get more bookings out of that.

Uh you you might not.

But the current structure of the Civic Center is not designed to be a profit center.

That has not been its um intent because it's meant to be a community asset.

So it did it comes back to the council to decide if this deferred maintenance issue is something that rises to the need of taken care of or pushing it off.

But like I said, we've been probably 40 years on those seats, and this is one issue we keep like others, we keep pushing it off because something else creeps ahead of it.

So this is a council decision.

Yes, Clay Long is at the mic.

Uh good morning.

Uh just to maybe a couple other comments.

I I think we continue to recognize there's more and more competition for these types of venues in the Treasure Valley.

While we may not see an increase, I think we'll continue to see a decline in the use of that facility if we don't remain competitive uh with our compet with the competition of those venues.

So maybe not an increase, but definitely we'll see a decrease if we don't upgrade this.

Probably a foolish part.

Uh yes, go ahead, Sebastian.

You can finish your statement.

Foolish on your part on which issue.

Yeah, you when I you heard me say that you knew you wanted to hear the end, right?

Uh there again, uh, I will say this many many times, probably in the next year and a half.

My personal my personal opinion, but philosophically, I'm not in favor of the city running these type of operations.

To me, that's a private entity capital.

And uh if it's not making uh revenue, our Fort Idaho Center finally is turned around.

But if it's it's not making revenue revenue, I would I would hope, I don't know if it's even sellable, but as far as where it would be turned over to a private entity that could carry on the productions that are being made.

So anyway, that's just my potential foolish statement, but uh that's just my philosophy on that.

Mayor, I had a discussion with Andrew um on that topic a couple years ago.

Andrew, the the manager uh from uh Oakview, and to be to make the civic center profitable would require a substantial capital investment far beyond the seats.

Therefore, the if if you want to keep that as a city asset, the only path right now is for continued city support.

Otherwise, it becomes you can tear the building down, you could repurpose it, you could do anything you want, but I doubt you would get anybody interested in buying it for its intended purpose right now.

So it would have to be a good idea.

And uh I guess I'll carry it even further if it wasn't for there are so many uh venues.

I don't I don't believe a city should be in the competition uh for uh yeah as far as entertainment.

I think there's entertainment around the treasure valley, and I think we just have better ways of focusing our interests and dollars at this point in time.

But that's my opinion.

Yeah, so mayor, I'll just do a quick response.

I uh sometime back when the granddaughter was uh performing there.

Uh I walked uh during kind of the intermission time, looked at all the plaques of all the personal donations and all the corporate donations into that facility 26, 27 years ago.

So part of it is whether we want to stay in the venue business, yes.

The other part of it is is whether at some point, if we're not gonna stay in the venue business, do we stay, do we keep the facility then and let go of other facilities and move and use that facility for city operations.

Umor do we keep it such that it can uh house different you know meetings and etc.

So there's definitely a point when it may be needed soon that there is a committee of sort from the community uh to gather and help make this decision.

Yeah, no, and I I agree, and but if the city does decide to keep it as a as a venue.

To me, you don't let things go.

You want people you want guests coming in there and seeing uh when they walk in, they're impressed.

Uh I was not I'm not sure about all the money being spent, but an example of that is a few of us were over in Calwell for the ribbon cutting of the new sheriff's building.

I mean, you walked in those doors, and you go, my gracious Canyon County has this now.

And I and uh so anyway, anything that the city is opening up, whether it's a rec center, golf courses, no longer the Ford Idol Center, but it needs to be to me.

That's what I was taught when I was in the business world from the parking lot to the entry.

That is key in the experience while you're in there, and also on the way out.

And so uh if we can do that and have the funds to do that, but that's where the decision in my opinion needs to be made.

So um finance's recommendation from this perspective would be I would say approve the budget.

You're approving the budgetary authority, you're not yet approving the spend, and then bring the committee back and say, let's look at the see what do we want to do with this?

Approve the budget and then figure out what if you actually want to spend it.

Yeah, I think it's a good approach.

I think I think we've got to decide if we're hanging on to the facility or not.

And if we are, we gotta continue to maintain it just like we gotta maintain roads and other stuff.

If we're not gonna hang on to it, then we need to figure out the disposition.

But I think it involves community involvement.

Uh so right now I'd move that we approve the capital budget on the uh civic center for a second, second, second.

Okay, roll call, please.

Cog yes, Rodriguez, yes, Griffin.

Yes, Reynolds, yes, bills, yes, all in favor, motion carries.

All right, next we have our fleet division, uh tab 15, page 237.

Uh, this is uh the remaining funding for the fleet building, which is two point or two million six hundred and thirty-nine thousand one hundred and seventy-seven dollars coming out of uh the gen gov capital fund move to approve roll call, please.

Scog yes, Rodriguez, yes, Griffin.

Yes, Reynolds, yes, Bills, yes, all in favor, motion carries.

All right, next we have streets, tab 16, page 241.

Um, as you can see there, quite a quite a lift of list of projects, um, equipment and vehicles.

We do have a total FY27 uh capital request of 24,184,029.

Are there any questions?

Move to approve.

Second roll call, please.

Scott.

Yes, Bills, yes, Reynolds.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Griffin.

Yes, all in favor, motion carries.

Next we have our traffic division, Tab 17, page 283.

Uh all these requests are coming from uh the traffic fund, which is shared with streets, uh, and we have a total FY27 request of 1 million one hundred and ninety-three thousand two hundred and twenty-five dollars.

Make a motion to approve.

Second roll call, please.

Reynolds.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Griffin.

Yes.

Cog.

Yes.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

Now we have our airport, tab 18, page 307.

Uh, this one does include the terminal building remodel um request for a million dollars, 500, which is funded out of the airport fund, and 500 coming from the Gengov Capital Fund.

Uh, they have a total FY27 capital request of 1 million 375,000 dollars.

I think it's it's probably worth noting that the money coming from General Gov is coming from the Capitol Fund, but it probably will not um I don't know that it will be spent in FY27.

The intent, partial intent was to get the design going and then help build the airport fund balance uh to the point sufficient to complete the terminal when if and when council approves it.

So yeah, I think I have a question for Crystal.

Councilman, yeah, Councilman uh Rodriguez, I'm sorry, had two voices.

Yes.

So this is if we're going on the same line of removing money to for other projects.

I am having a hard time with this one because I know we need it.

It's a benefit for us.

Um but I need you to tell me well how much money is coming in from other sources that actually this is just a drop in the bucket for us.

Mayor, Councilman Rodriguez, for the record, Crystal Craig, Director of Transportation.

So we have applied for, I want to say four five rounds of grants for this, and we've been unsuccessful.

I don't anticipate any alternative grants that would allow us another funding source for that.

That means that we have to start exploring either self-funding it ourselves or getting creative through the use of like public-private partnerships and things like that.

We've had conversations about fundraising, similar to how they do at the Civic Center, uh, to see if there's there's ways to self-fund outside of just the city um docket.

But the as it stands right now, all the money in order to either renovate or uh new build that terminal is going to need to come from the airport fund.

So can we wait another year or two for this then?

Uh I mean, I think we have to.

We don't have the funds for it right now.

We have to continue building the funds.

I will say if there is another grant that comes available showing that we have the match in our fund balance, does typically make us score higher on grants, but that's not a guarantee that any grant will get there.

Okay, thank you.

Um David, I'm gonna kind of go with you on this one.

I'm not sure where you're at, but I'll I know you've been talking about it a lot, so let me hear you.

Well, uh, so what I did uh a while back in conjunction with talking with uh Lindsay and Crystal, uh and I went into the marketplace a little bit, and what I was seeing was potentially we could uh put together uh uh private group who would build a new terminal building and uh lease the ground from the airport, and then lease the the terminal building back to the FDO and uh the restaurant, et cetera.

Unfortunately, um the rents that the airport's been charging the current two users uh is substantially below market to construct a building and have a viable uh five to seven percent return on that type of investment, which is low for that type of investment.

So uh either we we would go forward and do it and find new operators or not.

The part that so I I step back because uh the FBO operator um said he couldn't afford any more.

It was a tough go at NAMPA, and he just pulled back to his other sub-operation that he's got at another location on the airport, as I understood him to say.

Um the difficulty is he flew in in a new two million dollar airplane.

So he can't afford his operation at NAMPA, and he's got several operations around the state.

So then you scratch and say, okay, I'm gonna stepping into a bureaucracy or a situation that you know is gonna be difficult to physically get a building done, get it somebody in and occupied, namely also you know, the restaurant use.

It may take NAMPA to get the the terminal remodeled or or rebuilt.

The part that's difficult for me though is having it come from JenGov uh monies.

I I don't think the property taxpayer should necessarily be funding airport operations, and yet I don't have a solution at the moment to offer.

But it's a struggle for me on on the budgeting side.

Just just for clarity.

So when it comes from General Gov, it's coming from General Gov Capital, which only of which only a portion of that funding flows through from the property tax value.

So it's a franchise fees, it's the interest income, it's fund balance.

So partially, yes, but not entirely from the city funds of sales tax and property tax.

But even so, every time I write a check for the power company, I'm paying the franchise fees.

Oh, yeah.

So it's the citizens of Napa who are funding, and there's only a certain percentage who are using the facility.

They enjoy going out and hitting the restaurant.

The restaurateur has done an excellent job with what they have space-wise.

Soon are we going to start building restaurants downtown Nampa and subsidize them so that the restaurant people will do in the atmosphere changes down there?

I mean, at what point does government keep subsidizing and what point do we say the marketplace should take over and and handle the improvements?

So to me it's a little bit of a phil philosophical issue for uh council and mayor.

I guess the the uh the question uh addressed that I don't know the complete answer to is does that investment provide s significant or does it provide enough economic lift across the community to justify the use of those funds in that and I don't know the answer to that question.

I don't either.

That's where you know I defer to Lindsay who's doing a great job at the airport, and this isn't anything against Crystal either.

I think they've been uh doing a heck of a good job with what they've got funding-wise.

Uh if if I may just interject, and I don't know more just.

I know our time.

Okay.

Uh I'm just I'm just curious.

Uh, do we are there any projections if this new terminal or a remodel or where the case is, is that gonna uh bring more economic dollars to NAMPA?

Are more planes gonna be flying in, or are these two million dollar uh planes gonna be uh habitual good morning, council.

Uh Lindsay Johnson for the record.

I don't have exact numbers.

Um we we anticipate we'd have additional a transient aircraft coming in.

Uh something we could evaluate and provide more uh data on for future economic impact for a new terminal building.

This council that would be very beneficial to at least uh you know not I think it's mainly the financial dollars that those transit would would potentially bring in.

All right, thanks.

Appreciate all you do out there, Lindsay.

All right.

So I guess I can make a motion, I guess, if you already uh like the past budget uh operations we've had.

I will pass or approve this budget holding the five hundred thousand for somewhere else if that's what we need to do.

How's that?

Okay, we have a motion and a second roll call, please.

Fog yes, Reynolds.

Yes, Griffin.

Yes.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

So just for clarification, are we taking the airport investment and putting in the bucket of money we have for the 1.1 and adding to that?

Is that the intent of the of the motion?

Pay firm.

Okay.

And then if Lindsay can, I think down the line as far as gonna give us then we decide where we take that money and do a budget amendment.

It's not an automatic to start drawings on a building until we figure out our capacity on these other issues from my perspective.

All right, Mayor and Council.

Next we have uh the water division tab 19, page 319.

And we have a total FY27 request of 7 million 20,618 dollars, uh, the majority of that which is coming from the water fund itself.

Chris, a question.

Yes.

Uh Coyote Springs Well, that was just on our agenda, I believe, and approving that moving forward.

So I'm a little confused that we just approved that, and that's supposed to go to construction or happening.

And now we're saying we're 500,000 for 2027.

Uh Mayor, uh Council President, I'm sorry, I don't remember exactly what the action item was on uh Monday night's council uh uh John and Tom might be able to John please this is Mayor, Councilman Bills, uh John Spencer, Director Water Resources.

Uh the award on Monday was for the development of the well itself.

Um the the pumps, the the pump station, all the auxiliary portions to actually make that well functioning uh still need to be uh designed and constructed and funded.

Okay, so this is just getting the casing in the ground.

That is correct.

resources uh the award on Monday was for the development of the well itself um the the pumps the the pump station all the auxiliary portions to actually make that well functioning uh still need to be uh designed and constructed and funded okay so this is just getting the casing in the ground that is correct and proving that we got water flow that's correct yes okay all right thank you so this other five hundred to then get a building pumps and there etc currently there is funding for portions of that in this fiscal year uh this will be the remaining portion that we need to finalize that full project to build out how soon will you be bidding it to where we know the five is the full 500 needed or is that just kind of a ballpark at this point so that's based on the estimates that we've received thus far from uh the designers okay thank you mayor brunner yes council member so uh john m and m subdivision waterline project are we funding the project here or is this uh are we working alongside a developer mayor councilman rodriguez uh we are funding this project um this subdivision is a subdivision that we uh acquired um previously from united water at least the water portion of it uh so we are the ones that are responsible for maintaining uh the the water system within that subdivision mayor if I could so half of it's out of impact fees is what the chart showing is that right and the other half is mayor councilman bills the MM subdivision is not out of impact fees well I'm seeing on Coyote Springs well 500,000 fund and then it has 500,000 under impact fees for a total budget of a million correct that those are two separate projects coyote springs is the production well the domestic well the MM subdivision uh project that councilman rodrigues is referring to is a a separate project uh we need to upgrade the the water lines within that subdivision my error I see it down here on the other line sorry councilman griffin I think I heard your voice I'm just trying to I'm just trying to clarify uh John common practice I I assume in every neighborhood in the city when a uh water line needs replaced that's the city's responsibility not necessarily the HOA or or whatever organization that is managing that neighborhood correct mayor councilman griffin that is correct and do does the city ever impose fees or dues on HOAs to pay back I I'm getting in a rabbit hole maybe I shan't because we only have eight minutes so I just wanted to clarify this is common practice that we're not actually funding a development but it's infrastructure for a neighborhood mayor councilman griffin that is correct this is a an upgrade to their existing system their system is old um it's been a challenge over the last couple of years to um operate and maintain it under its existing condition it is no different than any of the alley projects we do within the city or within any subdivision where we need to upgrade the pipes mayor uh council if I I think council griffin I think you're asking about HOAs paying for infrastructure that they pay for that through the rates so that's how why we have the rates is they pay they paid for the service and that's how we fund some of these water line replacements thank you council is this subdivision being annexed or is it still going to be enclaved and we're we're just providing service for it.

Mayor councilman bills yes it is it's still enclaved um the city has not grown out to um to the uh limits where it can be annexed at this time so in doing this did we get some type of agreements with the homeowners that at such time that we can annex mayor councilman bills I'm not sh certain of the agreement that was made um in regards to this subdivision okay so uh situations like this where they are not uh part of the city they they pay double their the rate and that's how we kind of make up some of it so it's not they're not paying uh property tax in the city but they are paying more into the enterprise fundament okay okay here five minutes I'm sorry mayor yeah just a minute just a minute I I I got my blood pressure up a little bit so uh we're we're increasing the fees for these folks but they're in the county so why is not the county taking care of this county doesn't have public water system right so yeah I I to me uh city should not be spending the uh the current city uh taxpayers should not be helping out with an I Mark's gonna clarify all this for us before we're blood pressure back then okay council member uh explainers my blood pressure is also through the

So why is not the county taking care of this?

Because county doesn't have public water system, right?

Okay, so yeah, I I to me uh city should not be spending the uh the current city uh taxpayers should not be coming out with it.

And I think Mark's gonna clarify all this for us before we have blood pressure back then.

Okay.

My blood pressure is also through the roof, so I can't wait for this as well.

Mayor and city council members for the record, Mark Stoyer, Senior Director of Development Services.

In these cases of these enclaves, and we're providing water to, we do have a pre-annexation agreement that at some time in the future they will be annexed into the city in the meantime, like Tom indicated, they pay about double the uh the amount of fees for these projects.

I'm not one that's usually for forced in annexation, but this would be an exception.

Yes, we're getting doing all this work.

Yes, sir.

My opinion again.

Correct.

That's is forced annexation a possibility on this property, or do we have to be contiguous with it?

You gotta be contiguous.

This is uh my blood pressure is probably double Darl Bruner's right now.

Uh how many properties in the city of Napa do we have that have a similar situation?

Several that wasn't me by the way, that was.

Uh if they run into a situation such that they don't have potable water, and uh whether they can pull together the financing to redrill a new well for a small subdivision or not, or is the city able to come alongside and help uh and charge double on the regular water rates to help offset some of that cost.

However, it's a great deal of capital that we're laying out, but at the same time of doing it, uh I believe public works has identified that location will also service uh uh future development uh and be helping with capacity uh down road, and that's why part of the impact fee monies is paying for putting in this well additional clarification.

Yes.

Oops, sorry, Mayor.

Get me involved for habit, I'm sure.

I I told my wife she could sub for me plans, so you you're fine.

Mayor, if I could, yes.

Blood pressure sufficient, okay.

It's double sufficient for what we're charging.

I I can't imagine that double on their water rate, even is going to scratch the surface on the cost that the cities aren't taking on for each of these developments.

Should it be quadruple?

Is double enough?

I yeah, we've opened a can of worms for me, uh, and I just want some something to help bring me down here.

So, Mayor, for some clarification.

We purchased this uh water right and this water infrastructure from United Water some years back.

So we currently have an obligation to provide water service to this subdivision.

Um so that's something that was done previously.

Uh so we're just trying to uh handle this situation as we do with anyone else where there is a um uh deferred maintenance need within the subdivision, and we need to um upgrade that system to meet our obligations.

Not not today, I know Tom's gonna speak, but what I would be interested in, I would think the council would be interested, is how many other situations is is Council President said that we also have the water rights in those areas too and are responsible.

I uh I would be very curious to know throughout the city.

Mark just said there's not that many as five or six pre-annex agreements situations like this.

So what I want to mention is that you we're I know you're looking at this individual subdivision, but you need to think about the system as a whole because it's all looped together.

So if this breaks, it's gonna affect somebody in the city, and so we we need to maintain our system so it's uh all of it's working because it's all looped together, all the pumps are all together, so it's just it's it's part of our system, and it's something we need to invest to keep our system healthy care subdivision.

Who is this uh who just solved victory?

Oh, okay, counselor is this subdivision?

Mayor Councilman Rodriguez.

This is um I'd say it would be the southwest uh area of of the of our impact area off of uh I think Lewis Lane is uh one of the streets that's near I don't know exactly the crossroads at this time yes on a specific very specific because now you've got my head thinking about all the development in South Napa.

I'm thinking of Jack's place in way South Napa.

CBH development brand new development.

Are they annexed into the city or is that another county property that we're just servicing our utilities to respond to the councilman's question?

There's uh one project out there that it's not annexed into the city because it doesn't touch the city, but the city uh allowed the developer to take uh services to it, and uh again they work out a uh fee structure deal with the city is my understanding.

Um whether they've got the the city's got the right to annex uh future.

I don't know how those development agreements were put together, but that's there's one or two out in that area.

Well, there's several out in that area um that have gone in both north of Lewis and south of Lewis.

Mark Stroyer Yeah, uh Mayor, Council members, uh the northeast corner of Sunny Ridge and Lewis, I believe those that's C BH development there.

We do have a pre-annexation with that development and also uh I think on uh South Side in Lewis, uh those uh the larger homes right there.

We also have this uh an agreement there as well.

Yeah.

But the ones around the charter school are not annexed in, that's still county ground.

That that's correct, yes.

Yeah, and on the north side there as well.

Yes.

Oh okay.

Actually, uh we need to move ahead and I didn't agree with blood pressure until this morning, so we're good.

Okay, but uh what's what's the action action of the council and you want further discussion?

On municipality utility domestic water, I move that we approve the capital budget.

You have a second I would second I would go with you on this one, David, but I would like some more information on M and M subdivision from the legal side.

If we're obligated or what the long-term cost will be.

How's that?

Yeah, I I uh I I agree, and and as Doug has said, uh these projects individually will still come back before council for explanation and more detail.

This may be a topic you wanted to vote a council meeting or a workshop to, but not necessarily the budget process.

Yep.

We'd call calm calming uh dogs with us.

Okay.

All right.

Okay, thank you.

Thanks, Councilman.

Okay, we I I believe we have a motion and a second, so roll call, please.

Scott.

Yes.

Councilmember Reynolds has left the meeting.

Rodriguez.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

Bills.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

Okay, Chris, we've got quite a sabbatical.

We did, but the good news is we only have a few more.

So next we have irrigation tab 20, page 351, uh, for a total FY27 capital request of 12 million four hundred and eleven thousand two hundred and fifty-two thousand dollars.

So moved.

Second motion, okay.

We've had uh second, so we're ready for roll call, please.

God, yes, Griffin.

Yes.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

All right, next we have water renewal.

Uh tab 21, page 373.

Uh, Florida total FY27 capital request of 31,664, 737.

So one comment I have for uh water renewal.

Uh we're talking about adding on to existing building.

Is what I saw in there.

Um the one part I'm I'm wondering is long-term better deal is whether we keep remodeling and adding on, or whether we should be taking some of the ground that we've we purchased a couple years ago and potentially building a new building and use this building for possibly some maintenance storage issues or something to that effect.

And so I I'm questioning we're we're budgeting and know this is gonna come back, but I'm just raising the issue of whether we keep focused on remodel and keep changing the existing, or are we better off to come out of the ground for you know putting a building up that would take care of the next thirty or forty years?

So I'm just putting that out to the team here that I think you ought to look at that.

Um I realize it'd be a little bit of a walk or potential distance from the actual plant operations, but uh something to be in my mind should be discussed we whether we keep remodeling over and over the existing buildings, John Spencer, please mayor councilman bills.

Uh a portion of this uh funds that we're requesting will go to look at uh the facilities as a whole, the whole site, um, to evaluate whether a remodel is uh the the best and most efficient course of action.

Um Mayor Bruner.

Yes, you're on council.

John, I have a question for you.

The Purdue Lift Station Ugrade Planning, 500,000.

Now we've been directing a lot of money and funds towards the Purdue drain and project.

Did we already allow 500,000 in the 26 budget?

Now you wanted more.

Is that what this is?

Mayor Councilman Rodriguez, uh, this is uh a completely separate project, although it's tied to the Pertom sewer.

Uh this is an existing lift station.

Um as capacity is needed, the upgrades are needed.

It's it's um part of the long-term master plan uh for this lift station.

This lift station ultimately will become a regional lift station um uh as needed.

It was uh yes.

Um but I'd also understand that the developers in this area put some money down on this.

Is that right or or not?

Mayor Councilman Rodriguez, that is correct.

So what's the total price then?

Councilman Rodriguez, we're we're evaluating the currently we're evaluating the need and the best course of action for the upgrade of this lift station.

Um and we have a consultant on board who's working with us to do that evaluation to determine what the immediate needs are and then long-term needs um moving forward uh with overall cost uh associated with that so you just need the 500,000 just as a just as a beginning point then.

You may not use it, right?

Mayor Councilman Rodriguez, we will be we know we need to add um a one pump, so there is funds in this fiscal year to help uh progress with that, but we also need uh more of the the longer term planning for the regional um system itself okay.

I understand.

I don't know if I agree, but I understand.

Thank you.

Okay, do we have a motion area?

This on water renewal, correct?

Yes, correct.

Make a motion to approve second roll call, please.

Rodriguez, yes, Griffin.

Yes, God's yes, all in favor, motion carries.

I make a motion to approve the stormwater budget.

Second roll call, please.

God, yes, Griffin.

Yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, bills, yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

When you're beyond the timeline, right?

Mayor and council, just real quick.

I wanted to uh clarify just to make sure I got the changes correct.

So we were removing the 145,000 uh for the gazebo from the parks, uh the 486,850 from the cemetery for the scattering garden, and the five hundred thousand uh from the airport for the terminal building.

Is that correct?

And we're setting those in a bucket.

Just to clarify, Chris.

Yes.

The 465,000 as well as the 688,000 from previous years.

Is that my understanding?

It should be about 1.1 million.

Holistically, yes.

Uh the 486,000 is just from the FY27 budget.

The 686,000 are from uh fiscal years 25 and 26.

So we're gonna approach that portion a little bit differently.

Through an amendment.

No worries.

Just wanted to clarify it was still uh being considered though.

Thank you.

I just want to clarify our total capital request with those three items being removed is now 104 million four hundred and six thousand five hundred and thirty-eight dollars.

Any questions, council?

Uh follow-up question 392 page 392 in the book.

I wasn't quite clear on this one if it's in the right location or so it's a street deal that's so I didn't know what's happening.

It is yeah, and I can see uh sorry, uh mayor councilman.

Um I can see how this is slightly confusing.

So this is a streets project, but on a lot of our projects there are uh portions that are funded by the different divisions.

So if we look at uh tab 21, that's our water renewal division, and uh in the very bottom table you'll see uh the bottom line is for wastewater for 137,000 dollars, and that's why this streets division project is falling into the waste or water renewal division as opposed to being budgeted under streets and all it it is budgeted under streets as well, but it is just the uh if you look at that first line is this piece coming in under that item, correct?

Okay, thank you.

Chris, I just want a clarification on the uh airport building terminal we approved it, but that's gonna be standing by depending, right?

Uh Mayor Councilman Rodriguez, if I am if I understood correctly, we removed the general gov portion for the uh terminal building, which was the $500,000.

We're gonna put that into a special pot with the scattering garden portion and the gazebo portion to be used as uh council wishes at a later date.

Okay, thank you.

Any further uh Chris Doug or I'm sorry, we're 12 minutes over.

I don't like that, but we we at least we did it, right?

So uh madam clerk, are we okay to have a motion for adjournment?

Okay, I think you guys will be anxious for that.

Who wants to make it?

So move.

So moved.

Second second, all in favor.

Aye.

Aye, all right.

We are adjourned.

Thank you all.

Thank you, Mayor Council.

I know you had nothing better to be doing, right?

Uh yes, Mark, thank you.