Motion.

Second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay.

Minutes are adopted.

Item number one under old business.

Authorization of budget amendments.

For the department of public safety tabled on 930 25.

Mayor Maddox.

Ms.

Herbert and Ms.

Stanbridge.

Yes, sir.

And I'm gonna let uh Miss Herbert and Ms.

Standridge go through the specifics of the budget amendment.

But I passed out to each of you a memorandum that I want to prepare for today because I assumed that there would likely be a discussion just beyond the budget amendment itself.

So 130 days ago, I notified the city council in writing that my goal was to create an executive director of public safety.

The foundation of this recommendation is something I think we all believe in, whether we've agreed or disagreed along this journey that we want to make Tuscaloosa safer, and that if there is a crime fire medical response or even an act of mother nature or terrorism, then our response will be swift.

I don't disagree that any of us don't believe that.

We all are in alignment.

This recommendation since June 27th has been vetted both formally and informally and has been adopted by the public safety committee and the administration and policy committee, has also gone through one vote of the city council.

Um the recommendation that we have made is cost neutral, doesn't increase our fiscal 26 budget, and the recommendation that you see today is a reflection of months of discussion with each and every one of you.

So hopefully today's recommendation fits what I believe has been the concerns of several city council members.

Um I know there has been some concern about the amount of this being vetted, and so what I wanted to provide to each and every one of you is just my correspondence and a couple of other significant correspondence since June 27th.

Um whether we agree or disagree, it's my goal to provide you as much information that I have access to so that this council can make a good decision and debate it and then determine if it's necessary.

So at this time I'm gonna ask Ms.

Herbert and the standards to walk you through the budget amendment, an overview of it from 40,000 feet before they go into details is one of the concerns that has been and probably the primary concern as it relates to the budget amendment, has been overtime.

So as you will see in the budget amendment, we have limited the overtime in the case that someone who is a police or current police officer or firefighter, a sworn officer is selected to that position.

Um, and it's in your packet, you will see the proposed legislation that will allow this position eventually to be exempt under the local law that requires that sworn police officers and sworn firefighters earn over time.

Um again, that's been a process of the very productive discussions I've had with many of you, and it is reflected in the overall spreadsheet.

So I don't know if Ms.

Standridge or Ms.

Herbert are going to present, so I'll let them present this to you.

It's a single sheet that we send it out to them.

So Miss Standard.

Yes.

Um the sheet that you see in front of you with all of the details for um financing for the position is not should not be foreign.

I think that we handed this out at the end of September when we first started talking about the position and how to fund it.

Um the only change from that original document will be the overtime amount that the mayor mentioned has been decreased.

I think previously it was at 30,000.

We have since decreased it to 10,000 as shown on the um page in front of you.

And because of that um lowered overtime rate, we were able to uh functionally adjust the offsets for it, and so I do want to go through the offsets as there is.

Lower overtime amount.

Okay.

Um, and so I do want to go over the uh individual offsets for the ways to to fund this position.

The first one on the list is going to be to utilize the ambulance franchise revenue.

Um, this is the one that was adjusted because over time was decreased.

Previous to now, we had two different positions that we were gonna try to offset their um their salaries and benefits amount with the ambulance franchise revenue.

So because of the lowered overtime, we're only requesting one offset, and that is for the EMS prevention coordinator.

That total amount um would be about $83,791.

And so we would recognize the ambulance franchise revenue and then also increase salary amount for this position.

The other two items that we're proposing to use to fund the position is to eliminate two vacant um two vacant positions that are currently in TPD.

The first one is an auxiliary officer position.

Um that total amount would be the 60,000 one sixty-five, and then in a vacant police patrol officer position that would total about 115,000 dollars.

Um those two positions have been vacant for over a year, and the and when it comes to the uh ability to be able to fund the position, that one, those who are already in TPD, and so really just taking them off the board is all we would need to do for funding.

Um this really will the the net effect of all of these changes would leave about 23,315 dollars available.

Um whether or not that goes back into contingency within the general fund or stays within the salary line item within TPD to be possibly utilized later is is up to the council to decide.

Um below you will see equipment uh one-time costs needed for the position, and that is really just going to be uh proposed to be paid for out of salary savings, which the uh police department has um available, and we can transfer that to their equipment line.

I'm willing to answer any questions.

I have a question.

How long have these positions been vacant?

That's a Miss Herbert question.

Um they have been vacant for over a year, the auxiliary officer as well as the um police officer.

And how many positions does that leave us funded after removing this one?

So right now we have a total of about 22 vacancies.

We have five police officers that are going through the process now for hiring, and we have one auxiliary officer that is vacant, and this excludes the um the school resource officers.

We have two of those that are vacant now.

In terms of sworn officers, how many funded positions does TPD have?

Okay, so I think it was 265.

And if we take this one patrol officer off, it's 264.

Um, did you have any other questions, Ms.

Homan?

Not that no, sorry.

Carly, yes, sir.

Talk me through this.

It if if this job is uh filled in first of the year, say January or February 1st.

Yes, sir.

We're accounting for a whole year of the salary when basically we're talking eight months, right?

Correct.

Right.

So if that if the local bill passes and is signed by the governor, and this job becomes exempt, right?

Until that happens the salary based off the 175 would be paid whatever overtime they're generating, and if they're generating, I don't know how much percentage, you're never gonna hit this 10,000.

I mean it's gonna be not it'll it's gonna come out of 175 basically, right?

Any overtime up until so if there is a local bill that we're because that's really my biggest issue is the overtime, right?

Administrative position.

That local bill passes the governor signs that law, it will immediately become an exempt position or is how does that work?

I would imagine, and this is probably gonna be an OCA and HR uh tag team question, but I would imagine that we would be coming back to um the council as a body to amend and update the position and and also the funding piece that would go along with it.

To marry that to marry what the the position now requires, and then we would also come back to change the job description and adjust that job description.

Well, imagine we probably do that all at one time to make the full picture be um as the state legislature now allows us to.

And if that the session blows up, something happens, and that job that local bill does not pass, then this job will continue to be paid.

Overtime eligible.

Yes, sir.

My my question is if you know because last year the session blew up, right?

I mean, a lot of local bills didn't get passed.

I hope and pray that doesn't happen this time.

But if it does, how how there's only $10,000 put in here in overtime.

So there's really not going to be any overtime pay this budget, I don't think.

So how what happens if I mean you'll continue to be paid?

You'll pay overtime on that job until I mean you don't pay overtime, obviously, but but would you have to come back for a budget revision for that if let's say or would that be covered in the budget of the 27 budget when we're going to RSA and all that, right?

We would have to come back for a budget and then the worst case scenario of all local bills got stolen.

Right.

We we would have to come back for to fix this.

Yes, sir.

To put the reality of what it because I mean really you probably don't know what kind of overtime have to be.

I'm assuming.

I mean, are we assuming that this job's gonna have the same kind of overtime that the two chiefs have now percentage-wise?

Because it seems like it was about 30 percentage.

I would suspect I would suspect year one is going to be again the goal was for it not to be overtime.

The goal was for it to be an exempt employee.

Um but I would think year one, and especially not only I mean as we've discussed, there's gonna be many different things that have to be done simultaneously, is going to be the more intense year, and then year two, year three, as processes get in place, procedures and SOPs are established, those things will then smooth out.

Okay.

But whatever happens though, to kind of get straight by it, whatever happens in the legislative session.

Yes or no?

Well, that bill passes or not, there's gonna have to be a budget revision by it.

I would imagine so.

Because then you would know with certainty.

Either that or we're gonna handle it in the 27th budget when it's proposed.

See, that's where I think you that's just it depends on timing.

I mean, uh honestly, it would it would really depend on timing.

Timing of the hire, and then timing of of if the bill passed or if it did not, and then and where we were in the budget process at that point.

I think that's fair.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

So the $10,000 overtime limit is only for this budget year?

Yes, sir.

Okay.

So Mr.

Holmes, the um, you know, and uh as kind of a recap, this compensation package has uh has traveled through the BOA constrictor in two separate pieces.

And the first piece um was the job description uh that was put together I don't several weeks ago, it moved through uh I think public safety and admin and policy, and that was voted on by full counsel two or three weeks ago.

And that was the piece that had the designation of this job classification as non-exempt.

And that is if I can oversimplify for a lot of us, the sticking point for most of those who object to this is the fact that it is one of the highest level executive management positions, but unlike all the other ones in the city, we'll be paid overtime pay.

And I I think we attributed that to there's uh a local bill that says if if you're a sworn law enforcement officer, you have to be paid.

Why not just remove that requirement from the job description?

Wouldn't that accomplish in instead of all these repealing local bills and this and that and the other, just do like Mobile and Auburn did and say, hey, if you're gonna pee in this position, you set your s your your oath down, you're not acting as law enforcement.

Sure.

Well, I guess that that raises two questions.

One one question, which is which is beyond me, which is whether or not you want this position who ultimately is gonna be kind of the the commander in the field should you have an incident to to be sworn.

Um there are certainly uh some legal protections that come with that.

Uh but ultimately, realistically, if we want any of our current police and fire fighters to be able to apply for this position or to have any desire to apply for this position, if you removed it, they would have to completely give up basically their ability to convert to RSA that we've been working for.

They could not be covered under any other method.

So in RSA?

They so they would be covered under RSA.

If you if you remove that today and we hired somebody they would they would move over to an RSA position but they would they would start with day one credit they would have to be either either retire under the police and fire pension or cash out their police and fire pension they would not be able to go through the conversion which is is a substantial amount of money for for our membership.

Okay.

All right so yeah sure Scott so that is an issue that I don't think we've discussed am I wrong?

I mean I've discussed Walt and I talked about this last week but as far as like us sitting here talking about this you're saying that we cannot change the job description and do this without going through this process or the person if it was internal that was hired could not go to RSA rolling over their benefit in years that are in the Tusclist fire and police pension fund.

I think we touched on the pension the the last time we talked about this I don't think we've talked about it in depth and it's again it's not something you can't do but obviously each choice you make has has consequences outcome.

And you well you wouldn't want to listen I I I don't I also want to ask Carly a question too because I I guess I was confused the other day which I stay confused I guess but I know we talked about RSA or the other I personally do not remember us having a conversation with what you just said which was that that would have probably helped a lot if that is an actual fact that would have helped a lot of this confusion on my end if that had been said from the start that one of the main reasons we want to do this is because do we don't want to disenfranchise anybody that's on the police force nobody would ever want that.

If they want to apply for this job we needed to wait to do this because then they wouldn't have their retirement benefit rolling with them to RSA.

Was I the only council person that didn't hear that I think if we ever discussed that I think it was mentioned that in depth it wasn't mentioned in depth I think it was mentioned that they would have to if we went that route then they couldn't convert their years over I it it was mentioned.

We didn't go in depth with it but I I think it was mentioned in the discussion and I couldn't pension discussion.

Sorry Mr and I believe Mr Crow that we and I I apologize there have been a number of meetings I believe we touched early on that the the need for the sworn was was related to that and that a number of these items could be potentially revisited after the RSA conversion.

I think that was early on I could I could be wrong.

I probably well I can speak for myself I didn't understand that that part of the issue the other question I want to revisit Lashawna and I talked about this I I thought when we had the discussion about how much if you're because I know your RSA benefit is based on your three highest years and and when you're getting credit for that overtime counts one percentage of your salary can can go I mean 20 percent up to 20.

So your your um salary amount as calculated under RSA can be up to a hundred and twenty percent of your base of your base so in this particular example I mean I'm gonna go ish right you're talking about thirty five thousand dollars of overtime based on up to that you mean it could be the most so that would be two hundred and five thousand dollars that could be counted toward your benefit years correct if you earn it if if you earn it that's right only if you run that overtime and then last 10 years that's right and then that number would go up based on what your level is or your what do we call it salary step or where wherever you are in the rank yeah you're stepping and you have 20 percent on top of that whatever that is.

Right correct okay thank you sorry Mr.

Chairman so back to the revision at hand so the the first portion of this compensation package went through council two or three weeks ago I think the second component of that goes through tonight is that right Ms.

Kemp yes that's the assignment of the actual pay grade so um and again I'll I'll leave that drama for there.

This at hand is the the budget revision um under which most of this would flow through Ms.

Ms.

Standridge, the the vehicle um section down here.

Yes, sir.

Are we getting new vehicles?

We're not adding any new people, right?

We possibly could be.

Um I would imagine that the public safety director wouldn't need a vehicle for ability to go out to scenes if necessary.

I agree.

I agree.

So we'll have I thought we had more vehicles than people right now.

Chief.

I mean, if you're hiring somebody new, you need a vehicle in a motor transportation.

Well, we cycle our cars as best as possible, but um, you know, we do have a take our take-home park program.

No, I get that.

I just didn't realize we're hiring anybody new.

However, it turns out though.

Well, this is a new, I mean, uh a new position will require the new.

All right.

Um technology furniture.

Any other questions or comments?

I'll make a comment if I may.

Uh I've talked to several of our legislative delegation, and they tell me they're okay with this resolution.

And tonight I'm gonna vote yes.

I'm gonna trust my colleagues to vote for this resolution, and I think it'll pass in Montgomery if things don't blow up.

I'm gonna trust our new legislative person to make sure that doesn't happen.

But I just want to take a little drama out of it.

You can't take the drama, let you know what I was gonna do.

All right, any other comments or questions?

All right, is there a motion?

Moved.

Second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay.

Motion passes.

Item number two under new business.

District two funding request for Northridge high school.

Councilman Crow.

Yeah, I will give you guys a little bit more.

25,000 dollars.

A little bit more.

25,000 dollars.

Yeah, just wait till you hear the explanation.

Back, I don't know, Carly, my memory is fuzzy, but two or three years ago.

We've we set aside five hundred thousand dollars per district for um infrastructure improvements, yes, sir.

Yes, sir.

And I think the main point of that for the council was paving was uh, you know, sidewalks, whatever, whatever we all want to do.

We had different things in our district.

I did have done multiple projects in my district over the last three years, and my remaining funds that I had of that half a million dollars for several from several years ago was about 49,000.

We've done some sidewalk stuff, we've done some intersection things.

I did a lot of extra paving.

Um, an opportunity has come up that Northridge high school is wanting to build a soccer field for their boys and girls teams there, and I had spoken with Carly about what I would have to do to move part of that money.

I'm leaving the other 24,000 for some projects that we've got um with some intersection improvements and some striping and some stuff that Mike and the engineering teams working on.

So I wanted to ask for permission from my colleagues to move that 25,000 from several years ago into this to give to the Tuscan City schools to work.

There, there's it's gonna be a public-private partnership to raise money for the soccer field.

So what was the funding source?

Would it a good number?

Remember that the $500,000 that's remaining funds that I had left in that money from a couple is it three years ago?

I think it was three.

Yeah, it was the surplus.

Is that legit?

Yeah, he's asking you if he could if he can make it legit.

Um so I think that's legit if she says it is no no no, it is legit if this body says that it's I'm kidding, I'm kidding.

Well, it was available.

Sorry.

Um, so if I if please correct me if I'm wrong, Counselor Crow.

The um there was about I think it was four million dollars that was uh proposed to be used to pay for it was the fire station six, and that the council um then moved into and broke it down into seven districts that each had 500,000 each in them.

Yeah, and then each counselor could propose uh you know streets to be repaved, sidewalks to be repaired, um drain it possible drainage projects, um, and I and from that that 500,000 corpus for district three, there is forty-nine thousand dollars and some change left over.

So Mr.

Crow is requesting to move it out of that infrastructure line, which is 25 into a donation to Northridge High School through to the C schools.

Was there any other funds remaining from the other districts?

I'm sure that there is my I spend everybody amount and can rate them.

That's a great question.

We need to ask.

Oh, okay.

Yeah, I think that removes some of those funds with the streets.

So I walk out.

Most of us, I did mostly paving.

Yeah.

We added extra paving streets in most.

It is, but I was allocated for district.

This is district brewing.

So are there any complications on rerouting that money from what would have been road and sidewalks to schools?

No, sir.

There's no, I mean, again, there was nothing about the the uh original funding that required it to be earmarked for infrastructure.

Um it was part of a surplus um annual surplus transfer amount.

So uh really all we're doing, all we would be doing is moving it out of the RFFI, which is where it currently sits, back into the general fund, and then uh having a funding agreement with the city school system.

Any other comments or questions?

I want to say as a constituent of Mr.

Crow.

And a soccer dad.

Thank you.

Soccer is such a growing sport, and quite frankly, I think all three of our high schools need to be moving totally agreeing in this direction.

And y'all, I will get on my soapbox.

The city schools' athletic facilities are far below what the rest of the state has.

And um I know that when you talk about athletics, people think that comes at the cost of academics.

I don't believe it to be true.

I think two things can be true at once, and they're both very important.

And the more I'm very thankful that you're doing that because our students, regardless where they go to high school and see if they deserve the same sort of athletic facilities that you see in Trustville and Mountain Brook and Hoover and Huntsville, Madison.

Well, the more I think the more kids get involved with extracurricular activities and sports, the better they're gonna do.

Because I think it's gonna teach them time management in it, coach.

It's gonna teach them how to do that, and hopefully it'll kind of work with it.

All right, speaking of time management, let's thank you.

Any other questions or comments?

Not is there a motion.

Second, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Items approved.

Thank you, Carla.

Number three authorizing amendment to the joint funding agreement.

Tuscaloosa County Road Improvement Commission for the Martin Luther King Jr.

Boulevard, Jack Warner Parkway phase three project, Ms.

Standridge.

Yes, and and um I'll ask Mr.

Holmes to back me up and add any commentary as necessary.

But last Monday, um, October 27th, the Tuscaloosa County Road Improvement Commission uh adopted a an amendment to our funding agreement that uh pays for the Martin Luther King Junior Boulevard, Jack Warner Parkway project.

This is the third phase that I think everybody knows we've all been waiting on.

Um we've been waiting on the railroad to to get uh to our agreements with railroad to get to a point to where we can continue with the project.

We are now there.

We have cost estimates uh updated from the engineers, and I think that we are ready to go.

If you will take a look, I'm gonna ask you to look at a very complicated spreadsheet that is in your packet for this item.

Um it is on the last page of the of the packet that you have in front of you, and this will go to the item the next item on the agenda.

Um, this basically lays out all of the costs, um, it uh cost inputs and then funding mechanisms for the entire project.

As you can see, the total project right now is running at about 84 million dollars.

Um, and this last phase three uh is looking to pop we possibly have about another 48 million to pay for um phase three to continue on.

Uh with that 48 million dollars to be able to continue with phase three, we have a little bit left over from the prior bond issuance that we've done.

Um it's about nine million dollars, and so therefore the new amount to bond will be in the neighborhood of 40 million.

Um you can see at the very very bottom of this of the spreadsheet that I know you need a magnifying glass for, and I apologize.

Um, but at the very bottom you'll see it's uh the amount to bond is 39,374,595 and 25 cents.

That is per the cost estimate.

Um obviously knowing what bids can come in as related to cost estimates, we would like to be able to propose that we would uh do a maximum bond issuance of about 45 million dollars right now just to be able to clear us in case anything were to come in over cost estimate.

But so the uh Tesco's County Ground Improvement Commission has adopted the amendment to the funding agreement to pay for this project up to that amount that's listed on the spreadsheet for the total project cost, and then in the next item we're going to be asking for the preliminary bond ordinance to be able to issue the debt for payment of those costs.

What kind of time frame are we talking about?

That's a mic question.

Time frame for bids.

Well, I think if the council agrees to this, that's the next step for us to go to advertisement for bids, which based on the the scheduling of y'all's council's meetings.

You know, we can we could be ready to go to bid within two or three weeks.

Uh the idea is that we'll advertise.

There'll be a I think I've mentioned this before, fairly lengthy uh advertisement or bid process because the pre-qualifications necessary for the the uh the bridge contractor has to meet some pre-qualification requirements.

Long story short, I think we could open bids Marchish, late mark mid to late March, um, and then be ready to give notice to award and uh start construction early summer.

So when would we issue the 45 million dollars of bonds?

We have to bond.

So we we have to have that 45 before putting the bids out, no sir.

So generally, timeline um as we're working it right now, is that this preliminary bond ordinance, if we do it up to 45 million, will allow them to go ahead and start their bid work, their bid process work.

I would like to have bid numbers before we actually sell bonds, um, which is again why I would need the up to 45 million just in case any of the bids come in over cost estimate.

Um we have the the extra wrinkle in this general setup that we have the funding agreement with the TCRIC.

Their funding agreement only lists the total project amount per cost estimate.

So again, if we have any issues coming in up with a bid coming in over cost estimate, we will have to go back to TCRIC at some point.

Um, and that would kind of put a cramp in the timeline as we as we denoted it today.

But generally, what I the timeline that we're thinking of is that if we get preliminary bond done in this month or you know, beginning of December, this is this is also one that has to be validated.

And so we would and Barry Staples is here and can speak much more eloquently to the validation process than I can, but that's going to take about 45 days.

And Mr.

Busby, one additional wrinkle, and the these projects, especially when you have tick rec and validation and are involved, get get to where you have to line up all the pieces well and hopefully thread the needle.

And so one of the additional wrinkles is if we come back over what Tick Rick has authorized in the current agreement that's before you, then we have to go back to TICRIC to update their agreement, which then we have to start over the validation process because we would have validated the uh an agreement with a number less than the full cost of the project.

And so one of the things that we've talked about, and and you probably wouldn't enjoy sitting in a room with a bunch of accountants, lawyers, and uh engineers trying to get the numbers to work right, is we want to be in a situation to open the bids close to a tick rick meeting.

We expect that these these bids to one from opening, we expect to have 45 days to award.

And so if we can open a week or so before a tick rick meeting, then we potentially get in a situation that gives us two tick rick meetings to be able to discuss it, get any updated agreements and still be able to award the bid because what happens if we don't award that bid within 45 days, we either have to cut ask the the low bid contractor to keep their bid open longer or we just have to reject all bids and start over, which is rarely to our to our benefit, certain with pricing.

That's a longer answer on timeline than you were probably at probably really wanting.

So I think that opened.

Well, we're gonna sell bonds.

So overall overall thought on bond sale is that if we are opening bids um in early March, I would like to be in the bond market in mid-March.

In the bond market mid-March.

Okay.

We literally opened bids, and I think a week and a half later we sold bonds.

That's that's the goal again.

You know, again, if something comes in over cost estimate, we got we need to go back to the drawing board.

Barry, these bonds on behalf of TICRIC, do they are they distinguishable in any way from our normal COs?

They are a little bit in fact that from to the market standpoint, no, they're just general obligation warrants.

Market doesn't care.

Um from internal standpoint, we do have this funding agreement.

It's our source of payment, which is we will go validate to make sure it's legal and enforceable against Ticker A.

But they still appear as Tuscaloose geo bonds.

Yes, sir.

All right.

So this so the vote on this specific item is just authorizing the amendment to the joint funding agreement with TCRIC that that TCRIC has already approved.

We just have to approve it from our end.

All right, well, uh are we making a motion on number three?

Yes, sir, on number one.

Authorizing the amendment to the joint funding agreement.

Yes, sir.

Yes.

Okay.

Was there a second, Ms.

Holly?

Yes, second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

That item is approved.

Item number four.

Approval preliminary bond ordinance for the 2026 A's to construct the MLK bond.

Are we ready for that?

Yes, sir.

So in a continuation of the of that conversation, this is going to be the preliminary authorization for us to begin work towards issuing bonds.

Um, possibly that 40 to 45 million dollars, depending on on what the cost estimates come back at.

The preliminary work will be um filing the validation requests.

Um we'll also be engaging with uh bond rating agencies and then also engaging with uh Frazier Lanier on uh their underwriter services.

All right, are there any questions or comments?

Motion all in favor say aye.

Aye.

That preliminary bond ordinance is approved.

Item number five, authorization to submit grant application.

Chief Chief Blankley.

This should be the easiest one on the day.

All right.

Uh we want to send a grant application for bulletproof investment for our police canines.

Um we've got five pains.

This is a no-match grant, and we hope to get them all ballistic guests.

Okay.

Any questions or comments?

Motion.

Second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Item is approved.

Okay, is there any other business please, dear God, not be brought uh before finance committee though?

No.

All right, is there not is there a motion to adjourn?