[1. DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
[00:00:08]
>> JANELLE, ARE WE READY TO GO? GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.
I'M GOING TO CALL THE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 9TH TO ORDER.
WE DO HAVE EVERYONE PRESENT HERE, I THINK, BUT WE'LL HAVE TO DO A ROLL CALL, PLEASE, MA'AM.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER PERETO IS HERE.
>> HE'S IN THE OTHER ROOM THERE.
HE'LL BE HERE SHORTLY. VERY GOOD.
COUNSEL, I'M GOING TO DO SOME SOME CHANGES COMING UP HERE.
LET ME LET YOU KNOW WHERE WE ARE WITH THIS.
WE'RE GOING TO START WITH THE CITY'S BUDGET THIS AFTERNOON.
WE WILL THEN GO INTO THE PARK BOARD'S BUDGET.
THE PARK BOARD BUDGET, I UNDERSTAND WAS JUST SENT OUT HERE RECENTLY TO YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I KNOW YOU DON'T HAVE HADN'T HAD QUITE A WHILE I HADN'T HAD REALLY MUCH TIME TO LOOK AT THIS BUDGET, BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM THE PARK BOARD ON THIS BUDGET.
WE WON'T APPROVE THIS BUDGET UNTIL SEPTEMBER 19 SO THAT GIVES YOU TIME TO KIND OF GET YOUR THOUGHTS TOGETHER AND LOOK AT THAT MORE CLOSELY.
BUT CHILA AND WE'LL HAVE PARK BOARD REPRESENTATIVES HERE THIS AFTERNOON FOR THAT.
>> HOW COME WE DIDN'T RECEIVE THE BUDGET UNTIL TODAY?
>> REALLY I DIDN'T REALIZE YOU HADN'T RECEIVED IT.
WHEN YOU ASKED ME ABOUT IT, I JUST WENT AHEAD AND SENT IT TO EVERYONE.
IT'S NOT ON OUR WEBSITE, BUT ALLY IS WONDERFUL.
>> VERY GOOD. PART BOARD REPRESENTATIVES ARE HERE. I JUST SAW HIM COME IN.
WE'LL MOVE THROUGH THE CITY BUDGET, AND THEN WE'LL START WORKING THROUGH THE PARK BOARDS BUDGET ON THAT.
THEN WE'LL MOVE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE COUNCIL EMPLOYEES FOR THE CITY.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND LET'S MOVE TO 3A, PLEASE, MA'AM.
[3.A. Discussion of the FY 2025 City of Galveston Budget (C. Ludanyi - 1 Hour)]
>> THREE A. DISCUSSION OF THE FY 2025 CITY OF GALVESTON BUDGET.
>> WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS QUITE A BIT ALREADY, BUT WE'RE COMING UP TOWARDS SEPTEMBER 12 AND THEN SEPTEMBER 19 TO MAKE OUR FINAL DECISIONS ON THIS BUDGET.
THE BUDGET IS GOING TO GO OVER SPECIFICS THAT WAS SENT OUT TO COUNSEL, CHILA LADONE OUR CFO HAS SENT OUT SOME OPTIONS ON THE BUDGET AND HAS OUTLINED WHAT WAS INVOLVED DEPENDING ON IF THE COUNCIL CHOOSES THESE OPTION.
WHAT I WANTED TO BE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT IS THESE CHOICES ON OUR BUDGET TO HAVE RAMIFICATIONS ON THE OPERATIONS OF THE CITY.
AS YOU PROBABLY HAVE EXPERIENCED AS COUNCIL MEMBERS, I DON'T GET ANY CALLS FOR REDUCTION OF SERVICES, I GET CALLS FOR INCREASE OF SERVICES FROM THE CITY.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO BALANCE WITH OUR BUDGET.
THIS IS SOMETHING FOR COUNCIL TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.
OF COURSE, WHAT OPTIONS ARE CHOSEN AND WHAT THE RESULTS OF THOSE OPTIONS WILL BE TO THE RUNNING OF THE CITY.
ALSO, I WANT IF THERE'S ANYBODY FROM THE COMMUNITY WATCHING THIS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE COMMUNITY IS AWARE OF THIS TOO ON WHAT THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THIS PARTICULAR BUDGET IS.
THIS DECISIONS, AS WE'LL TALK ABOUT, DOES NOT ONLY AFFECT THIS BUDGET COMING UP NEXT YEAR, I AFFECTS THE BUDGET FOR MANY YEARS TO COME BECAUSE WE'RE SETTING A STANDARD AND A BENCHMARK TO SET OUR PROPERTY TAX RATE THAT WILL AFFECT OUR BUDGET COMING UP IN THE FUTURE, ALSO.
IN OCTOBER, COUNSEL, UNRELATED TO THE BUDGET, BUT IN OUR DISCUSSIONS, COUNSEL HAS BROUGHT UP THAT THEY WANT TO LOOK AT ALTERNATIVE REVENUE SOURCES.
THIS WILL BE ON OUR OCTOBER 24 WORKSHOP.
WE'RE GOING TO START WORKING TOWARDS IDENTIFYING REVENUE SOURCES THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR US IN THE FUTURE.
TO HELP INCREASE THE REVENUE STRING TO SUPPORT OUR BUDGET IN THE FUTURE.
I WOULD REQUEST THAT EACH COUNCIL MEMBER START TO PUT THOUGHT ON
[00:05:04]
THOSE ALTERNATIVE REVENUE SOURCES SO THAT WHEN WE COME TO OCTOBER MEETING, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THOSE A LITTLE MORE THOROUGHLY AT THAT POINT.I HAVE SOME OTHER COMMENTS ON THE BUDGET, BUT LET ME STOP HERE AND I'M GOING TO TURN THE FLOOR OVER TO CHILA. CHILA?
>> IS EVERYONE READY? [LAUGHTER] THE FIRST THING I WANT TO REVIEW AS WE BEGIN OUR DISCUSSION TODAY IS WHAT WE'VE DONE SO FAR ON THE BUDGET THIS YEAR AND WHAT WE HAVE AHEAD OF US.
WE'VE ADDED THIS WORKSHOP IN THE SCHEDULE.
THE LAST TIME WE DISCUSSED THE BUDGET WAS ON AUGUST 22 AT THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, THE WORKSHOP, AND WE HAVE TWO MEETINGS COMING UP, ONE THIS THURSDAY IN THREE DAYS, I BELIEVE, AND ONE THE FOLLOWING THURSDAY.
THE MEETING ON THE 12TH WAS NOTICED IN THE GALVESTON DAILY NEWS, BOTH FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE TAX RATE, AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET.
THERE WILL BE OPPORTUNITIES TO APPROVE THE BUDGET, AS WELL AS RATIFY THE TAX RATE, WHICH THE RATIFICATION IS REQUIRED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE IN THE BUDGET ADOPTION PROCESS, AND IT IS A ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE TAX RATE THAT IS IN THE BUDGET THAT IS PRESENTED THAT YOU ARE ADOPTING.
IT IS NOT AN ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET OR OF THE TAX RATE, I THEN ON SEPTEMBER 19, THERE WILL BE OPPORTUNITY TO ADOPT THE TAX RATE IS WHAT THE PLAN IS RIGHT NOW.
SHOULD SOME OF THOSE ITEMS NOT OCCUR ON THE 12TH, AS LONG AS THE PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE HEARD AS THEY HAVE BEEN NOTICED ON THE 12TH, THERE WILL BE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE ADOPTION RATIFICATION AND ADOPTION OF THE TAX RATE ON THE 19TH AS WELL.
JUST TO REVIEW, WE RECEIVED THE CERTIFIED ESTIMATE OF THE TAX ROLL ON JULY 23.
WE RECEIVED A CERTIFIED ESTIMATE BECAUSE OF HURRICANE BERYL, AND THE INSTRUCTIONS WERE FOR THE WHOLE COUNTY TO CALCULATE THEIR TRUTH AND TAXATION CALCULATION BASED ON THE CERTIFIED ESTIMATE.
ON AUGUST 5TH, WE RECEIVED THE FINAL UPDATED VERSION OF THE TRUTH IN TAXATION CALCULATION FROM THE TAX ASSESSOR COLLECTOR.
PER THAT CALCULATION, THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE IS THE 391198.
THE PROPOSED TAX RATE THAT IS REFLECTED IN YOUR BUDGET IS THE 428382, AND THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE IS THE 430530.
AUGUST 8TH WAS THE PRESENTATION OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET, AND AS I MENTIONED ABOVE, IT IS BASED ON THAT TAX RATE OF 428382.
>> CAN I JUST TALK ABOUT THIS SLIDE FOR A SECOND.
IN THE VERY FIRST PAGE OF OUR BUDGET BOOK RIGHT HERE.
IT TALKS ABOUT THE NEW PROPERTY ADDED, AND IT HAS A NUMBER OF 702,000 OR IS IT ACTUALLY IN MILLIONS.
ISN'T THAT ACTUALLY NINE YEARS ACTUALLY NINE.
IF YOU LOOK AT IT, IT'S REVERSED.
IT'S THE 912702 IS WHAT THE NUMBER IS ON THE BUDGET COVER OR SHOULD BE ON THE BUDGET COVER, CORRECT? THAT'S WHAT WILL BE ON THE ADOPTED BUDGET COVER.
THIS IS THE SECOND NUMBER THAT HAS NOT BEEN RIGHTED, BUT YET EVERYTHING IS BASED OFF THE.
THIS WAS SIMPLY JUST TYPING ERROR.
IT'S THE EXACT SAME NUMBER, IT WAS JUST REVERSED AND OBVIOUSLY, IT WAS CAUGHT WAY IN ADVANCE OF THE ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET.
BUT OUT OF DOUBT, I'M SURE THERE IS OTHER GRAMMATICAL ERRORS, BUT WE HAVEN'T CHANGED ANYTHING ON OUR BUDGET BOOK THAT'S ONLINE AND IT'S BEEN UPDATED ON THE IT'S BEEN UPDATED ONLINE.
IT HAS BECAUSE LAST TIME I LOOKED AT, WAS IT? WHICH IT SHOULD BE UPDATED ONLINE. I BELIEVE IT IS.
>> CHILA EVEN THOUGH IT MAY BE MISPRINTED IN THE BUDGET BOOK, IN YOUR CALCULATIONS, YOU HAVE THE PROPER AMOUNT?
IT WAS LITERALLY JUST A SWAPPING OF THE FIRST AND THE SECOND PART OF THE NUMBER.
>> ALL THIS PARTICULAR SLIGHTLY THE OTHER NUMBER RELEVANT TO OUR DISCUSSION, I THINK IS THE CURRENT TAX RATE RIGHT.
>> IT IS RELEVANT FOR THE PURPOSES OF OUR SETTING THE TAX RATE.
BUT FOR THE TRUTH IN TAXATION CALCULATION FOR THIS YEAR, THOSE ARE THE NUMBERS THAT ARE SIGNIFICANT, BUT CORRECT.
THE CURRENT TAX RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 24 IS THE 408850, AND WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT ALL OF THAT ON THE NEXT SLIDE WE CAN MOVE FORWARD.
WHAT THIS TAX RATE COMPARISON IS SHOWING US IS THE LAST FOUR YEARS, INCLUDING OUR CURRENT FISCAL YEAR 24.
YOU'LL SEE THE TAX RATE HAS DECREASED INTO ALL FOUR OF THOSE TAX YEARS.
[00:10:06]
THEN ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THAT DOTTED LINE, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US FOR FISCAL YEAR 25.THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS AS WELL.
BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEA OF WHAT'S BEING DISCUSSED.
THE TWO BARS WITH THE DOTTED LINES ARE THE KNOWN NEW REVENUE RATE AND THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE.
THE MIDDLE TWO LINES ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE IS THE 428382.
THEN IF WE MAINTAIN THE TAX RATE AT THE 408850, THAT'S THE ONE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE.
YOU'LL NOTICE THAT FOR THE FOUR TAX RATES THEY ARE LISTED FOR FISCAL YEAR 25, THE DEBT SERVICE RATE AND THE RATE FOR THE LIBRARY ARE UNCHANGED.
THE CHANGES WE MAKE IN THE TAX RATE ONLY IMPACT MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS.
THE 428382, WHICH IS THE SECOND ONE FROM THE RIGHT.
YOU'LL NOTICE IT IS AN INCREASE OVER THE FISCAL YEAR 24 NUMBER, BUT NONE OF THESE PROPOSED RATES REACHED THE LEVEL OF THE FISCAL YEAR 23 NUMBER.
IT'S NOT EVEN GOING BACK TO THE PREVIOUS RATE.
[NOISE] DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ONE? ONE OF THE BIG QUESTIONS IS TAXPAYER IMPACT.
I WANTED TO TAKE YOU THROUGH THIS PRESENTATION.
THIS IS A PRESENTATION THAT IS IN YOUR BUDGET AS WELL.
WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE IS A COMPARISON YEAR OVER YEAR.
THE FIRST LINE OF THIS TABLE SHOWS YOU WHAT AN ASSESSED VALUE MIGHT BE, REST THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION, WHICH IS A MINIMUM OF 60,000 FOR US, AND THE 300,000 NUMBER IS WHERE THAT 60,000, ANYTHING OVER 300,000, THE 60,000 INCREASES AS WELL BECAUSE IT'S ALSO A MINIMUM OF 20%.
YOUR TAXABLE VALUE LINE IS WHAT IS TAXABLE AFTER THAT HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION IS REMOVED.
THIS DOES NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ANY OTHER EXEMPTIONS THAT A PROPERTY MIGHT HAVE.
THIS IS SIMPLY BASED ON HOMESTEAD HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS.
BASED ON LAST YEAR'S TAX RATE AT THOSE RATES, THE TOTAL TAX THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PAID ON A HOUSE THAT'S 200,000 OR ANY OF THESE IS THAT LINE LISTED THERE LAST YEAR'S TAX TOTAL.
YOU'LL SEE IT SAYS IN THE THIRD COLUMN, TAX YEAR 23 AVERAGE TAXABLE VALUE, THAT IS THE AVERAGE TAXABLE VALUE AS PROVIDED BY THE COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT.
LAST YEAR THAT TAXABLE VALUE WAS 245678 AND ON THAT TAXABLE VALUE, WITHOUT ANY OTHER EXEMPTIONS OTHER THAN THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION, TAXPAYER WOULD HAVE PAID ABOUT $104 FOR GALVESTON TAXES, CITY OF GALVESTON TAXES.
YEAR OVER YEAR, STATE LAW ALLOWS THAT THERE BE A 10% INCREASE IN THE TAXABLE VALUE.
THE MARKET VALUE, AS WE KNOW, CAN INCREASE A WHOLE LOT MORE THAN THAT, BUT THE AMOUNT THAT IS TAXABLE CAN ONLY INCREASE 10% ON HOMESTEADS.
YOU'RE SEEING THAT 10% INCREASE FROM IN THAT FIRST COLUMN, LET'S SAY, 200,000 TO 220, LESS THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION FOR THE NEW TAXABLE VALUE.
THEN APPLYING THE PROPOSED TAX RATE, YOU'LL SEE WHAT THIS YEAR'S TAXABLE TOTAL WOULD BE.
ONCE AGAIN, FOR TAX YEAR 24, THE AVERAGE TAXABLE VALUE THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT WAS 276227, AND THE TAX AT THE PROPOSED RATE THAT WOULD BE PAID ON THAT IS 1183.
ON THAT AVERAGE TAXABLE VALUE IN THE CITY OF GALVESTON, THE ANNUAL INCREASE BASED ON THE PROPOSED TAX RATE IS $179 OR ABOUT $15 A MONTH.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME ABOUT THIS SLIDE? ONE OF THE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS, AND THIS GOES BACK TO COUNCILWOMAN ROB'S COMMENTS FROM EARLIER.
WHEN TRUTH IN TAXATION IS CALCULATED, THERE IS A PORTION OF THE VALUE IN THE CITY THAT IS CONSIDERED NEW CONSTRUCTION, MEANING THAT PORTION OF THE VALUE IN THE CITY IS NOT APPLIED TOWARDS THE DETERMINATION OF THE TAX RATE BECAUSE YEAR OVER YEAR TO GET THAT NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE WHERE YOU'RE GETTING THE SAME AMOUNT OF REVENUE YEAR OVER YEAR, YOU CAN ONLY COMPARE THE SAME PROPERTIES.
EVERY YEAR WE DISCLOSE WHAT THE NEW CONSTRUCTION IS.
THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT PORTION BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME CITIES, LET'S SAY LEAGUE CITY, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT HAS HAD TREMENDOUS VALUE GROWTH IN THE LAST 15 YEARS.
THAT AMOUNT GENERATED BY NEW CONSTRUCTION IS SIGNIFICANT AND OFTEN [OVERLAPPING] AND OFTEN ALLOWS THE BUDGETARY GROWTH THAT YOU NEED IN REALLY NEW COMMUNITIES.
WHAT I'VE DONE HERE IS JUST TO GIVE EVERYONE AN IDEA IN GALVESTON BECAUSE IT'S AN OLDER COMMUNITY THAT'S BUILT OUT A GREAT DEAL.
>> THERE'S JUST GOING TO BE LESS NEW CONSTRUCTION,
[00:15:04]
ESPECIALLY AS COMPARED TO THE VALUE ON THE GROUND.IN THE TAX YEAR STARTING 21 -24, WHICH IS THE ONE WE'RE GOING TO BE SETTING FOR BUDGET YEAR 25.
THE NEW CONSTRUCTION VALUE IS LISTED IN THE FIRST COLUMN.
THE TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE IS THE SECOND COLUMN.
THEN YOU'LL SEE WHAT PERCENT OF THAT TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE IS NEW CONSTRUCTION.
IN THE LAST FOUR TAX YEARS, THAT HAS BEEN NEARLY IDENTICAL, 1.8 OR 1.9%.
THE EXCEPTION WAS LAST YEAR AT 3.1%.
IN EACH OF THOSE YEARS, THE TAX RATE THAT WAS APPLIED, AND THEN FOR 24, THE TAX RATE WE'RE PROPOSING GIVES YOU THAT REVENUE FROM NEW CONSTRUCTION NUMBER.
YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THIS IS HOVERS UNDER $1 MILLION IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS.
PREVIOUS TO THIS, IT WAS OBVIOUSLY EVEN LOWER BECAUSE VALUES WERE LOWER.
BUT LAST YEAR WAS A LITTLE BIT OF ANOMALY.
BUT THIS IS NOT AN ENTIRE PENNY OF VALUE ON OUR PROPERTY TAXES, AND SO TO THINK ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE ONLY PART OF THE TAX REVENUE THAT AUTOMATICALLY GROWS IS THIS PIECE.
THIS IS A RELATIVELY SMALL NUMBER COMPARED TO THE COST OF VARIOUS THINGS IN THE BUDGET.
I'LL WE'LL COME BACK TO THE SLIDE, BUT THE IMPORTANT THING TO CONSIDER HERE IS IF YOUR PUBLIC SAFETY AND YOUR HEALTH INSURANCE GO UP BY $2 MILLION, YOUR NEW CONSTRUCTION ALONE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO FUND THAT.
SO THE NO NEW REVENUE IS VERY, VERY HARD TO ATTAIN IN THIS COMMUNITY BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF NEW CONSTRUCTION COMPARED TO THE EXISTING VALUE ON THE GROUND.
>> JUST A THOUGHT ON THAT, COUNSEL, I VISITED WITH MICHELLE HAY TODAY LOOKING TOWARDS NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT MAY BE PLANNED THAT WOULD GO ON THE TAX ROADS FOR THIS COMING YEAR, THERE'S PROBABLY VERY LITTLE THAT'S GOING TO GO ON THE TAX ROWS FOR THIS COMING YEAR.
NOW, IN '25 '26, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PROBABLY A BIG BUMP.
IF THESE PROJECTS CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD, BUT FOR THIS COMING YEAR '24 '25, IT'S STILL GOING TO BE A DOWN YEAR FORCE.
I QUESTION FROM A NUMBER OF THE SUBDIVISIONS.
>> BUT UNLESS THEY'RE UNLESS THEY'RE COMPLETE, IT WON'T DO YOU ANY GOOD.
>> TRUE. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON IN BEACHSIDE VILLAGE, IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON IN BEACH TOWN, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE HOUSES.
YEAH. THERE'S A NUMBER OF HOUSES UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW IN MULTIPLE NEIGHBORS NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
>> THERE IS, BUT THE PROBLEM IS TO GET A BIG BUMP IN THE REVENUE HERE FOR THIS NEW CONSTRUCTION, IT ADDS A LITTLE BIT TO IT.
IT'LL PROBABLY STAY WITHIN THIS RANGE FOR THIS NEXT YEAR.
IN '25 '26, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE IF THEY CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD, I THINK, QUITE A FEW BIG PROJECTS MOVING FORWARD.
>> WELL, JUST TO CLARIFY, THE REVENUE THAT WE ARE GOING TO BASE THIS BUDGET ON, THE FISCAL YEAR '25 PROPERTY TAX REVENUE IS BASED ON VALUE THAT WAS ON THE GROUND JANUARY 1ST, 2024.
THREE MONTHS FROM NOW OR FOUR MONTHS FROM NOW IN JANUARY 1.
THE REVENUE OR I SHOULD SAY THE VALUE ON THE GROUND ON JANUARY 1 AND FOUR MONTHS IS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR '26 BUDGET YEAR.
IF IT'S NOT ON THE GROUND IN THE NEXT FOUR MONTHS, IT WON'T IMPACT US FOR TWO MORE BUDGET CYCLE.
>> AND SO THERE'S A LARGE LAG TO HOW THAT VALUE IMPACTS OUR ABILITY TO INCREASE THE BUDGET.
>> I WAS JUST CURIOUS FOLLOWING UP ON WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER ROB SAID.
DO WE HAVE A NUMBER LIKE ON NEW HOME STARTS YEAR OVER YEAR?
IT'S USUALLY IN MY CITY MANAGER'S REPORT.
>> IT'S USUALLY IN MY CITY MANAGER.
IT'S YOUR CO IN THE CITY MANAGERS REPORT.
>> ALL RIGHT. I SAID BUT WHO READS THAT? CAN WE JUST GET A COPY OF THAT?
>> SURE. WE'LL GET TIM. YEAH, WE'LL GET TIM TO DO THAT. YEAH.
>> GO AHEAD, COUNSEL NO THAT WAS MY ONLY POINT. THANK YOU.
>> COUNSEL RECEIVED OUR TABLE THAT HAS PRESENTED OUR VARIOUS OPTIONS AS WE LOOK TO ADOPT THE BUDGET.
WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER THIS IN A LITTLE BIT OF DETAIL BECAUSE THIS IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT FOR THE BUDGET ADOPTION ON THE 12TH AND THE 19.
IN THE FIRST SLIDE, I'M SHOWING THE REVENUE PORTION OF IT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T ALL FIT WELL ON ONE SLIDE AND THEN THE SECOND SLIDE WILL BE THE EXPENDITURE SIDE.
[00:20:03]
BUT YOU'LL SEE COLUMN 1 IS AS THE BUDGET WAS PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL ON AUGUST 8TH, WITH THE PROPOSED TAX RATE OF 428382, AND YOU'LL SEE THE TOTAL REVENUE WAS $82.7 MILLION.COLUMN 2 IS THE UPDATED PROPOSED BUDGET, WHICH ON THE REVENUE SIDE INCLUDES THE CHANGES RECEIVED FROM THE PORT, DECREASING LONG TERM PARKING REVENUE PROJECTIONS TO 1,896,480, AND ON THE CRUISE PASSENGER CHARGES, AN INCREASE OF $175,120 - 825120.
THE TOTAL INCREASE IN REVENUE THAT WE'RE PROJECTING IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS $121,600, AND THAT'S SHOWN IN COLUMN 3.
I'M GOING TO GO DOWN TO THE EXPENDITURE SIDE NOW SO THAT WE CAN LOOK AT THOSE TWO COLUMNS AND NOW WE'LL COME BACK TO COLUMN 4 AND 5.
COLUMN 1 IS SHOWING YOU THE EXPENDITURE PORTION RELATED TO THE PROPOSED BUDGET.
WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE HERE AND WE'VE SEEN IT AT EVERY PRESENTATION.
THE BLUE SECTION IS THOSE CONTRACTUAL ITEMS THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO FUND IN FISCAL YEAR 25.
THE POLICE AND FIRE CBA, THE 1.5% INCREASE TO FIRE PENSION, THE EMS CONTRACT INCREASE TIED TO SALARIES, AND HEALTH INSURANCE AT 10%.
AND ADDITIONALLY, ANY INCREASE IN REVENUE INCREASES THAT INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEBT CONTRIBUTION.
THAT TOTAL EXPENDITURE COMMITMENT IS 9,995,421.
IN OUR PROPOSED BUDGET, WE HAD A 4% EMPLOYEE PAY AND BENEFIT INCREASE FOR CIVILIANS, THAT'S 728 TO 10.
IN ADDITION TO ALL THE OTHER GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES, THAT PROPOSED BUDGET IN COLUMN 1 HAD OUR EXPENDITURES AT 82 MILLION 9042 45, AND IT HAD ABOUT $140,000 DEFICIT IN THE ORIGINAL PROPOSED BUDGET.
IN COLUMN 2, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE IS AN INCREASE TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEBT SERVICE FUND OF $9,700, THAT'S RELATED TO THE $121,000 INCREASE IN A REVENUE SHOWN ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE.
YOU'LL ALSO SEE THE PINK LINE AS ANIMAL SHELTER, GALVIS SENAL AND HUMANE SOCIETY.
THE CITY WAS NOTIFIED A WEEK AND A HALF AGO ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO BY THE ANIMAL SHELTER THAT THEY NEEDED ABOUT $120,000 IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN SERVICES AT THE CURRENT LEVELS.
WHILE WE INFORMED THE ANIMAL SHELTER THAT IT WAS A VERY, VERY LATE REQUEST IN OUR BUDGET PROCESS, WE FELT THAT IT WAS ESSENTIAL TO INCLUDE THIS IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN SERVICES.
>> YOU ARE STILL GETTING A VERY GOOD DEAL FROM YOUR LOCAL ANIMAL SHELTER.
IF WE HAD TO OPERATE OUR OWN SHELTER, WE COULD NOT DO IT FOR WHAT WE'RE SENDING THEM.
>> THEY HADN'T GOTTEN A INCREASE OVER THERE IN HOW MANY YEARS FIVE YEARS, FIVE YEARS.
>> IT'S LONGER THAN THAT. IT'S LIKE 2016.
IT HAS BEEN A VERY LONG TIME. YEAH.
>> IS THIS AN INCREASE OVER EXISTING FUNDING?
>> OKAY. AND DO WE EXPECT THAT TO CONTINUE FOR?
>> YES. JOSH SAYS THAT HE'S GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR THIS IN FUTURE YEARS AS WELL?
>> IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A BALANCED BUDGET COLUMN 2, WE ARE GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTING A CO PAY FOR EMPLOYEES ON THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE, $20 FOR A DOCTOR'S VISIT AND FIVE OR $15 DEPENDING ON 30 OR 90 DAY SUPPLY FOR GENERIC DRUGS.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MOST ORGANIZATIONS DO AND UNTIL NOW OUR EMPLOYEES HAVE RECEIVED THESE BENEFITS AT ZERO COST.
BY IMPLEMENTING THESE CO PAYS, WE'RE ABLE TO SAVE THE CITY $156,000 IN THE GENERAL FUND.
YOUR TOTAL EXPENDITURE BUDGET AS PROPOSED IS 8200000877273, AND THAT LEAVES YOU TO THE GOOD $7,937.
NOW, I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS SLIDE SO WE CAN LOOK AT REVENUE IN COLUMN 4 AND COLUMN 4.
COLUMN 4, AND JANELLE WAS KIND ENOUGH TO PASS AROUND A LETTER, A NARRATIVE THAT BRIAN HAS COMPILED.
THIS IS RELATED TO THE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED ITEMS THAT ARE PRESENTED HERE.
ESSENTIALLY, IT'S A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCESS WE WENT THROUGH AND THE ITEMS THAT WE ADJUSTED IN ORDER TO FIND A WAY TO PROVIDE A BALANCED BUDGET AT THIS LOWER TAX RATE.
THE LOWER TAX RATE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE IS THE 480 OR 408850, WHICH IS A FLAT TAX RATE FROM FISCAL YEAR '24.
SO IT'S THE EXACT SAME TAX RATE.
YOU WILL NOTICE IN COLUMN 4, WE HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF YELLOW AND THIS IS WHERE WE HAVE PUT FORWARD SOME REVENUE ITEMS. REVENUE INCREASES THAT WE BELIEVE CAN HELP MAKE THIS SOMEWHAT OF A BALANCED BUDGET,
[00:25:02]
ALTHOUGH THE CAUTION IS THAT ALL OF THESE ITEMS ARE RISKY.WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THOSE PORT RELATED ITEMS, EVERYTHING YOU SEE THERE IN YELLOW IS SOMETHING THAT WASN'T IN OUR INITIAL RECOMMENDATIONS BECAUSE IT'S NOT HOW WE BELIEVE IT'S BEST TO SUSTAINABLY FUND THESE EXPENSES.
BUT THE FIRST ITEM YOU'LL SEE IS $70,000 INCREASE IN THE CONTRIBUTION FROM THE CONVENTION CENTER SURPLUS FOR SPECIAL EVENTS.
WE ARE PROPOSING TO USE A TRANSFER FROM THE PENSION RESERVE FUND TO FUND THE 1.5% INCREASE TO THE FIRE PENSION.
THIS IS A PENSION RESERVE FUND THAT WAS CREATED TO HELP WITH PENSION ISSUES IN THE CITY OVERALL, AND THERE'S ABOUT $1 MILLION IN IT.
IT'S IN YOUR SPECIAL REVENUE FUND IN YOUR BUDGET.
IT IS NOT A SUSTAINABLE REVENUE SOURCE.
IT WAS ORIGINALLY DEDICATED FOR PENSIONS, SO THE PURPOSE IS ALIGNED, BUT IT WILL LAST MAYBE FOUR TIMES IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THIS INCREASE.
>> OF CONCERN HERE IS THAT THE FIRE PENSION IS STILL USING A VERY HIGH RATE OF RETURN ON THEIR PLAN.
WE ALL AGREE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT DOWN.
WE'RE JUST KIND OF SCARED TO DO IT BECAUSE IT'LL MAKE THAT NUMBER JUMP UP EVEN MORE.
YOU COULD EASILY DEPLETE THIS PENSION RESERVE FUND GOING THIS ROUTE NEXT YEAR IF WE DID THAT.
>> I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN PAST COUNCIL MEETINGS.
WE HAVE BEEN UNDERSTAFFED IN BOTH FIRE AND POLICE.
WE BUDGETED FOR THOSE SALARIES AND PENSION CONTRIBUTIONS.
>> WE'VE NOT BEEN UNDERSTAFFED IN FIRE FIRE IS ALMOST 100% STAFFED ALL THE TIME.
>> ALWAYS? LET'S TALK ABOUT PLEASE.
I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THE EXCESS THEN GETS PAID TO THE BENEFIT TO THE PENSION FUND TO LOWER THAT, AND WE'RE NOT SEEING ANY POSITIVE EFFECTS FROM THAT?
>> BUT IT'S A 30-YEAR PROCESS.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE IT OVERNIGHT.
>> THIS IS FIRE. THE POLICE PENSION FUND IS PERFORMING WELL.
>> SINCE 2019, WHEN WE GOT THE CHANGE IN LEGISLATION, THE POLICE PENSION FUND IS PERFORMING WELL AND IT'S ACTUALLY AHEAD OF SCHEDULE. THIS IS PURELY FIRE.
>> FIRE WHERE WE HAVE HOW MANY FIREMEN?
>> A HUNDRED AND TEN, I BELIEVE.
>> WHAT ARE WE DOWN RIGHT NOW?
>> YEAH. [OVERLAPPING] WE GOT TYPICALLY DON'T HAVE.
>> WE GOT A COUPLE OUT ON COMP AND STUFF, BUT BUT AS FAR AS ALL THE POSITIONS ARE FULL.
>> WHEN SOMEBODY LEAVES THE DEPARTMENT, WE ALREADY HAVE A LIST OF POTENTIAL.
>> WE HAVE VERY MINIMAL TURNOVER IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
>> THEY DO A GOOD JOB OF RETAINING THEIR EMPLOYEES.
>> THEY DO A GOOD JOB. AS POLICE.
>> ADDITIONAL INCREASES, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE NATURAL GAS FRANCHISE, TABLE FRANCHISE, AND TELEPHONE FRANCHISE.
ALL OF THESE ARE SHOWING DECLINING TRENDS.
WE KNOW THAT PEOPLE AREN'T INSTALLING NEW HARDWIRED PHONE LINES IN THEIR HOMES ANYMORE.
THAT TELEPHONE FRANCHISE ISN'T REALLY EXPECTED TO GROW A WHOLE LOT.
HOWEVER, INSTEAD OF DECREASING IT AS TRENDS HAVE BEEN, WE'VE JUST HELD IT STEADY YEAR OVER YEAR.
THERE'S INHERENT RISK IN SOME OF THIS, BUT IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE PROJECTING IT TO GROW, BUT WE'RE HOLDING IT.
>> WE'RE HOPING TO IMPORT A BUNCH OF PEOPLE LIKE MY PARENTS THAT HAVE TO HAVE A LANDLINE VERY SOON.
>> QUESTION. THESE NUMBERS THAT YOU'RE SHOWING ON THE FRANCHISES AND BUILDING PERMITS, ARE THOSE WHAT YOU ARE SHOWING YOU'RE PROJECTING AN INCREASE FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR, OR YOU'RE MAKING SOME ASSUMPTIONS OR YOU'RE NOW INCLUDING THIS REVENUE IN THE.
>> OH, NO, NO, NO, NO. THESE REVENUES WERE IN THE BUDGET.
THEY ARE IN YOUR PROPOSED COLUMN 2.
BUT WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS, WE ARE GOING TO INCREASE THIS REVENUE AMOUNT FROM THE COLUMN 2 ORIGINAL NUMBER BY 70,000 BY A 170,000.
>> IT'S IN THE NARRATIVE, WHY WE CAME UP WITH ALL THAT, BUT IT'S IT'S RISKY.
I MEAN, IF YOU GO BACK FAR ENOUGH, YOU CAN JUSTIFY THESE NUMBERS, BUT IT CERTAINLY THEY CERTAINLY DON'T MEET TREND, BUT WE WERE DOING OUR BEST TO TRY TO COME UP WITH ANYTHING.
>> LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS COLUMN HERE.
YOU'RE PROPOSING THIS OF THESE INCREASES IN THESE ITEMS ABOVE LAST YEAR'S.
YOU WOULD NORMALLY NOT INCREASE WOULD RECOMMEND THIS, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> OUR COLUMN 2 INCLUDES ALL THE REVENUE.
YOU'LL SEE UNDER CRUISE PASSENGER CHARGES, IT SAYS ALL OTHER REVENUE, AND IT'S LISTED A 14.8 MILLION.
WE OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE ROOM TO DETAIL OUT ALL THE REVENUE THAT COMES INTO THE GENERAL A.
>> YEAH. IT'S IN YOUR IT'S IN YOUR BOOK.
THE YELLOW ITEMS ARE ITEMS WHERE IN REVIEWING ALL THE REVENUE SOURCES, THESE ARE AREAS, WE FEEL LIKE, MAYBE MAYBE WE CAN HOLD IT STEADY AND WE'LL GET ANOTHER $17,000 HERE.
[00:30:06]
THE IDEA IS, WE HAVE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH A BALANCED BUDGET.WHILE THESE WERE NOT OUR ORIGINAL PROJECTIONS IN THESE REVENUE LINES, THEY ARE AREAS WHERE WE FEEL LIKE THERE MIGHT BE A LITTLE WIGGLE ROOM.
INSTEAD OF GOING WITH A DECREASING TREND, WE HELD THEM FLAT BASICALLY.
>> INTEREST. NOW WITH THEM LOWERING RATES.
I DON'T KNOW HOW TRUE THAT'S GOING TO BE, BUT IF YOU FOLLOWED THE TREND, THAT WAS A NUMBER THAT WE FELT WE COULD GO UP ON, ALTHOUGH THAT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE THE CASE RIGHT NOW.
IF YOU LOOK AT BUILDING PERMITS, I FEEL FAIRLY COMFORTABLE WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT ONE BECAUSE I ONLY NEED ONE OF THOSE BIG PROJECTS TO HIT.
>> IF MARGARITAVILLE HITS OR TIERRA HITS OR SOLARIS HITS, THAT'LL GET YOU GOING BECAUSE THOSE ARE BIG TICKET PERMIT ITEMS. BUT THAT IF THEY DON'T HIT, THEN THAT'S A BIG MISS.
>> WE HAVE SOME OF THOSE OTHER SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE BUILDING PERMITS.
>> YEAH. BUT THOSE ARE ALL INDIVIDUAL LITTLE PERMITS.
>> IS IT THAT THEY ARE FUNDED?
>> THEY'RE NOT PERMITTED YET BECAUSE THEY'RE WAITING ON THE ACCESS PLAN.
>> ON THE REVENUE SIDE, YOU'LL SEE BETWEEN COLUMN 4 AND COLUMN 5, IT'S THE SAME TAX REVENUE AT THE 4,850 BRINGING YOU THE 38.7 MILLION IN PROPERTY TAX REVENUE.
EVERYTHING ELSE IS HELD THE SAME AS COLUMN 1 AND 2, BUT WE'VE ADDED THIS BLOCK OF ITEMS, IN COLUMN 4 THAT ARE NOT IN COLUMN 5.
THE DIFFERENCE IN REVENUE IS THE 81.4 MILLION IN COLUMN 4 TO THE 80,000,008 IN COLUMN 5.
WITHOUT THESE ADDITIONAL REVENUES, THERE'S LESS REVENUE AVAILABLE AT THIS TAX RATE.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? MOVING ON TO THE EXPENDITURE SIDE.
ON THE BLUE SECTION OF CONTRACTUAL ITEMS THAT IS HELD FLAT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEBT, YOU'LL SEE THERE'S INCREASES IN OR THERE'S AN INCREASE IN COLUMN 4 AND A DECREASE IN COLUMN 5 RELATED TO THE TOTAL REVENUE THAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE.
THE 81.4 MILLION IN REVENUE RESULTS IN THAT 6.5 MILLION TRANSFER AND THE LOWER REVENUE AT THE 80 MILLION IS THE 6.4 TRANSFER TO INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEBT.
YOU'LL NOTICE IN COLUMN 4, THE ORANGE LINE, CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE PAY AND BENEFITS 4% IS EMPTY.
IN ORDER TO BALANCE THE BUDGET AT THIS LOWER TAX RATE, WE ARE UNABLE TO LEAVE THAT AMOUNT IN THE SCENARIO.
WE HAVE ADDED THE ANIMAL SHELTER AT 120,000 ONCE AGAIN BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THIS IS OPERATIONALLY NECESSARY.
WE'VE ALSO MADE ADDITIONAL CUTS IN COLUMN 4 ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE.
YOU'LL SEE A DECREASE IN THE ISLAND TRANSIT BUDGET BY $300,000.
THERE WAS A PAUSE IN FEDERAL FUNDING AFTER 2020 AS A RESULT OF THE CENSUS INFORMATION AND THE WAY THINGS ARE BEING CALCULATED.
THE CITY MA PULLED BACK ON SOME OF THOSE FIXED ROUTE OPERATIONAL SERVICES THAT ISLAND TRANSIT PROVIDED IN THE MEANTIME FOR LITTLE SAVINGS.
IF WE KEEP THIS $300,000 OUT OF THE BUDGET, WE WILL SUSTAIN, WE WILL MAKE PERMANENT THESE LIMITATIONS IN THE FIXED ROUTES.
THESE ROUTES WILL NOT COME BACK, ESSENTIALLY. WE'RE NOT FUNDING.
>> THIS ALLOWS US FROM PUTTING MONEY AWAY FOR FUTURE CAPITAL ON TRANSIT, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO.
>> BUT WE DID RECEIVE THE FUNDING THIS YEAR.
>> BUT THAT'S OPERATIONAL, IT'S NOT CAPITAL.
>> IF YOU WERE TO JUST WITH THE FUNDING WE RECEIVED, TO RESTORE THE REDUCTIONS THAT WE TOOK BEFORE, WE NEED THE $300,000.
BUT BY JUST TAKING THE FEDERAL DOLLARS, AND IF WE DON'T RESTORE THAT, YOU CAN SAVE THE 300,000, KEEP OPERATIONS THE WAY THEY ARE TODAY, WHICH ELIMINATED SOME WEEKEND SERVICE AND SOME LATE HOUR SERVICE, AND THAT SAVED US 300,000.
IF YOU GO BACK WITH THE FEDERAL DOLLARS, THAT 300,000 IS NEEDED IF YOU RESTORE ALL THOSE SERVICES.
WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS WE DON'T RESTORE THEM.
TO SAVE THIS 300,000, WE WOULD NOT RESTORE THOSE SERVICES.
>> ARE WE LOOKING AT WHAT THE TREND IS NOW ACROSS TEXAS, WHICH IS TO GO TO MORE LIKE ON DEMAND TRANSIT, WHICH IS WHAT THE GULF COAST TRANSIT IS DOING.
>> THAT'S A VERY EXPENSIVE UNSUSTAINABLE MODEL, BUT YES.
WE'VE LOOKED AT IT, AND JAMES IS TRACKING IT VERY CLOSELY.
[00:35:01]
>> WE HAVE A DIFFERENT SYSTEM HERE, SO I WANT TO WE DO A LOT OF THAT THROUGH OUR RESPONSE TO MY RESPONSE ALREADY.
>> I MAKE A COMMENT ON THE COLA.
THAT IS ONE OF THE AREAS THAT I FEEL THESE CIVILIANS NEED TO HAVE A COST OF LIVING INCREASE.
WE LOOK BACK AT THE LAST FOUR YEARS AND DON'T GET ME WRONG, WHAT I'M GETTING READY TO SAY, IT'S WELL DESERVED.
THE POLICE AND FIRE HAVE BEEN AVERAGING ALMOST TRIPLE OR MORE WHAT THE CIVILIANS HAVE BEEN GETTING OVER THESE LAST FOUR YEARS.
OUR CIVILIANS ARE OUT THERE AS THE FIRST RESPONDERS, BUT OUR CIVILIANS ARE OUT THERE WORKING OVERNIGHT AND EXTRA EXTRA TO KEEP THIS CITY SAFE AND MOVING FORWARD.
THIS IT THIS COLUMN 4 DOES NOT HAVE ANY COST OF LIVING INCREASE FOR THE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES.
>> I WOULD AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I THINK WE DO NEED TO LOOK AT A CALL, PERHAPS THREE, BECAUSE I THINK THE INFLATION RATE, MAYBE JAYSON COULD CONFIRM THIS.
I THINK IT WAS 2.9%, SO MAYBE IF WE LOOKED AT THREE.
AS I LOOK AT OTHER DEPARTMENTS WHERE WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO SOME SHAVING DOWN, I THINK WE COULD DO THE COLA EVEN WITH THE DECREASED TAX RATE.
>> WELL, YOU'RE STILL A DEFICIT BUDGET WHEN YOU DO THAT.
>> I THINK WE CAN GET PAST THAT.
>> WE ASK COUNCIL MEMBERS TO MEET WITH US, AND ALL OF YOU HAVE DONE THAT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COUNCIL MEMBER ROB TO TALK ABOUT THOSE.
>> I MET WITH YOU ONCE, AND I'M SORRY I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO GET BACK THERE, BUT WE CAN DO IT BEFORE THURSDAY.
SINCE I HAVE NOT BEEN BACK IN MY HOUSE SINCE BURL, MY TIME SCHEDULE AND MY COMMITMENTS WITH THE HDAC HAVE BEEN QUITE FULL.
>> I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND THE 4% COLA AND FOR THESE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES.
ONE OTHER THOUGHT ON THIS, HERE WE ON THESE THEY'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE HEALTH INSURANCE AND HEALTH INSURANCE DECREASE OF CITY CONTRIBUTION.
IN MY MIND, IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO GIVE THESE INDIVIDUALS A COLA RAISE, WE CAN'T PUT MORE BURDEN ON THEM FINANCIALLY IN THE CIVILIAN FOR WHAT THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR THESE THINGS, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BUDGET IS DOING HERE.
>> IF WE DO THESE, THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO ACHIEVE THE NUMBERS WITH, I MEAN, IT'S EVERY YEAR WHEN WE GO THROUGH THIS AND BUDGETS, I COULD ALMOST WRITE EXACTLY WHAT BRIAN'S GOING TO SAY.
HE'S GOING TO SAY, OH, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CUT POLICE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CUT.
>> I HAVE NOT SAID WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CUT POLICE.
>> BECAUSE YOU LEGALLY CAN'T DO IT DOWN BY LEGISLATION.
BUT HE WILL SAY WE HAVE TO CUT THE COLA, WE HAVE TO CUT TRANSIT.
WE HAVE TO CUT PARKS, WE HAVE TO CUT THIS, WHERE THERE ARE OTHER AREAS WHERE WE COULD LOOK AT ADAPTING OUR BUDGET.
>> WELL, IN THIS COUNSEL, WE'RE DOWN TO THE 11TH HOUR HERE.
I'M GOING TO TELL COUNSEL THIS, YOU FEEL THAT WE CAN MAKING STATEMENTS THAT WE CAN FIND THAT MONEY SOMEWHERE ELSE, I WANT TO KNOW SPECIFICALLY WHERE YOU WANT TO FIND IT.
>> WELL, I AM GOING I'M GOING THROUGH DEPARTMENT, I'LL BE GLAD TO SIT WITH MANAGEMENT AND GO THROUGH IT.
>> I'M READY FOR YOU TO EXPLAIN THIS TO THE COUNCIL ON AREAS.
>> I'M JUST GOING TO MAKE SOME GENERAL STATEMENTS NOW.
BUT IF YOU GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE BUDGET, AND NOT TALKING ABOUT ENTERPRISE FUNDS, IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT BUDGET WAS FROM 2004, TO WHAT THE ESTIMATED BUDGET IS, TO WHAT THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS, MOST CROSS BOARD, THE ESTIMATED BUDGET IS LESS TO WHAT WAS IN THE BUDGET.
WE ACTUALLY ARE LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL BUDGET, WE ARE LOOKING AT THE AMENDED BUDGET BECAUSE WE'VE MADE MULTIPLE AMENDMENTS WHERE WE'VE TRANSFERRED FUNDS.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE ACTUAL VERSUS WHAT THEY ESTIMATED, ALMOST IN EVERY CASE, THERE ARE EXTRA FUNDS THAT ARE LEFT THAT WOULD CARRY FORWARD.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE BUDGETED AMOUNT, THE YEAR COMING UP.
IT'S A LARGER AMOUNT THAN WHAT THEY WERE BUDGETED FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
I JUST THINK WE NEED TO DO A LITTLE SCRUBBING.
I ALSO THINK THERE'S SOME AREAS OF REDUNDANCY IN MIDDLE MANAGEMENT.
WELL, YOU ASKED ME TO TALK ABOUT WHAT AND I'M TALKING.
[00:40:05]
>> WHERE DO YOU FEEL THERE'S REDUNDANCY?
>> WELL, ONE THAT POPPED INTO MY HEAD, LIKE THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT IN THAT LINE DOWN THERE.
I MEAN, WE HAVE A DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY MANAGER.
WE HAVE A EMERGENCY MANAGER WHO IS THE HEAD.
I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING SUBSTANTIAL DOLLAR, AND THEY'RE ALSO RETIRED POLICE WHO HAVE BEEN BROUGHT BACK, SO WE ALSO DOUBLE DIPPING IN PENSIONS.
I JUST THINK THERE ARE OTHER AREAS WHERE WE COULD LOOK.
>> YOU DOUBLE DIPPING IN PENSIONS.
>> IT'S NO THERE ON CIVILIAN BUT PENSION.
>> THEY'RE COLLECTING POLE PENSION.
I MEAN THAT THERE'LL BE ON TWO PENSIONS.
>> I AGREE ON THAT. I'M NOT SAYING THAT.
I'M JUST SAYING I THINK THERE'S OTHER AREAS WHERE WE COULD LOOK.
IT IT'S ALWAYS OUR CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES WHO WE LOOK AT CUTTING THINGS FROM FIRST.
>> THEY'RE ALL STAFF REMEMBER, THEY'RE ALL THAT'S LEFT.
>> YOU CAN'T SPEND MONEY LIKE DRUNKEN SAILORS ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND THEN TELL THE CIVILIANS, OH, IT'S MANAGEMENT.
THEY DON'T HAVE A VOICE AT THE TABLE WITH YOU GUYS.
THAT WE CAN LOOK AT SCRUBBING SOME OTHER AREAS.
I WILL HAVE TIME TO MEET WITH YOU BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING.
>> I WANT TO CLARIFY SOME THINGS, DON, I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO WEIGH IN ON THIS.
DON, AS A COUNSEL, ACCORDING TO THE CHARTER, WE CAN'T TELL BRIAN WHERE TO MAKE CUTS IN THE PERSONNEL.
YOU CAN GIVE HIM HIGH OVERVIEW POLICY DECISIONS FOR HIM TO FOLLOW BUDGET OFFICER UNDER THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
>> IF THERE'S PROGRAMS YOU NO LONGER WISH TO PURSUE? THAT'S THAT'S GOOD POLICY DISCUSSION.
>> DO YOU HAVE PROGRAMS YOU'D LIKE TO PURSUE ON THAT?
>> I WILL HAVE THIS DISCUSSION WITH THEM THIS WEEK.
ARE YOU ASKED ME TO BRING OUT THE THINGS I'M LOOKING AT? THAT'S THE AREAS THAT I'M LOOKING AT.
>> KEEP IN MIND UNDERSPENDING IS WHAT GETS YOU TO WHERE YOU ARE WITH YOUR FUND BALANCE, AND YOU ARE GOING TO BE DROPPING IN YOUR FUND BALANCE QUITE A BIT.
YOU HAVE TO REBUILD THAT FUND BALANCE, OR YOU'RE GOING TO BE IN.
IF WE HADN'T HAD THAT FUND BALANCE, WE WOULD BE IN A WORLD OF HURT AFTER BARREL AND THANK GOD, THIS ONE IS NOT NECESSARILY HEADING TOWARDS US IF YOU HAD TWO IN ONE YEAR.
IF YOU, WE USE THAT VACANCY RATE, AND I'D REALLY LOVE TO HAVE ALL THE POLICE OFFICERS FILLED.
THAT WOULD BE THE MOST IDEAL SITUATION.
BUT GIVEN THAT, THAT'S COVERED THEIR OVERTIME.
YOU CAN'T JUST LOOK AT LITTLE PIECES OF IT BECAUSE THEY HAVE TOTALLY OVERSPENT ON OVERTIME BECAUSE OF IT.
>> I HAVE A LITTLE PIECES OF IT. I'M LOOKING.
I'VE ACTUALLY SPENT THE TIME TO GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE BUDGET BOOK, WHICH IS HOW I FOUND SOME OF THE LITTLE TYPOS, WHICH ALSO MAKES YOU WONDER HOW MANY OTHER LITTLE TYPOS ARE.
>> BOTTOM LINE IS, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A COLA OF 4% FOR OUR CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES, PERIOD.
>> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE COLA.
>> NUMBER 2, WE NEED TO TAKE OUT THOUGH TO OFFSET THAT PARTIALLY.
THIS 103,000 FOR THE HEALTH INSURANCE $75 IN THE 298, I WOULD LIKE NOT TO PUT THAT BURDEN ON THESE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES.
>> I'LL MAKE A COMMENT THERE BECAUSE ALL OF US HAVE INSURANCE WITH SOME EMPLOYER, AND WE ALL PAY A CO-PAY.
>> I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE CO-PAY.
>> RIGHT NOW, OUR PLAN DOES NOT INVOLVE CO-PAYMENT.
>> NO, BUT THAT'S NOT ONLY ONE.
>> THERE ARE CO-PAYS ON SOME THINGS, JUST NOT A BASIC CPC VISIT OR YOUR GENERIC DRUG.
THAT'S THE ONLY CO-PAY CHANGE WE'RE MAKING.
THE EMPLOYEE MAX CONTRIBUTION, THAT'S THE MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE INSURANCE PER EMPLOYEE.
CURRENTLY THEY PAY 57 50, AND THIS WOULD BE INCREASING IT TO 75, WHICH IS THE MAX ESTABLISHED BY THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING UNIT.
>> I THINK THAT'S A DEAL. NOW, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THE MAYOR THAT IT'S A HIT TO THE EMPLOYEES IF THEY DON'T GET A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT ON TOP OF IT.
>> I THINK THEY SHOULD GET A COST.
>> NO, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO PUT THAT ON ME, RICKY BOBBY.
>> WELL, WE CAN BE CHILDISH ABOUT IT, BUT WE CAN ALSO BE PREMATURE ABOUT IT AND ADDRESS THIS IN A MANNER THAT WE CAN GO THROUGH THESE NUMBERS APPROPRIATELY.
IF THERE ARE PROGRAMS OR SERVICES THAT YOU FEEL WE'RE DOING EITHER INEFFICIENTLY OR THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE REDUCED.
I MEAN, YOU GUYS SET THE POLICIES AND THE RULES AND WE ENFORCE THEM, AND WE GIVE YOU THE BUDGET TO DO THAT.
IF THERE'S SOMETHING WE'RE DOING THAT'S NOT CORRECT, JUST LET US KNOW, WE'RE HAPPY TO GO THROUGH THAT, LOOK AT IT WITH YOU.
[00:45:01]
>> JUST TO BE CLEAR ABOUT CIVILIAN STAFF COMPENSATION PACKAGES.
I ASSUME THEY ALSO INCLUDE MERIT PAY OVER TOP OF THAT?
>> THE VAST NUMBER OF THE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES, THE ONLY WAY THAT THEY GET A RAISE IS WITH THE COLA.
>> SEVERAL YEARS AGO, WE DID A MARKET SURVEY AND WE DID SOME WORK ON IT THAT WAY.
BUT THE MARKET SURVEY ANTICIPATED COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS KEEPING UP WITH IT AND WE ANALYZED THE MARKET.
WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT EFFECTIVELY UP TO THIS POINT.
WE'VE BEEN CLOSE. WE'VE HAD SOME GOOD YEARS.
>> THEY'VE AVERAGED AROUND A LITTLE OVER 2% OVER THESE LAST FOUR OR FIVE YEARS, POLICE AND FIRE UP AROUND 6% OR MORE.
>> DOES COLA INCLUDE EVERYONE IN THE CITY?
>> ALL CIVILIAN, INCLUDING MANAGEMENT.
>> CORRECT. COUNCILMAN PORRETTO.
>> I UNDERSTAND THE SERVICES HAVE TO BE DECREASED TO SOME EXTENT, BUT I'M LOOKING AT THINGS LIKE, THIS IS SOMETHING I MENTIONED WHEN WE FIRST GOT STARTED, NOT WITH THE BUDGET, BUT COUNCIL.
WE'RE GOING INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IS THAT BUDGETED? DID WE BUDGET FOR THE COST OF WHAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS GOING TO BE?
>> YES. THERE'S A CARRY FORWARD OF $250,000 FOR THE CITY'S PORTION, BUT THEY ARE APPLYING FOR GRANTS FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WE SHOULD KNOW I BELIEVE OCTOBER, NOVEMBER ABOUT THAT FUNDING.
WE'RE PRETTY CERTAIN THAT IT'S FUNDING WE'RE RECEIVING, AND SO MOST OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WILL BE COVERED BY GRANTS.
>> WE GOT CONSULTANTS AND THINGS THAT WE'RE PAYING FOR EVALUATING THE CITY.
ARE SOME THINGS THAT MAYBE THERE THAT WE COULD LOOK AT NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH OR?
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE ANY SCHEDULE FOR THIS YEAR UNLESS IT'S [OVERLAPPING].
>> ESPECIALLY NOT IN THE GENERAL FUND.
>> MOST OF YOUR CONSULTANTS ARE IN YOUR ENTERPRISE FUNDS AND THEY'RE SPEAKING TO THE WATER SEWER MASTER PLAN, THAT THING, AND THOSE ARE ALREADY COSTS THAT ARE BAKED IN.
THERE'S NOBODY REALLY IN THE GENERAL FUND THAT'S PERFORMING ANY CONSULTING SERVICES.
WITH SOME OF THE GRANTS, WE HAVE IT, BUT IT'S COVERED BY THE GRANT REVENUE, AND SO THERE'S NOT REALLY [OVERLAPPING].
>> I CAN'T THINK OF ANY OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
>> IT'S PENSION, AND WE PAY FOR THAT OUT OF THE PENSION FUND.
>> THAT'S WHAT THE PENSION RESERVE FUND IS FOR.
WE DO THAT FOR ACTUARIAL STUDIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WE DO THAT TO HELP THE PENSIONS, ESPECIALLY POLICE AND CIVILIAN, BECAUSE THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF MONEY, SO WE USE THAT FUND TO HELP OFFSET THOSE COSTS FOR THE PENSION PLANS.
>> I WANT TO BRING UP TWO OTHER THOUGHTS TOO THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT IN THIS BUDGET.
I'M GOING TO GO TO COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS.
SHE HAS REQUESTED FIREWORKS FOR JUNE 10.
>> YES. WELL, IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY AS A LINE ITEM, BUT THAT'S PART OF THE HOT FUNDING, YES.
>> SECOND IS, I HAVE AN INTEREST IN LOOKING AT THIS WHOLE FLOCK CAMERA SITUATION.
I THINK IT HAS MERIT FOR THIS CITY.
I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL NOT ONLY TO OUR POLICE, BUT TO THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE HERE.
IF THAT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THIS.
>> IT'S NOT INCLUDED IN HERE AT THIS POINT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WE WERE TALKING ABOUT LOOKING AT HOT TAX WITH THE GRANT TO THE COUNTY AND THAT FELL THROUGH.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HOT TAX?
>> I BELIEVE IT'S SOMETHING WE COULD EXPLORE, YES.
>> WELL, AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT MAYBE $30,000-$40,000?
>> NO. THE ESTIMATE CAME BACK IN [OVERLAPPING].
>> LAST YEAR WAS CLOSER TO $100,000.
>> WE HAVEN'T COMPLETED IT YET, SO WE REALLY DON'T HAVE A COST.
>> WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A REAL SCOPE YET. WE DON'T KNOW.
>> WELL, I KNOW I WOULD BE ABLE TO, BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY BEEN A GROUP OF MY CITIZENS HAVE CREATED A NOT-FOR-PROFIT TO SUPPORT POLICE OFFICERS, AND I'M SURE THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO DONATE A PERCENTAGE OF THAT, BECAUSE EVERYONE IS VERY MUCH IN SUPPORT OF THE FLOCK CAMERAS.
WE HAVE THEM IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT HAS BEEN SUCH A SUCCESS.
>> THERE'S OTHER SOURCES FOR THAT.
ONE OF THE THINGS SHEILA AND I TALKED ABOUT EARLIER ON WAS, WE HAVE A LOT OF SEIZURE FUNDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN PD THAT ARE VERY HARD TO SPEND ON, EXCEPT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT NEEDS.
THEY'RE NON RECURRING, BUT FOR THE CAPITAL PORTION OF FLOCK, THAT WOULD BE A BIG HELP.
I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE FLOCK CAMERAS AT THIS POINT.
IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU GUYS WANT TO PURSUE, I BELIEVE THERE'S FUNDS AVAILABLE IN SOME OF THESE LITTLE SMALLER FUNDS.
>> WELL, I WANT TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT THOSE, AS WE'RE DISCUSSING THIS BUDGET, THAT WE SOME WAY OR ANOTHER COVER IF COUNCIL WANTS TO MOVE THAT WAY,
[00:50:02]
THE PURCHASE OF A CERTAIN [OVERLAPPING].>> WE'LL MAKE SURE WE OUTLINE THAT IN THE PD'S BUDGET.
>> CAUTION, WE HAVEN'T COMPETED IT YET.
YOU'RE SAYING FLOCK, I THINK YOU'RE USING THAT GENERICALLY.
>> FOR A CAMERA SYSTEM, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY FLOCK.
IT'S WHOEVER THE MOST COMPETITIVE BID IS WHEN THE CITY [OVERLAPPING].
>> I THINK THEY ACTUALLY HAVE SOME THINGS THAT QUALIFY THEM AS A SOLE SOURCE.
>> IT DEPENDS ON THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE TRY TO PROCURE.
THERE'S CERTAINLY NOT A SOLE SOURCE.
>> WELL, I THINK WHAT MY THOUGHT IS, I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO SEE A 4% COLA FOR THESE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ABOUT TAKING OUT THE EMPLOYMENT MAX PER EMPLOYEE, $75 IN THE OTHER.
BELOW THAT, HEALTH INSURANCE DECREASE OF 4%.
SO WE'RE NOT GIVING THEM A COLA AND THEN TAKING IT AWAY FROM THEM WITH THESE EXTRA COST IN THAT.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE JUNETEENTH FIREWORKS DISPLAY INCLUDED IN THAT BUDGET.
I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT WOULD BE A GUESSTIMATE ON STARTING WITH A CAMERA VIDEO SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM FOR THE CITY.
>> IT'S A VERY EFFECTIVE TOOL.
>> ALSO, I AGREE WITH THE COLA.
I WAS LOOKING AT THE INCREASE TO $75 A MONTH, AND I GUESS IF I SUBTRACT THE TWO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MID SALARY IS FOR A CIVILIAN, BUT YOU'RE ABOUT AT THAT 4%, WHICH WE USED TO GET EXCITED WHEN WE GOT A 3% RAISE, BUT THEN WHEN YOU RAISE INSURANCE, THEN YOU REALLY DON'T GET MUCH OF AN INCREASE.
I LIKE THE IDEA OF NOT RAISING THAT TO THE $75 IF WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THE INCREASE OF THE COLA.
>> WE HAVE A VERY GOOD INSURANCE PLAN.
OUR EMPLOYEES DO GET THE BENEFIT OF A VERY GOOD INSURANCE PLAN.
>> ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW, I THINK, CRAIG, HELP ME OUT HERE IS, THE CHANGES TO THAT 131,289 WOULD ADD BACK 298,800, 103,000, 156,700, BUT THE 300 WOULD STAY. IS THAT RIGHT?
>> THAT WOULD STAY. BUT WE'D ALSO ADD 4% COLA, WHICH IS NOT SHOWN HERE.
>> THAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN COLUMN 4. THAT IS CORRECT.
>> IT'S THOSE THREE ITEMS THAT WOULD BE ADDED BACK TO THAT NUMBER, THAT 131,289, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> NO, WE WOULD HAVE TO SUBTRACT, I GUESS, THE ADDITION OF 103 AND 298.
>> THOSE TWO PLUS THE 4% COLA?
>> WELL, THAT 4% COLA IS THE 298.
>> THE 4% COLA WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE ORANGE LINE.
>> WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT THE 728 BACK IN.
>> THAT IS CORRECT. I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE 4% DECREASE OF CONTRIBUTION.
MAYOR, WHAT THAT IS THE INDUSTRY NORM, AND PER OUR CONSULTANT, THEY'RE RECOMMENDING WE BUDGET 10% INCREASE IN THE HEALTH PLAN.
>> THIS $298,000 IS A REDUCTION OF THAT FROM 10-6, WHICH IS BASED ON EXPERIENCE, BECAUSE WE MANAGED THE HEALTH PLAN WELL THIS YEAR AND WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY EXTRAORDINARY LOSSES.
OUR COST THIS YEAR HAVE BEEN SIX, SO WE CARRIED THAT SIX OVER TO NEXT YEAR, AND THAT'S A REDUCTION IN THE PROPOSED $298,000.
>> IT'S NOT NECESSARILY OUR RECOMMENDATION, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD BASE A ONE-YEAR TREND ON.
>> THE LONG TERM AVERAGE IS CLOSER TO 10.
>> WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS, OUT OF COLUMN 4, TAKE OUT THE 103 AND THE 298 ADDITION HAVING THE 4% COLA ON THERE.
>> THAT GETS US UP TO WELL OVER A MILLION, MAYBE 1.2 MILLION.
>> MAYOR, I HAVE ONE MY QUESTION.
>> I JUST NEEDED AN EXPLANATION ON ISLAND TRANSIT REDUCTIONS IN SERVICE.
WHAT SPECIFICALLY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
>> THERE WILL BE NO REDUCTION IN SERVICE FROM WHAT THEY ARE RECEIVING TODAY.
BUT THE SERVICES THAT WE SAID WE WOULD RESTORE WHEN WE GOT OUR FEDERAL FUNDING, WE WILL NOT RESTORE.
>> YOU HAVE SEND IT BACK FOR FEDERAL FUNDING?
>> NO. THOSE WERE SUPPLEMENTAL PROJECTS THAT WE PAID FOR OURSELVES, EXTRA SERVICE AREAS.
>> A REDUCTION IN SERVICE MEANS THAT YOU'RE JUST NOT REINSTATING THE PREVIOUS SERVICES THAT YOU REMOVED.
>> THE NIGHTS, THE WEEKENDS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
[00:55:01]
BUT THEY WERE THE ONES THAT USED THEM APPRECIATED THEM, BUT THEY WERE LIGHTLY USED, SO THAT'S WHY WE MADE THOSE REDUCTIONS.>> THE DEMAND RESPONSE, I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB WAS REFERRING TO IT.
THAT IS SOMETHING WHEN WE ELIMINATED WEEKEND SERVICES, THE DEMAND RESPONSE OF THE SAME PERIOD PARALLELS THAT, SO YOU DON'T OFFER THAT.
IF YOU EXPAND THOSE AND THE HOURS OF YOUR REGULAR SERVICE ARE MIRRORED ON THE DEMAND RESPONSE SIDE.
WHEN WE ELIMINATED THOSE, THE DEMAND RESPONSE WASN'T AVAILABLE DURING THOSE HOURS EITHER.
IF YOU RESTORE THAT, YOU ALSO EXPAND THE DEMAND RESPONSE, WHICH IS A VERY COSTLY SERVICE.
>> YEAH, WE HAD A LOT OF WEEKEND USERS ON THAT.
>> YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. IT'S NOT CUTTING ANYTHING ELSE.
>> I JUST NEEDED IT TO BE CLEAR.
>> IT DOES REDUCE OUR ABILITY TO RAISE CAPITAL FOR THE FUTURE FOR REPLACEMENT OF BUSES, BUT WE'VE GOT FIVE NEW BUSES NOW, SO WE'RE GOOD FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS.
WE TEND TO PUT A LITTLE BIT AWAY EVERY YEAR FOR IT.
IF WE DON'T, IT'LL JUST BE THAT MUCH MORE WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH WHEN THOSE BUSES NEED TO BE REPLACED.
ON ONE OF THE ANALYSIS, WE GOT PROJECTIONS ON PROPERTY TAX.
IT CONTEMPLATED AN INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX THIS YEAR, AND THEN STARTING IN FISCAL YEAR '28, IT BEGAN TO GO DOWN TO WHERE IT WAS JUST 0.4000.
IS THAT STILL A PRACTICAL OBSERVATION?
>> YEAH, I THINK YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE TREND ON DEBT.
HOLD ON. NO, I SEE WHERE YOU'RE SAYING.
YEAH, PART OF IT IT'S PROJECTIONS AND IT WAS A FORECAST IN JUNE.
PART OF IT WAS JUST BASED ON POTENTIALLY WHAT VALUE GROWTH COULD BE IN THAT TIME PERIOD. IT'S POSSIBLE.
WE WOULD HOPE THAT IT WOULD FLATTEN OUT.
IF WE LOOK AT THE SLIDE BACK HERE, ESSENTIALLY, WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS, WE NEED TO BE CLOSER TO THAT TAX RATE THAT EXISTED IN 2023.
MAYBE THAT'LL GIVE US ENOUGH OF A BUMP THAT IT CAN BE FLAT AFTER THAT.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE WAY TRUTH IN TAXATION WORKS IS, EVERY TIME YOU LOWER THE TAX RATE, THAT LOCKS YOU IN AT YOUR NEW BASE LEVEL, AND EVERYTHING IS COMPARED TO THAT FROM NOW ON.
NEXT YEAR, YOU'RE COMPARING TO THAT NEW LOWER LEVEL, AND ANYTHING THAT ISN'T THAT NEW LOWER LEVEL IS CONSIDERED AN INCREASE, EVEN IF IT'S BASICALLY JUST RETURNING TO WHERE YOU WERE A YEAR AGO.
THERE MAY BE A SWEET SPOT IN THERE SOMEWHERE, ALTHOUGH SOME OF THAT IS IMPACTED BY THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION NUMBER AND THE FACT THAT IT'S JUST NOT THAT LARGE FOR US.
BUT IDEALLY, OUR GOAL IS NEVER TO SEE LARGE TAX INCREASES.
THAT IS WHAT WE ARE HOPING TO ACHIEVE.
POTENTIALLY, THIS COULD BE IMPACTED BY NEW SOURCES OF REVENUE THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING.
I GUESS THAT'S HOW I WOULD ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
>> IF YOU LOOK AT THE NARRATIVE, THERE'S SOME OTHER OPPORTUNITIES WE HAVE TO RAISE ADDITIONAL FUNDS AS WE GO FORWARD, AND IT'S NOT ALL BAD NEWS.
I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME BIG HITS.
I THINK WE'RE HITCHING OUR WAGON TO DEVELOPMENT, AND IF MARGARITAVILLE COMES ONLINE, AND I GET THEM MIXED UP, MARIE, TIARA COMES ONLINE.
>> YEAH, AND TIARA COMES ONLINE.
>> WE HAVE THAT OTHER SUBDIVISION OF 60 HOUSES.
THERE'S ANOTHER ONE THAT WAS APPROVED OF ANOTHER 120.
WE HAVE THE REST, THE BEACHSIDE VILLAGE THAT'S ALREADY BEING BUILT OUT AND SOLD.
>> THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ONLINE UNTIL [OVERLAPPING]
>> BUT THEY'RE COMING, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
I THINK WHAT BOB IS SAYING IS REALISTIC.
I'M HOPING THAT WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF JULY HURRICANES THE WEEK OF JULY 4TH.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE THE FUTURE.
I THINK THAT WE'RE DOING A GOOD JOB, AND ONE OF THE THINGS IF, MICHELLE KNOWS THIS, MICHELLE KNOWS THIS MORE THAN ANYBODY ELSE WHEN SHE'S TALKING ABOUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, I SAY, IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT PROPERTY TAX, IT'S ABOUT SALES TAX.
WE'VE GOT TO GROW THAT SALES TAX.
MY BIGGEST CONCERN WITH YOUR BUDGET, AND I TELL EVERYBODY, WE CAN DO ANYTHING YOU WANT ONCE. THAT'S EASY.
WE MAKE THAT HAPPEN, AND I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT FOR YOU.
MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS, IS IF YOU LOOK AT THE GROWTH OF YOUR PUBLIC SAFETY EXPENDITURES OF SALARIES, AND I BELIEVE AND I AGREE WITH THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB, IT IS 100% WARRANTED.
THAT IS A HIGHLY COMPETITIVE MARKET.
WE HAVE GOT TO STAY COMPETITIVE IN THAT MARKET.
EVEN AT THE HIGHEST COMPETITIVE LEVEL THAT WE'RE AT, I'M STILL 19 OFFICERS SHORT IN PD.
WE'VE GOT TO MAINTAIN THAT LEVEL.
THAT'S GROWING AT OVER 5% A YEAR, AND AT THE PERCENTAGE IT IS OF YOUR GENERAL FUND, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO MATHEMATICALLY GET THERE NEXT YEAR. IT'S OKAY.
YOU CAN PULL A RABBIT OUT OF THE HAT IF YOU WANT TO TRY TO DO IT, AND COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB PROBABLY HAS SOME IDEAS THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER,
[01:00:02]
BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO NOT GOING TO HAVE THOSE IDEAS EVERY YEAR.YOU RUN OUT OF IDEAS IN A HURRY, AND IT QUICKLY JUST BECOMES MATH.
>> ONE THING WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME THAT YOU JUST REMINDED ME OF WAS, ALL THE UNFUNDED BURROW WORK THAT WE STILL HAVE TO DO.
>> WE HAVE A SLIDE ON THAT IN A SECOND.
>> SHE'S TURNED INTO MIKE LOFT, I HAVE A SLIDE ON THAT. [LAUGHTER]
>> WE SAID WE WOULD DO A BUDGET AMENDMENT WHEN WE GET THAT INFORMATION.
WE ALSO SAID, I THINK, THAT AT THAT TIME, THAT THAT WOULD COME OUT OF OUR RESERVE.
>> THAT'S NOT IN THIS BUDGET AT ALL.
>> IT'S CURRENTLY BEING FUNDED OUT OF RESERVES.
>> THAT'S WHY I URGE YOU TO BE VERY CAUTIOUS ABOUT OUR PROJECTED NUMBER OF DAYS IN RESERVE, BECAUSE THAT IS OUR BEST ESTIMATE.
THEY TEND TO MIRROR EACH OTHER.
NOW, I'VE HEARD ANECDOTALLY THAT HOT SPRING BACK IN AUGUST.
I HOPE SALES TAX SPRINGS BACK.
BUT HOT HAS OUTPACED SALES ALL YEAR.
IF HOT IS DOWN 45%, I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT SALES.
>> IF YOU LOOK AT THE COMPTROLLER'S SITE NOW AND THE ESTIMATED, ACTUALLY, THE NUMBERS FOR JULY WERE DOWN, I THINK IT WAS 58,000.
>> I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY NUMBER YET.
>> THAT'S A YEAR I BELIEVE, COUNCILMEMBER, THAT'S A YEAR OVER YEAR COMPARISON EXTRAPOLATED BY THE OFFICE.
>> THEY'VE ALREADY CUT THE NUMBER.
>> BUT IT HAS NOT PROJECTED ON ACTUAL COLLECTIONS THAT NUMBER WON'T COME OUT TILL THE 13TH, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> WE'LL HAVE IT FOR THE THURSDAY MEETING.
>> WE'LL HAVE IT FOR THURSDAY.
>> WELL, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE NUMBERS OF REPAIRS.
I'D SAY, WELL, AT LEAST IN MY DISTRICT, 90% OF PROPERTIES HAD SOME DAMAGE AND EVEN THOUGH IT'S A BAD WAY TO MAKE IT UP, THE SALES TAX, I DON'T THINK IS GOING TO BE WHAT YOU'RE ESTIMATING.
>> YOU MEAN ON THE 11TH? IT'S ON THE 11TH?
[LAUGHTER] IF I COULD GO BACK JUST A LITTLE BIT TO WHERE WE WERE DISCUSSING ABOUT WHAT TO PUT BACK INTO THIS COLUMN 4.
IF WE COME UP ABOUT $1.2 MILLION SHORT, IF WE PUT THOSE THINGS BACK THEN EVERYBODY AGREED THEY WANTED TO BACK.
SO I GUESS THE QUESTION WOULD BE WHAT TAX RATE IS REQUIRED TO DO THAT?
>> WELL, ARE YOU PROPOSING TO LEAVE ALL THOSE ENHANCED REVENUE NUMBERS IN THE NUMBER IN THERE ALSO?
>> DOES THAT INCLUDED IN THIS COLUMN 4?
>> SO THOSE PROBABLY BETTER IF YOU LOOK AT COLUMN 5 IS WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, JUST MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS THERE.
>> COLUMN 5. THAT'S BASICALLY THE NUMBER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE WHAT IT DOES IS IT INCLUDES A COLUMN.
WE CALL IT COLUMN BENEFITS BECAUSE IT'S A COLUMN, AND THEN DEPENDING ON WHAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON SOMETHING WITH THE CIVILIAN PENSION, AS COUNCIL DIRECTED US SEVERAL YEARS AGO TO TRY TO KEEP ENHANCING THAT, AND MAKING THAT A MORE REASONABLE PENSION PLAN.
THERE'S USUALLY A MIX BETWEEN THE COST OF LIVING INCREASE AND WHAT IT MAY TAKE TO INCREASE THE FACTOR PENSION PLAN SO THOSE ARE INCLUDED IN COLUMN 5.
IT WOULD JUST THE DIFFERENCE THERE WOULD BE WE TOOK OUT THE ENHANCED REVENUES.
>> DID WE ALSO TAKE OUT THE 300,000 FROM?
>> COLUMN 5 SHOWS EVERYTHING WITHOUT THE YELLOW.
THE ONLY YELLOW IN COLUMN 5 IS GOING TO BE THOSE PORT CHANGES THAT WE KNOW ARE ACTUAL.
IF YOU HOLD THAT CURRENT TAX RATE THE 408850 AND DON'T DO ANY OF THE REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE ENHANCEMENTS, THEN YOUR DEFICIT IS TWO MILLION DOLLARS
>> UNLESS WE COME UP WITH ALTERNATE INCOME TO TAKE CARE.
>> THE OTHER THING TOO FOR 25, THAT GIVES ME A LITTLE HOPE AND THIS IS WHERE I GO OFF SCRIPT AND SHELA GETS VERY UPSET.
BUT THE REASON I WAS WILLING, ONE, I'M CATHOLIC, I DON'T MIND SPINNING THE WHEEL.
TWO, I THINK THAT I'M COMFORTABLE ENOUGH WITH A COUPLE OF THOSE NUMBERS TO THINK, LIKE I SAID, IF ONE OR TWO OF THEM HITS.
THE OTHER THING IS THAT IF WE MISS THEM A LITTLE BIT, WE ARE GOING TO HOPEFULLY HAVE IN NOVEMBER OF NEXT YEAR THE INCREASE OF THE CREW STEPS.
IF WE DIG OURSELVES IN A HOLE, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO COME [OVERLAPPING] TEMPORARILY COME OUT A LITTLE BIT.
YEAH. THAT'S IT'S GOING TO BE TIGHT.
>> SO MOVING ON FROM THIS SLIDE, YOU HAVE NARRATIVE ASSOCIATED IN YOUR POWERPOINT WITH THE THINGS WE'VE DISCUSSED.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER ALL OF THIS BECAUSE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT.
I THINK TO COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS' POINT, THE REMOVAL OF THE CIVILIAN PAY BENEFITS AT THE 728, THIS IS FROM THE COLUMN 4 SCENARIO AND THE ADDITION OF THE CO PAYS IN THE EMPLOYEE MAX, ESSENTIALLY, BALANCES THE BUDGET ON THE BACKS OF OUR EMPLOYEES.
[01:05:04]
IT'S JUST IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT BOTH OF THOSE SAVINGS IN SCENARIO 4 AND COLUMN 4 ARE EXPENSES TO THE EMPLOYEES.THAT'S HOW THE CITY IS SAVING.
>> THAT'S ALL EMPLOYEES. ACROSS ALL FUNDS, POLICE FIRE EVERYBODY.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS WE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IS MITIGATING THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH OUR PROPOSALS IN YELLOW SO EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW IT WASN'T OUR INITIAL INSTINCT BECAUSE IT IS A LITTLE RISKIER.
THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE WILL DO IN CASE THOSE REVENUES DON'T MATERIALIZE BASED ON ECONOMIC TRENDS, BASED ON ECONOMIC FORECAST.
IF HEALTH INSURANCE DECREASES, END UP NOT BEING APPROPRIATE, THEN WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO PIVOT.
ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO DO IS IF WE WENT WITH A COLUMN 4 SCENARIO AND THAT FLAT TAX RATE WITH THOSE REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE CHANGES.
WE WOULD HOLD GENERAL FUND VACANCIES OPEN AND SUSPEND CAPITAL FLEET PURCHASES FOR 180 DAYS.
THIS WOULD ALLOW US TO REALLY LOOK AT WHAT THOSE REVENUES ARE DOING AND WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO PERFORM OR NOT ACCORDING TO WHAT WE'VE PUT INTO THE BUDGET.
IF AFTER 180 DAYS, WE SEE NON PERFORMANCE IN THOSE REVENUES, WE WILL CUT OVERTIME FOR ALL GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENTS, EXCEPT FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT, BECAUSE LEGALLY WE CANNOT DO THAT.
IF THOSE REVENUE TRENDS CONTINUE, WE WILL HAVE TO MOVE TO LAYOFFS IN ORDER TO NOT OVERSPEND BY THE END OF THE DISCLOSURE.
>> I WOULD THROTTLE BACK ON OVERTIME STARTING WITH I WOULD DO POLICE LAST ON THAT JUST BECAUSE THOSE ARE DETAILS THAT TYPICALLY MOST POLICE OVERTIME OCCURS LATER IN THE YEAR ANYWAY SO I THINK WE COULD MANAGE THAT.
>> A LOT OF OUR OVERTIME IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE LIFE ON DOING THAT 17 OR 19.
THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF OUR OVERTIME IS.
>> SO THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF SPECIAL DETAILS THAT WE STAND UP FOR SUMMER.
>> ADDITIONALLY, THERE'S CURRENT YEAR RISKS THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY INCLUDED IN THIS PROPOSED BUDGET.
WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT, AS BRIAN MENTIONED, HOT FOR JULY WAS DOWN 45% YEAR OVER YEAR.
AS WE DISCUSSED, SALES TAX WON'T BE AVAILABLE UNTIL WEDNESDAY.
BUT IT DOES TYPICALLY TRACK VERY CLOSE TO HOT.
YOU'LL SEE THAT LITTLE GRAPH RIGHT THERE.
ESSENTIALLY, THEY'RE USUALLY GOING IN THE SAME DIRECTION.
JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEA, IF OUR SALES TAX LOSS WAS IN THE 45% YEAR OVER YEAR RANGE, THAT WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 1.5 MILLION DOLLAR WORTH OF LOSS TO THE GENERAL FUND.
WE'LL HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON WEDNESDAY, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER THAT WOULD BE ABOUT 6.4 DAYS OFF YOUR FUND BALANCE IF WE WERE TO LOSE ANOTHER 1.5 MILLION IN SALES TAX.
CURRENT ESTIMATES FOR BARREL RELATED EXPENSES IN THE GENERAL FUND ARE JUST OVER MILLION DOLLARS.
THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL 4.5 DAYS OFF YOUR FUND BALANCE.
THE WAY THE BUDGET WORKS IS WE COME UP WITH YOUR DAYS OF RESERVE AT THE END OF FISCAL YEAR 24, AND THEN THAT'S CARRIED OVER TO FISCAL YEAR 25.
>> WHAT'S THE COST PER DAY? WE TALKED ABOUT.
>> DEPENDS ON WHICH YEAR, BUT FOR FISCAL YEAR 25, THE BUDGET YOU'RE GOING TO BE APPROVING, GETS ABOUT $227,000.
>> A PENNY IS IN THE RANGE OF 1.2 MILLION DEPENDING ON YOUR TAX RATE.
>> RIGHT IN THAT RANGE, ONE MILLION TO 1.2 IN THAT RANGE DEPENDING ON WHAT THE TAX RATE IS.
>> FISCAL YEAR 24 IS PROJECTED TO END THE YEAR AT 115 DAYS.
THE COMBINATION OF BARREL AND POTENTIALLY SALES TAX LOSSES COULD BRING YOU DOWN TO CLOSE TO 100 DAYS.
RIGHT NOW OUR BUDGET FOR 25 HAS US ENDING AT 106 DAYS BUT IF YOU HAVE THESE COMBINED LOSSES APPLIED TO YOUR GENERAL FUND IN FISCAL YEAR 24, AND THERE'S A REALLY GOOD CHANCE THAT THE ENDING FUND BALANCE FOR FISCAL YEAR 25 IT'S GOING TO BETWEEN 90 AND 100.
>> KEEP IN MICROS WE'RE RUNNING AT A DAYS IN THE YEAR, BUT IF SALES TAX DID REPORT LOW THIS WEEK, WE WOULD PROBABLY MAKE BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS THIS YEAR.
>> TO IN ORDER TO TRY TO NEGATE THAT.
>> WHAT ARE WE REQUIRED IN TERMS OF 90.
>> BUT IF WE'D HAVE BEEN AT 90 AND THEN HAD BARREL, WE WOULD HAVE PROBABLY HAD ISSUES WITH SOME OF OUR BOND AND DEBT RATINGS.
>> MAYBE THAT'S NOT ENOUGH TIME, NOT ENOUGH DAYS.
>> WE TRY TO KEEP 120. HUNDRED AND TWENTY SEEMS TO WORK PRETTY WELL.
>> BUT OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT ENDING THIS FISCAL YEAR AT 120 AND NEXT YEAR WE'RE NOT ENDING AT 120.
[01:10:02]
>> WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO REBUILD THAT.
>> WE ALSO CARRY CREDIT LINES THAT COULD FUND FEMA AS WELL.
>> JUST AS LONG LONG THE LOWER YOUR NUMBER OF DAYS AND RESERVES, THE MORE IT IMPACTS YOUR DEBT RATE, THE MORE EXPENSIVE YOUR EMERGENCY LINE OF CREDIT GETS.
>> THAT KEEP SOUNDING MORE AND MORE LIKE 90 DAYS ISN'T LONG ENOUGH.
>> NO. IT'S NOT WE TRY TO KEEP 120 DAYS. THAT'S BEEN COUNCIL'S.
>> MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING WE OUGHT TO LOOK AT CHANGING.
>> IT'S IN THE CHARTER THE 90 DAYS FOR THE GENERAL FUNDS IN THE CHARTER AND COUNSEL NUMBER OF SESSIONS AGO DIRECTED US TO [OVERLAPPING]120 DAYS.
>> THERE'S NO STATE LAW. MUNICIPAL BOUND.
>> THERE WERE MANY YEARS WHEN I WAS AT THE COUNTY.
THEY BEFORE WHEN JUDGE HOLBROOK WAS THERE, WE ZERO WENT IN ZERO.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS YOU WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IS JUST GIVE YOU SOME HISTORICAL PAY AND BENEFIT INCREASE INFORMATION.
JUST TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF EMPLOYEES HAVE BEEN IMPACTED OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, YOU'LL SEE THE INCREASES POLICE HAVE GOT THROUGH THEIR CBA OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
THE TOTAL INCREASE OVER THAT PERIOD IS 29.2%, AND THE AVERAGE IS 4.9% PER YEAR.
>> I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO READ THIS AND THINK WE LOVE FIREMEN MORE THAN POLICE, BUT POLICE HAD BEEN DOING A LITTLE BIT BETTER JOB OF KEEPING UP WITH THE MARKET THAN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAD.
>> THIS IS AN AVERAGE SO BECAUSE THERE ARE DIFFERENT POSITIONS AND DIFFERENT RANKS IN BOTH POLICE AND FIRE, THE INCREASES AREN'T IDENTICAL ON EACH RANK OR IN EACH CATEGORY.
THIS IS AN AVERAGING, NOT EVERY EMPLOYEE SAW 29.2% IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS AND THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE A RANGE FOR FIRE BECAUSE IT'S EVEN MORE DISPARATE IN THE DIFFERENT GROUPS.
ON THE FIRE SIDE, THE INCREASE OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS WAS 26-33% WITH AN AVERAGE OF 5.6, AND ON THE CIVILIAN SIDE, THE TOTAL INCREASE OVER THIS PERIOD WAS 11%.
WE DID NOT PUT AN INCREASE IN THERE FOR 2025 BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING GUARANTEED OR CONTRACTUAL, AND THE AVERAGE INCREASE IS 2.2% OVER THAT.
>> I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF PUBLIC SAFETY CHALLENGES.
GEOGRAPHY REALLY WORKS AGAINST US HERE.
I WAS TALKING WITH MARK MORGAN RECENTLY AND THAT IF WE WERE A LITTLE COMPACT CITY OF 50,000 PEOPLE, YOU'D HAVE THREE FIRE STATIONS.
WE'RE SPREAD OUT OVER 32 MILES.
WE HAVE TO HAVE RESPONSE TIMES, AND I'M NOT EVEN 100% SURE WE'RE 100% WHERE WE NEED TO BE THERE.
BUT SO WE'RE EXPENSIVE PLACE TO FIREWORKS AND EXPENSIVE PLACE TO POLICE JUST BECAUSE OF RESPONSE TIMES AND DO YOU POLICE TO POPULATION OR YOU DO YOU POLICE TO GEOGRAPHY AND THERE'S THAT'S ANOTHER QUESTION TOO.
THEN YOU COMPOUND ALL OF THIS WITH EIGHT PLUS MILLION VISITORS A YEAR THAT SEEM TO REALLY LIKE OUR PUBLIC SAFETY GROUPS AND TO USE THEM, IT GETS EXPENSIVE IN A HURRY.
VERY EXPENSIVE. I'M NOT SAYING NONE OF THIS. THIS IS ALL MERITED.
IT'S EXPENSIVE TO POLICE AND TO PUBLIC SAFETY THIS ISLAND.
>> ADDITIONALLY, THIS OF WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION.
FUTURE YEAR CONCERNS, THINGS TO CONSIDER IS WITH THAT AVERAGE YOU JUST SOLVE ABOUT 5% ANNUALLY FOR POLICE AND FIRE.
THE NUMBERS YOU SEE HERE IN 26, 27, 28 ARE WHAT 5% ANNUALLY, EACH OF THOSE NUMBERS, THE INCREASE ANNUALLY FOR THE COMBINATION OF THOSE TWO BARGAINING UNITS.
THEN IF WE TAKE HEALTH INSURANCE AND WE ASSUME A 10% INCREASE EVERY YEAR, THIS IS A GENERAL FUND IMPACT.
SO JUST THESE TWO DATA POINTS, WE CAN ASSUME IN 26, 27, 28 THAT WE'LL BE INCREASING THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET, 2.5-2.8 MILLION DOLLAR.
>> IT'S OVER TWO PENNIES A YEAR?
>> THAT IS WITHOUT [OVERLAPPING].
>> ANY OTHER EXPENSES THAT MIGHT BE INCURRED IN THE GENERAL FUND.
THIS DOESN'T TAKE ANYTHING ELSE INTO CONSIDERATION.
AS I MENTIONED, THE FISCAL YEAR 25 YEAR FUND BALANCE IS PROJECTED TO BE 106 DAYS, THAT'S THE $227 PER DAY.
THE GENERAL FUND IS LOOKING TO HAVE A BARREL IMPACT AS OF THIS WEEKEND OF ABOUT A MILLION DOLLARS.
THAT'S 4.5 DAYS OF FUND BALANCE.
ALL THE OTHER FUNDS IN CASE ANYONE'S INTERESTED ARE RIGHT AT ABOUT 1.9 MILLION.
RIGHT NOW, THE TOTAL BARREL IMPACT IS RIGHT ABOUT 2.9 MILLION AND THAT'S FUNDS THAT HAVE BEEN SPENT OR ARE ENCUMBERED, BUT IT IS NOT THE FULL SCOPE OF ALL THE PROJECTS YET.
AT THE CURRENT TAX RATE WITHOUT ANY OF THE HIGHLIGHTED ADJUSTMENTS, THE DEFICIT IS THE TWO MILLION DOLLARS, WHICH IS ABOUT NINE DAYS OF YOUR FUND BALANCE.
[01:15:02]
IF ANY OF THE REVENUE OR EXPENDITURE CHANGES THAT WE MAKE DON'T COME THROUGH, THEN YOU WOULD BE HITTING YOUR GENERAL FUND FOR THAT TWO MILLION DOLLARS OR A PORTION THEREOF.>> THERE'S A COUPLE BIG TICKET ITEMS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FACE IN 26 AND 27.
ONE IS, I KNOW OF AT LEAST ONE PUMPER THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REPLACE, THAT IS A MILLIONS DOLLARS.
WE HAVE BEEN TOLD BY MOTOROLA BECAUSE MOTOROLA IS GOD, THAT THEY HAVE DETERMINED THAT OUR RADIOS ARE OBSOLETE, AND WE WILL HAVE TO REPLACE ALL OF OUR RADIOS ACROSS THE CITY.
NOW WE HAVE A PLAN TO DO THAT OVER TIME, SO IT DOESN'T HIT US AT ONE POINT, BUT THAT IS A MULTI MILLION DOLLAR EXPENDITURE AS WELL.
JUST KEEP THOSE IN THE BACK OF YOUR MIND AS THINGS AND THOSE ARE BOTH DIRECT GENERAL FUND EXPENSES.
THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO TO SHIELD THOSE.
>> ONE OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT HAS COME UP IN THE DISCUSSIONS IS THE INCREASE IN STAFFING AT THE CITY.
WE WANTED TO PROVIDE YOU A SNAPSHOT OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN EACH FUND OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
YOU'LL SEE THE TOTAL INCREASE COLUMN ON THE RIGHT SHOWS YOU THE TOTAL INCREASE IN STAFFING IN A FUND FROM 2020 TO THE 25 BUDGET THAT IS PRESENTED TO YOU.
THE TOTAL INCREASE OVER THIS PERIOD IS 4.3% AND 37 POSITIONS IN THAT FIVE YEAR PERIOD.
>> JUST TO REVIEW, WE HAVE A COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY.
WE'LL BE BACK AT IT. THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET.
THERE WILL BE AN AGENDA ITEM TO ALLOW FOR ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET AND IT'S PRESENTED AT THAT PROPOSED TAX RATE OF 42A382.
THIS WILL REQUIRE FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES.
THERE WILL ALSO BE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE TAX RATE.
IT WAS NOTICED AT THE TAX RATE YOU HAVE LISTED THERE, AND THAT IS THE MAX TAX RATE THE COUNCIL MAY APPROVE.
IT IS LOWER THAN THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE, BUT IT IS THE MAX TAX RATE THAT WE'VE NOTICED, SO WE CAN'T ADOPT ANYTHING HIGHER.
THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 19TH AT OUR REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, WE WILL HAVE THE ADOPTION OF THE TAX RATE, AND THAT REQUIRES FIVE AFFIRMATIVE VOTES.
IT MUST BE 60% OF CITY COUNCIL SINCE IT IS ABOVE THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE.
THE BUDGET MUST BE APPROVED FIRST IN ORDER TO ADOPT A TAX RATE.
AFTER THE BUDGET IS APPROVED, COUNCIL MUST RATIFY THE TAX RATE PRIOR TO EVER VOTING ON THE ADOPTION OF THE TAX RATE.
FAILURE TO ADOPT A BUDGET BY THE SECOND AND REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING IN SEPTEMBER RESULTS IN AN AUTOMATIC ADOPTION OF THE MOST RECENT PROPOSED BUDGET.
THAT'S PER CHARTER, AND FAILURE TO ADOPT A TAX RATE BY SEPTEMBER 30TH RESULTS IN AN AUTOMATIC ADOPTION OF THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE, WHICH RESULTS IN ABOUT $2 MILLION LESS IN REVENUE THAN THE RATES WE HAVE PROPOSED.
>> I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STAFFING OVER THE YEARS, IF YOU LOOK AT OUR BUDGET, IT'S ACTUALLY BROKEN DOWN BY DEPARTMENT.
>> SHEILA, THE SEPTEMBER 12TH MEETING, WE ALSO WILL VOTE TO RATIFY THE TAX RATE AT THAT.
>> THAT ALSO ONLY REQUIRES FOUR VOTES, BUT BOTH THE BUDGET AND THE RATIFICATION ARE RECORD VOTES.
>> VERY GOOD. BEFORE WE LEAVE THIS TOPIC, DAN, THE FINANCE COMMITTEE WEIGHED IN ON THIS BUDGET, LOOKED AT SOME OF THESE PROPOSALS, THE OPTIONS THEY VOTED LAST WEEK TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL. WHAT WAS THAT RECORD?
>> THEY RECOMMENDED WHAT YOU SAW IN YOUR PRESENTATION DAY AS COLUMN 2, WHICH IS A SLIGHTLY MODIFIED VERSION OF THE ORIGINAL BUDGET WE PROVIDED TO COUNCIL.
COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB DID PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING, SO SHE CAN DISCUSS WHAT I'M ABOUT TO TELL YOU, BUT, COUNCIL, I WILL TELL YOU THAT A COUPLE OF THINGS CAME UP.
SOMEONE WHO I WOULD CONSIDER PROBABLY AN INDUSTRY EXPERT ON THE COST OF HEALTH PLANS, ABEL LONGORIA WHO SITS ON OUR PLAN, IS A PRACTICING PHYSICIAN AND MANAGES BOTH MEDICAL FACILITIES AND HE'S A MEDICAL DIRECTOR FOR A NUMBER OF MUNICIPALITIES.
HE SAID THAT IT ABSOLUTELY SHOULD BE 10% AND NOT MORE.
HE THOUGHT THAT WE WERE ERRORING BY DOING 6%.
WE EXPLAINED TO HIM THE FACT THAT THAT WAS OUR EXPERIENCE FOR THIS YEAR, AND HE SAID, WELL, IT COULD VERY WELL BE, BUT HIS EXPERIENCE WILL DICTATE THE FACT THAT HE BELIEVES THAT THE COSTS ARE GOING TO GO UP 10%.
COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE, VOTED 5-2 TO RECOMMEND COLUMN 2, THAT COUNCIL APPROVE COLUMN 2.
CHAIRMAN WALSH ASKED THE TWO THAT VOTED AGAINST IT WHY THEY VOTED AGAINST IT.
ONE REPRESENTATIVE VOTED AGAINST IT BECAUSE THERE WERE ACTUALLY TWO MOTIONS, AND HE WANTED THEM COMBINED.
HE WAS AGREEABLE TO BOTH MOTIONS.
HE JUST WANTED ONE MOTION SO HE WAS AGREEING.
ACTUALLY, YOU HAD ONE MEMBER THAT VOTED AGAINST IT.
WHEN ASKED ABOUT HIS OBJECTIONS,
[01:20:02]
HE DIDN'T ARTICULATE ANY SIGNIFICANT OBJECTIONS.HE REALLY COULDN'T DISCUSS WHY.
HE JUST THOUGHT THERE SHOULD BE MORE WORK ON THE REVENUE SIDE.
THE SECOND ITEM THEY APPROVED WAS THEY WANT STAFF AND COUNCIL TO CONTINUE WORKING ON ALTERNATIVE REVENUES.
WE TOLD THEM THAT THAT WAS A DIRECTION WE RECEIVED FROM COUNCIL, AND THAT'S WHERE WE WERE GOING.
THEY WANTED TO REITERATE FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE, THEY WANTED TO COMMUNICATE TO COUNCIL THAT WE CONTINUE TO WORK TOWARD ENHANCING THE REVENUE OUTSIDE OF ADVALORM AND SALES TAX.
>> WELL, ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED AGAINST IT WAS ABEL LONGORIA.
>> SOLELY BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THEY WERE NOT COMBINED.
>> HE VERY STRONGLY FELT LIKE WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT ALTERNATIVE INCOME.
IF YOU GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS MEETING, THE MOTION ACTUALLY FAILED TO INCREASE THE TAX RATE BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO LOOK AT ALTERNATIVE INCOMES.
>> I THINK ALL OF US WANT TO LOOK AT ALTERNATIVE INCOME.
>> YEAH. I TOTALLY AGREE. BUT THERE BECOMES A LIMIT.
THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH ALTERNATIVE INCOME OUT THERE THAT WE CAN LEGALLY TOUCH THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE YOU GUYS TO MAKE POLICY CHANGES AT YOUR END.
STAFF IS WILLING TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO, LIKE I SAID, I'LL DO ANYTHING YOU GUYS WANT.
JUST TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
WE CAN DO IT ONCE. NOT SURE WE CAN DO IT TWICE, BUT WE CAN DO IT ONCE.
>> WE WILL BE MEETING AGAIN IN THREE DAYS ON THIS COUNCIL SO WE WILL CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION ON THAT.
LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3B, PLEASE JANELLE.
[3.B. Discussion of the FY 2025 Park Board Budget/Tourist Recovery Program (C. Ludanyi/City and Park Board Staff - 1 hour)]
>> 3B, DISCUSSION OF THE FY 2025 PARK BOARD BUDGET TOURIST RECOVERY PROGRAM.
>> I DO ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO READ THIS BUDGET NARRATIVE.
>> I DO ENCOURAGE Y'ALL ACTUALLY READ THE WHOLE BUNCH OF BOOK TO IT.
>> MAYOR, SINCE WE DO HAVE TO BRING SOMETHING BACK TO YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING FOR ADOPTION, I GUESS JUST SO I CAN BE CLEAR.
>> YOU GUYS ADDED A BUNCH OF STUFF, BUT YOU DIDN'T HELP.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN STATED, YES, THE QUESTION OF BETWEEN WHAT FFAC RECOMMENDED AND WHAT THE KEEPING THE TAX RATE WAS THE SAME.
WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU'VE HEARD FROM COUNCIL TODAY, WHAT WOULD BE A RESULTING TAX RATE THAT WOULD RESULT IN A BALANCED BUDGET.
>> ONE OF THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD TAX RATES THAT WE LOOKED AT WAS A TAX RATE OF 4155.
I CAN SEND THAT OUT TO COUNCIL AFTER THIS.
WE WANTED TO CLEARLY PRESENT BOTH THE PROPOSED BUDGET AS WELL AS THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED FROM COUNCIL TO DATE.
BUT WE HAVE LOOKED AT ALTERNATIVES IN THE MIDDLE, AND I CAN SEND THAT OUT TO COUNCIL AFTER THIS MEETING.
>> THANK YOU. BUT THAT DOESN'T GIVE IT TO YOU THE WAY YOU ALL DESCRIBED IT.
THE EMPLOYEE COLE IN THERE AND ELIMINATING THE HEALTH INSURANCE INCREASE TO $75 AND THE REDUCTION IN THE ALLOWANCE FOR OUR HEALTH PLAN BY 4%.
>> IT DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR POTENTIAL INCREASES RELATED TO CAMERAS. THAT WAS THE OTHER ITEM.
>> SHEILA TALK TO ME ABOUT THAT BECAUSE I'VE GOT AN IDEA.
>> YOU ALSO WANTED TO ADD CAMERAS. I'VE WRITTEN THAT DOWN.
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT JUNETEENTH FIREWORKS DISPLAYED.
>> THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE A GENERAL FUNDING EXPENSE.
>> CHAIR, YOU UNDERSTAND MY POINT.
I REMEMBER SEEING THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD ONE LAST TIME, BUT I THINK THE QUESTION IS THAT WITH THE CHANGES THAT WE'VE ASKED HERE, IS THERE A WAY FOR YOU TO ROUGHLY GO BACK AND CALCULATED TAX RATE THAT WOULD RESULT IN THE BALANCE?
>> FOR INSTANCE, IS THAT BIG YELLOW COLUMN THERE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT?
>> YOU HAD MORE CONFIDENCE IN SOME OF THOSE ITEMS AND OTHERS THAT I'M BEING ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH.
>> YEAH. IF YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT SOME OF THEM ARE RISKY NOW, I'M SURE YOU WOULDN'T HAVE BROUGHT ME ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE RECOMMENDED IN THAT YELLOW AREA.
>> WELL, WE ACTUALLY DIDN'T RECOMMEND ANY OF THOSE IN THE YELLOW AREA.
THOSE ARE JUST SHOTS AT IT. THOSE ARE SOLUTIONS.
>> THE WAY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE APPROACHED IT WITH US IS WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS YOU'RE PLACING FUND BALANCE AT RISK. THAT'S WHAT THIS IS DOING.
HOPEFULLY YOU CAN REPLICATE OR REPLACE THAT WITH GENERAL FUND REVENUE OR SOME TYPE OF REVENUE.
THEIR CONCERN WAS THAT WE WERE PUTTING FUND BALANCE AT RISK.
NOW, THE TRANSFER OF $70,000 FROM THE CONVENTION CENTER SURPLUS.
THAT'S COMPLETELY AT THE DISCRETION OF COUNCIL.
WE BELIEVE THAT'S REASONABLE BASED ON OUR INFORMATION OF WHAT OUR EXPENSES ARE ON SOME OF THESE SPECIAL EVENTS.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING YOU CAN MOVE OVER TO THAT COLUMN.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT COLUMN 2, THAT'S THE COLUMN THAT YOU DO AND THEN IF THERE'S AN ITEM IN THERE THAT WE FEEL VERY CONFIDENT, YOU COULD MOVE THAT OVER THERE.
>> LIKE THE BUILDING PERMITS, I FEEL CONFIDENT THAT ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS.
I AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB.
[01:25:01]
ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS, COUNTING ON ONE OF THEM FOR SURE, IS GOING TO DROP, AND I THINK THAT'LL GET YOU WHERE YOU NEED TO BE ON THE PERMIT SIDE.THERE'S SOME OTHERS, LIKE THE LANDLINE PHONES AND STUFF.
I HAD TO GO BACK FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AND THOSE ARE AVERAGE IT.
I'M LOOKING FOR SOMETHING WITH SIX ZEROS.
>> SPEAKING OF SIX ZEROS, SHARON, I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A TOPIC THAT'S BEEN OF CONCERN TO YOU FOR A LONG TIME.
LEAVING THE $300,000 IN THERE IN THE BUDGET TO KEEP THE SERVICES WHERE WE ARE.
>> I'M SORRY. WOULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION AGAIN?
>> WE'LL BE ABLE TO RECOVER THE OPA SERVICES.
>> BY LEAVING A $300,000 REVENUE IN THERE THAT WE WOULD GAIN BY KEEPING THE SERVICE AS IT IS NOW.
>> IT'S JUST A REDUCTION IN EXPENSE MAYOR.
>> IT'S ADDITIONAL REVENUE TO ISLAND TRANSIT, BUT IT'S AN EXPENSE TO THE GENERAL FUND.
>> IT WOULD ALLOW US TO DO THAT.
>> IT'S BEEN A MINUTE SINCE WE HAD THAT SERVICE.
>> BUT IT WOULD GIVE YOU A BUMP IN THE REVENUE IN GENERAL FUND.
>> THAT'S OUR CONTRIBUTION TO ISLAND TRANSIT.
>> HAD TRANSFERRED HISTORICALLY $1 MILLION.
>> THAT'S ANOTHER WAY OF SAYING IT.
BUT IF WE LEAVE THE $300,000 IN, IF WE TAKE IT OUT, THEN THE EXPENDITURES WOULD BE 300,000 MORE?
>> THE EXPENDITURE TO THE GENERAL FUND.
>> YOU'RE SAYING, TAKE IT OUT. YOU MEAN NOT GIVE IT TO ISLAND TRANSIT OR GIVE IT TO ISLAND TRANSIT.
>> IF THE 300,000, WE PUT THAT IN THERE IN COLUMN 4.
>> DECREASING THE EXPENSES 300,000.
>> COLUMN 2, THE ISLAND TRANSIT AMOUNT IS 975,000.
COLUMN 4, IN ORDER TO BALANCE, THE ISLAND TRANSIT AMOUNT IS 675,000.
SO WE'RE DECREASING THE TRANSFER TO ISLAND TRANSIT IN COLUMN 4?
>> YES. MY QUESTION IS THEN, SHARON, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE LEAVING THAT 300,000 AS A DECREASE OF EXPENSES KEEPING THE SERVICE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING NOW WITH ISLAND TRANSIT AS IT IS.
>> WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING IS IF WE KEEP IT THAT WE CANNOT EVER REVERT BACK TO THE OTHER SERVICES.
IT'LL JUST CONTINUE WHAT IT'S DOING NOW.
>> CONTINUE WHAT IT'S DOING DOWN UNTIL YOU PUT MORE MONEY INTO THE PROGRAM OR UNLESS SOMEHOW FEDERAL FUNDING INCREASE, WHICH THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE TO DECLINE, BUT THAT'S A DIFFERENT.
>> I HOPE AS WE GO DOWN THE LINE WITH THE BUDGET THAT WE CAN SOME WAY OR ANOTHER, WHEN WE THINK THIS IS COMING UP, AND I KNOW YOU FORECAST.
CAN THE PUBLIC KNOW MORE OF WHERE YOU REALLY WANT TO CUT BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, I WAS TALKING TO A LADY WHO EXPLAINED TO ME THE WHOLE TRANSIT SYSTEM, HOW SHE ROT AND IF YOU CATCH NUMBER FIVE, OR YOU GOING NUMBER TWO.
I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT SO I'M GOING TO HAVE TO LEARN TO DO THAT.
I BET YOU NONE OF US HERE SITTING AT THE TABLE IS FAMILIAR WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO TAKE THAT TRANSIT.
IT MIGHT BE AT NIGHT AND IT'S TO A NIGHT JOB.
I REALLY FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE SAYING THAT MAYBE YOU SHOULDN'T BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THE DATA, HOW MANY PEOPLE THIS IS AFFECTING, BUT MAYOR, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION RIGHT NOW.
YEAH. I WOULD NEED SOMETHING TO LOOK AT.
>> THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS IS IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION.
>> IN COLUMN 2, WE'RE FUNDING THE FULL AMOUNT.
>> NO. BUT IN ESSENCE, WHAT YOU'LL HAVE TALKED ABOUT IS MODIFYING COLUMN 2 BY ADDING SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE SOURCES THAT WE BELIEVE ARE COMFORTABLE THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH OR MORE COMFORTABLE WITH.
>> IN ROUND NUMBERS WHEN WE WERE CONTRIBUTING $600,000 ISLAND TRANSIT DURING THE DOWN PERIODS, WE'VE GONE BACK TO $1,000,000 IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET TO TRY TO RESTORE THE SERVICES AGAIN.
IF WE CAN'T, WELL, THEN WE STAY AT THIS 600, WHATEVER IT IS.
>> THAT'S CONTINUING SERVICES AS THEY ARE RIGHT NOW.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE THAT.
>> AN ISLAND TRANSIT IS TROLLEYS.
>> NO. THAT'S A FIXED ROUTE SYSTEM.
>> YEAH. THE SEAWALL RUBBER WHEEL TROLLEYS AND THE RAIL TROLLEYS ARE 100% FUNDED BY HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX.
THAT IS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM FOR WHOEVER IS SITTING HERE IN EIGHT YEARS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYONE.
APPRECIATE IT. JANELLE, COULD YOU READ ITEM 3B, PLEASE?
[01:30:02]
>> DISCUSSION OF THE FY 2025 PARK BOARD BUDGET TOURIST RECOVERY PROGRAM.
>> WE ARE DISCUSSING THE PARK BOARD BUDGET, AND I'M GOING TO INVITE BRYSON AND KIMBERLY TO COME FORWARD.
>> DO WE HAVE A CHAIR FOR THEM? I'D LIKE FOR THEM TO BE AT THE TABLE CASE THERE'S QUESTIONS.
WE'VE GOT CHAIRS COMING FOR US.
>> YOU GUYS WON'T MIND IF I COME SIT NEXT TO YOU?
>> COME RIGHT IN. KIMBERLY, YOU WANT TO SIT RIGHT HERE? WE'LL BRING YOU A CHAIR.
>> JASON, MAYBE PUT IN THE CORNER DOWN THERE. WE'RE GOING TO DO IT.
>> YOU GOT SOMEWHERE ON THE ISLAND?
>> I THINK IT'S THE 1ST OCTOBER
>> THANK YOU, EVERYONE FOR BEING HERE.
I WANT TO THANK THE PARK BOARD FOR BEING HERE.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SHEILA PRESENT TO US THOUGHTS ABOUT THE PARK BOARD'S BUDGET.
WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
IT IS ON OUR SEPTEMBER 19TH AGENDA FOR APPROVAL OF THE PARK BOARD BUDGET. SHEILA.
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD ONE THING.
THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A GOOD MEETING, JASON FOR YOU TO BRING SAMPLES FROM THE EMPORIUM.
>> I HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT THAT, BUT YES, I AGREE.
>> OR FROM YOUR BUSINESS. SAMPLES WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE.
>> WE KNOW WHAT SAMPLES THEY ARE.
>> YOU CAN SUBMIT THAT AS A REIMBURSEMENT.
>> OUR PRESENTATION OF THE PARK BOARD BUDGET IS EXTREMELY HIGH-LEVEL TODAY, AND OBVIOUSLY, PARK BOARD IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY DETAILED QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
[NOISE] BUT TO START WITH, JUST AS A REMINDER FOR OUR FISCAL YEAR '25, WE ARE HOLDING THE PENNY FLAT YEAR OVER YEAR AT THE $3,300,000.
IT'S THE SAME AS FISCAL YEAR '24 WAS.
AS A RESULT OF THAT, THE FIRST TABLE YOU SEE AT THE TOP IS HOW THAT SPLITS OUT THE REVENUE BASED ON THE VARIOUS SILOS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLICATED BOTH BY THE CHARTER, BY STATE LAW, AND BY SOME SELECTIONS THAT PREVIOUS COUNCILS HAVE MADE.
YOU'LL SEE THAT ON THE LOCAL HOT PORTION, THERE'S AMOUNTS GOING TO BEACH PATROL, BEACH MAINTENANCE, ADVERTISING, TOURISM, ARTS CULTURAL EVENTS, ARTS HISTORIC PRESERVATION, GALVESTON MALONE CONVENTION DEBT, AND CONVENTION CENTER OPS FOR THE TOTAL OF THE 7% THAT LOCAL HOT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR.
THEN YOU HAVE THE LOCAL HOT PRIMER BILL, WHICH IS ANOTHER 2%, AND THEN STATE HOT ALSO CONTRIBUTES TOO AND THAT GOES TO BEACH PATROL, BEACH MAINTENANCE, AND BEACH RE-NOURISHMENT.
THE TOTAL OF ALL OF THESE SOURCES SHOULD BRING IN ABOUT $36.3 MILLION WORTH OF HOT AND IT IS SPLIT TO THOSE LOCATIONS.
THE TABLE ON THE BOTTOM SHOWS THE ALLOCATIONS TO PARK BOARD SILOS SPECIFICALLY.
THIS MIRRORS LAST YEAR, AND IT IS WHAT IS PRESENTED IN THE PARK BOARD BUDGET.
BEACH PATROL WILL BE GETTING ABOUT $3.8 MILLION, BEACH MAINTENANCE WILL BE GETTING 4.1 MILLION, ADVERTISING AND TOURISM WILL BE GETTING 9.9 MILLION, AND BEACH RE-NOURISHMENT WILL BE GETTING 1.8 MILLION.
THAT IS THE BUDGET REQUESTS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE PARK BOARD, AND THEY ALIGN WITH THE $3.3 MILLION PENNY.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE DONE A HIGH-LEVEL SUMMARY OF ALL THE FUNDS AND ALL THE AMOUNTS THAT ARE ALLOCATED IN THE PARK BOARD BUDGET.
YOU'LL SEE THE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REPRESENTS THAT $19.8 MILLION WORTH OF REVENUE THAT'S GOING TO THEIR HOT ACTIVITIES SPECIFICALLY, AND IT IS THE SAME YEAR OVER YEAR.
WHAT YOU SEE HERE PRESENTED IS THE FISCAL YEAR '23 ACTUAL AMOUNTS, THE FISCAL YEAR '24 PROJECTED AMOUNTS,
[01:35:02]
THE FISCAL YEAR '24 BUDGET, AND THE FISCAL YEAR '25 BUDGET.THE PARK BOARD'S COMPARISON IS BUDGET TO BUDGET, WHICH IS NOT NECESSARILY HOW THE CITY USUALLY VIEWS ITEMS. TO THE RIGHT, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A BUDGET TO ACTUALS COMPARISON.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE LOOK AT OPERATIONAL REVENUE IN FISCAL YEAR '24, THE BUDGET WAS 603,000, THE FISCAL YEAR '25 BUDGET IS $767,000 WORTH OF REVENUE, AND SO IT SHOWS AN INCREASE OF 164,000 BUDGET-TO-BUDGET COMPARISON.
HOWEVER, THE PROJECTED AMOUNT FOR '24 IS AT 1.4 MILLION.
YEAR OVER YEAR ACTUALS COMPARED TO BUDGET, THERE'S ACTUALLY A DECREASE THERE OF 600,000.
WE'RE JUST GIVING YOU BOTH SETS OF INFORMATION SO YOU CAN COMPARE AND LOOK.
THIS FIRST SLIDE IS ALL THE REVENUE PART OF THE PARK BOARD BUDGETS FOR ALL THEIR FUNDS.
THE BLUE LINE IS THE CITY OF GALVESTON REQUESTED CONTRIBUTION.
THIS INCLUDES SOME CAPITAL ITEMS THAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IN A MINUTE.
ADDITIONALLY, OBVIOUSLY, THEY HAVE ADVERTISING REVENUE.
THEY HAVE DIFFERENT REVENUES THAT ARE OCCURRING IN OUR VARIOUS CITY PARKS THAT THEY MANAGE FOR US, AND THERE'S ALSO GRANT AND FEMA REVENUE.
THE TOTAL REVENUE THAT THEY HAVE ALLOCATED IN FISCAL YEAR '25 IS 51,172,500.
BUDGET TO BUDGET, THIS IS A DECREASE OF 6.9 MILLION.
BUDGET TO ACTUALS, THIS IS INCREASE OF $5.8 MILLION OR 12.9%.
WE DID A LITTLE FURTHER ANALYSIS AT THE BOTTOM HERE.
YOU'LL SEE THAT THEY'VE PROGRAMMED A LINE OF CREDIT IN FISCAL YEAR '25.
THIS IS RELATED TO THE RV PARK AT SEAWOLF, AND THERE'S A POSSIBILITY THIS OBVIOUSLY WON'T BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL.
BUT WHEN YOU SUBTRACT THAT FROM THE REVENUE SOURCES AND YOU PULL OUT THE TRANSFERS AND YOU PULL OUT GRANTS IN FEMA, IT LEAVES YOU WITH REVENUE OF ABOUT $33.1 MILLION IN FISCAL YEAR '25.
THEN WHEN YOU PULL OUT THE CITY CONTRIBUTION, IT LEAVES YOU AT ABOUT $30,921,800 IN REVENUE.
>> THE CITY CONTRIBUTION COMING FROM?
>> THAT THEY HAVE BUDGETED. THEIR BUDGET IS SHOWING 2.2 MILLION IN CITY CONTRIBUTION.
WHEN YOU PULL THAT OUT, JUST FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE WITHOUT THE CITY CONTRIBUTION, IT'S 30,921,000.
>> THE PROJECTED COLUMN FOR '24, YOU'LL NOTICE THAT WE'RE HAVING A PROJECTED HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX WILL COME IN A BUDGET. THAT WAS PRE-BERYL.
WE MADE ADJUSTMENTS FOR THAT IN THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF THE BUDGET SO THAT'S ACTUALLY DOWN BY ABOUT A MILLION AND SOME CHANGES IF I RECALL IT CORRECTLY.
>> ONE OF THE CLARIFICATION OF THE BLUE LINE CITY OF GALVESTON.
THOSE ARE PROJECTS THAT REQUIRES COUNCIL APPROVAL, IS THAT RIGHT?
WE CONTRIBUTE $200,000 RIGHT NOW TO BEACH CLEANING, AND THAT'S FOR THINGS LIKE GRAFFITI REMOVAL AND TRASH REMOVAL, THAT THING.
THAT'S INCLUDED IN THERE. SEE, I'M LEARNING IT ALL.
>>WHAT'S THE OTHER ONE? EAST END LAGOON, WE'RE CONTRIBUTING $50,000.
THERE'S $250,000 THAT'S SPECIFIC TO OPERATIONAL THINGS, AND THE REST OF IT IS REQUESTS THAT ARE SPECIAL PROJECTS OR CAPITAL.
ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, AND TO BRYSON'S POINT, THE PARK BOARD AMENDED THEIR BUDGET, AND I THINK I RECEIVED IT AUGUST 27, AND THE ITEMS WERE BERYL-RELATED SPECIFICALLY, AS WELL AS SOME JUNETEENTH ITEMS, I THINK.
THOSE WERE THE TWO CHANGES AND THOSE ARE NOT INCORPORATED IN THIS SUMMARY.
EXCEPT FOR POTENTIALLY HOT REVENUE, ESPECIALLY ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, THERE'S NOT MAJOR CHANGES.
ONCE AGAIN, HERE, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE FISCAL YEAR '23 COMPARED TO THE '24 PROJECTED, THE '24 BUDGET, AND THEN THE '25 BUDGET.
YOU'LL SEE COMPARED TO THE '25 BUDGET, THERE'S ABOUT A $5.7 MILLION DECREASE IN EXPENDITURES.
COMPARED TO THE '24 ACTUALS, THERE'S ABOUT A $6 MILLION INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES, WHICH IS ABOUT 13.6%.
SPECIAL PROJECTS INCLUDES SOME THINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED, LIKE WAYFINDING.
A PORTION OF THAT WAS SPENT THIS YEAR, BUT THERE'S ABOUT $1.2 MILLION SO ABOUT 600,000 IN THAT RANGE WAS SPENT IN FISCAL YEAR '24.
THE REMAINDER OF IT IS PROJECTED TO BE SPENT IN '25.
WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED IT ON THE CITY SIDE.
IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE APPROVED, AGAIN, THOSE FUNDS HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED FOR THAT PURPOSE,
[01:40:02]
AND THAT'S INCLUDED IN THIS.REVENUE SHARE WITH THE CITY IS IN THIS PRESENTATION INCLUSIVE OF THINGS LIKE THE SEAWALL URBAN PARKING REVENUE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY CITY REVENUE AND SO IT'S INCLUDED IN THIS COMBINED LINE, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY CITY REVENUE.
>> IF I COULD, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT AND I'LL MAKE SURE THAT THAT SEPARATELY STATED THE REVENUE SHARE FROM CONTRIBUTIONS FROM URBAN PARK IN FUTURE VERSION.
>> THE DEBT SERVICE AND LEASE LINE, I BELIEVE ALSO INCLUDES POTENTIAL DEBT SERVICE FOR THAT RV PARK DEBT ISSUANCE, THAT MIGHT END UP BEING AS HIGH IF THAT'S NOT A PROJECT COUNCIL CHOOSES TO DO.
CAPITAL PROJECTS ARE AT $808,000, WHICH IS A DECREASE BOTH COMPARED TO BUDGET AND PROJECTED FROM LAST YEAR.
YOU'LL SEE THAT THE TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR FISCAL YEAR '25 ARE THE 50,363,500.
YOU'LL SEE BELOW THAT AS WE DO THE RECONCILIATION, THERE'S THE PROJECT FUNDED BY THE LINE OF CREDIT, THE 1.2 MILLION ASSOCIATED WITH THE RV PARK.
ALSO, WE TOOK OUT TRANSFERS HERE TO GET A CLEAN NUMBER AND GRANTS IN FEMA AND SO THOSE EXPENDITURES FOR '25, WHEN YOU SUBTRACT OUT THOSE ITEMS IS ABOUT 29,000,845.
YOU'LL SEE THE REVENUE OF OUR EXPENDITURES LINE HERE IN FISCAL YEAR '25, THE REVENUE IS ABOUT $809,000 ABOVE EXPENDITURES FOR THE YEAR.
THEIR CASH POSITION OR THEIR FUND BALANCE IMPACT, YOU'LL SEE THAT FY '25 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE IS ABOUT 12,115,244, AND THERE'S ABOUT $152,000 INCREASE TO FUND BALANCE PROJECTED IN THIS BUDGET, AND THAT'S OVERALL ALL FUNDS.
THERE ARE STILL SOME FUNDS THAT HAVE A FUND BALANCE DEFICIT LIKE THE GENERAL FUND, BUT OVERALL THEIR FUND BALANCE IS AT THE 12.2 MILLION.
THE MAYOR ASKED THAT I SPECIFICALLY REVIEW ALL THE CAPITAL AND SPECIAL PROJECTS BECAUSE THAT'S A LOT OF WHERE COUNCIL WILL MAKE A DECISION.
A LOT OF THE ITEMS ARE LISTED AS CAPITAL IN THE BUDGET, AND THEY ARE FUNDED BY CURRENT REVENUE OR FUND BALANCE THAT THE PARK BOARD HAS IN THEIR BUDGETS.
THESE ITEMS IN BEACH CLEANING, BEACH PATROL, AND GENERAL FUND THAT YOU SEE LISTED HERE ARE ALL FUNDED FROM OPERATIONAL REVENUE THAT THE PARK BOARD HAS.
THESE ARE NOT REQUESTS TO THE CITY.
THESE ARE ITEMS THAT THEY HAVE BUDGETED IN THEIR CAPITAL FOR EACH OF THESE FUNDS.
TOURISM DEVELOPMENT, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT SEPARATELY BECAUSE AS USUAL, THAT'S ALWAYS THE BUSIEST WHEN IT COMES TO CAPITAL AND SPECIAL PROJECTS.
THE WHITE PORTION AT THE TOP HERE IS THEIR CAPITAL ITEMS THAT ARE LISTED IN TOURISM DEVELOPMENT.
THE MIDDLE SECTION FOR $1.9 MILLION THAT SAY CITY NEXT TO IT IS THE SPECIAL PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE COUNCIL APPROVAL, AND THIS WOULD BE MONEY MOVING FROM THE CITY TO THE PARK BOARD FOR THESE PROJECTS.
AS I MENTIONED ALREADY, THE WAYFINDING WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR, SO THIS ISN'T SOMETHING WE WOULD RE-APPROVE, THAT MONEY IS AVAILABLE AND ALLOCATED TO THAT PURPOSE.
THE OTHER SPECIAL PROJECT REQUESTS HERE ARE ITEMS THAT CITY COUNCIL WILL NEED TO REVIEW AND APPROVE AS EITHER PART OF THE BUDGET OR SEPARATELY AS IT HAS DONE IN THE PAST.
>> WHICH ONE COMES OUT OF HOT AND WHICH ONE IS NOT HOT?
>> THIS IS ALL TOURISM DEVELOPMENT, SO THIS IS ALL HOT.
THEN THE BOTTOM PORTION, THE 600,000 IS COMING FROM PARK BOARD REVENUE AND THESE ARE ADDITIONALLY SPECIAL PROJECTS THAT I BELIEVE THE PARK BOARD OF TRUSTEES HAS TO APPROVE SEPARATELY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE ALL BEEN APPROVED OR NOT, BUT THESE ARE SPECIAL PROJECTS BY THE DEFINITION.
>> THAT 1.955 WOULD COME OUT OF THE HOT THAT THE CITY HAS RIGHT NOW, NOT THE CURRENT HOT THAT THE PARK BOARD HAS.
>> GOOD IF I COULD REALLY QUICK TO YOU IF YOU DON'T MIND.
THE ONLY THING I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT IS JUNETEENTH GRANT FUNDING THAT WAS PART OF THE AMENDMENT IN LATE AUGUST THAT WE DID IN RESPONSE AFTER THE HURRICANE AND EVERYTHING AT THE REQUEST OF THE CITY.
THAT'S NOT REFLECTED HERE, BUT JUST KNOW THAT IT IS IN THE AMENDED BUDGET TO KEEP GRANT FUNDING.
>> THESE ARE RELATING TO THE PARKS THAT THE PARK BOARD MANAGES FOR US.
IN DELLANERA, YOU SEE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS TOTALING 199,000, R.A. APFFEL, THE CAPITAL ITEMS ARE 201,000.
[01:45:03]
THERE'S 30,000 IN STEWART BEACH, AND THEN IN SEAWOLF, WE'LL SEE IT'S SEPARATED OUT AGAIN.THERE'S 32,900 IN CAPITAL COMING OUT OF OPERATIONAL REVENUE AND THEN THESE ADDITIONAL PINK ITEMS ARE THE SPECIAL PROJECTS.
THE FALL TOURNAMENTS AND THE EASTER ECON ARE LITTLE PROJECTS THEY DO.
BUT THEN THE RV PARK IS LISTED HERE FOR BOARD APPROVAL AND FINANCING PLAN.
THAT WOULD BE PARK BOARD INCURRED FINANCING, BUT I THINK THE RV PARK WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED AS A PROJECT PRIOR TO ANY SUCH [OVERLAPPING]
>> BUT THE OTHER ONES ARE NOT.
>> CORRECT. URBAN PARK, THERE'S A LANDSCAPING REFRESH THERE AS WELL.
THAT IS MY VERY HIGH-LEVEL REVIEW.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR YOU'VE GOT THE EXPERTS AT THE TABLE AS WELL.
>> JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS I HAVE, SHILA, BACK TO THE SPECIAL PROJECTS.
ABOUT $2 MILLION OF THOSE THAT'S IN THE PARK BOARD'S BUDGET IS TO COME OUT OF BEING FUNDED BY PARK BOARD'S OPERATIONAL EXPENSES OR FUND BALANCE THAT THEY HAVE AT THE PARK BOARD, IS THAT CORRECT?
THAT'S PROBABLY ABOUT WHAT IT IS TOTAL.
I DIDN'T ACTUALLY TOTAL THE PARK BOARD SIDE OF IT, BUT THAT LOOKS ABOUT.
>> THEN APPROXIMATELY 1.9 OR SO IS TO COME OUT OF FUND BALANCE OR HOT THAT'S DEPOSITED HERE AT THE CITY?
>> YEAH. OF THAT 1.9, AS I MENTIONED, 1.2 IS ALREADY APPROVED.
>> YES. THAT WAS APPROVED AS PART OF LAST YEAR'S SPECIAL PROJECTS, THE WHOLE 1.75 MILLION FOR WAYFINDING AND SO IT'S THE REMAINDER OF THOSE ITEMS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED.
>> THERE'S NOTHING IN THAT REMAINING AMOUNT OVER THE 1.2 THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED IN THE PAST?
THE ONLY COMMENT I HAVE THAT I'D LIKE TO OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
IN THE AMOUNT THAT'S BEING FUNDED ON THE SPECIAL PROJECTS OUT OF THE PARK BOARD'S REVENUE, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RV PARK AT SEAWALL PARK IS 1.2.
COUNCIL, WE NEED TO WEIGH IN ON THAT.
I THINK THAT'S STILL OPEN AND THAT'S A DISCUSSION.
I THINK THAT THE PARK BOARD AND THE COUNCIL WILL NEED TO HAVE TO REALLY DETERMINE IF WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT.
WE HAVE A JOINT MEETING PLANNED, AS YOU KNOW, COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 10TH, AND THAT WILL BE ONE OF THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TO DISCUSS AT THAT POINT.
>> COUNCILMAN AND THEN JASON. I'M SORRY.
>> BRYSON, A QUESTION ON YOUR ENDING FUND BALANCE.
WHAT DOES THAT EQUATE TO IN TERMS OF YOUR APPROXIMATE NUMBER OF DAYS OF RESERVES?
>> ABSOLUTELY. I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.
THERE'S ACTUALLY A SCHEDULE IN OUR DRAFT BUDGET, AND I'LL POINT IT OUT TO YOU GUYS.
IT'S GOING TO BE THE VERSION THAT WE HAD UP HERE, THAT 12 MILLION, 0.2 WAS PRE-BERYL.
I'LL TELL YOU WHAT IT IS NOW POST-BERYL. LET ME GET TO THAT.
>> IT'S ACTUALLY ON PAGE 23 OF OUR BUDGET, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS HAVE A COPY OF IT THERE IN FRONT OF YOU.
IT'S OKAY. I CAN ABSOLUTELY SHARE THIS WITH COUNCIL.
WE ESTIMATE THAT WELL IN THE YEAR, IT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO BE 10.9 MILLION, SO A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN 12.3 THAT YOU SEE THERE.
THAT'S THE IMPACT FROM BARREL.
WE ARE REQUIRED TO KEEP 8.2 MILLION, WHICH IS ROUGHLY 120 DAYS OF OPERATION, SO OUR REQUIREMENT FOR RESERVES IS 120 DAYS.
THAT ENDS UP BEING 8.2 MILLION.
AT THE END OF THE YEAR, WE THINK WE'LL BE ABOUT 2.7 ABOVE THAT 120-DAY THRESHOLD.
>> I WOULD HAVE TO CALCULATE THAT.
I DON'T HAVE IT BROKEN DOWN BY DAY LIKE YOU GUYS HAVE, BUT I DO LIKE THAT METRIC.
THAT SHOULD BE EASY ENOUGH FOR ME TO CALCULATE SO I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU HERE PRETTY SOON.
>> I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHERE YOU WERE RELATED TO YOUR RESERVES. THANKS.
>> ON THE BUDGET BOOK YOU RECEIVED, IT'S ON PAGE 23, AS BRYSON MENTIONED TO LOOK AT THAT MORE THOROUGHLY.
THAT 2.7 THAT'S THERE, IS THAT INCLUDED IN YOUR BUDGET FOR THIS 24/25?
>> THAT WOULD BE WHAT WE THINK WE WOULD IN THE FISCAL YEAR AT 93,025.
>> THAT WOULD BE AFTER USING THE RESERVES THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE SLIDES.
>> I WAS THINKING WELL, TWO THINGS.
ONE IS THAT WE HAVE THE AUDIT THAT GLENN'S DOING.
I WANTED TO SEE IF COUNCIL WAS WARMED TO A CONDITIONAL OR PROVISIONAL APPROVAL UNTIL WE GET THE RECOMMENDATIONS BACK AND THEN WE SEND IT BACK WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO YOU GUYS AND IN 60 DAYS,
[01:50:03]
90 DAYS, HOWEVER MUCH, WE GET ANOTHER BUDGET THAT WE CAN LOOK AT APPROVE.>> THERE WAS ALSO A SECOND AUDIT THAT'S ONGOING.
THIS CITY COUNCIL HIRED WHITLEY PENN TO DO AN AGREED UPON PROCEDURES AUDIT AND THE RESULTS OF THAT HAVE BEEN DELAYED DUE TO VARIOUS INTERRUPTIONS OVER THE SUMMER AS WE'RE ALL AWARE.
>> YEAH, [LAUGHTER] BUT IN THE OCTOBER 27TH COUNCIL MEETING, THAT WHITLEY PENN REPORT WILL ALSO BE COMING TO COUNCIL.
>> WOULD COUNCIL BE WARMED TO THAT?
>> COST SAVING. JUST PROCEDURES, THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> WOULDN'T THOSE SAVINGS AS A RESULT, THE AUDIT BE JUST CAPTURED AND THEN COULD BE ADOPTED AS PART OF AN AMENDED BUDGET OR JUST BE FACTORED IN?
>> EITHER CONDITIONALLY APPROVED.
AT LEAST WE'RE ALL AWARE THAT IT'S GOING TO COME BACK AND THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET ANOTHER PARK BOARD BUDGET THAT WE CAN AMEND.
>> THEN WHAT'S THE IMPACT RELATED TO THE PARK BOARD IN TERMS OF CONDITIONALLY APPROVING OR NOT APPROVING A BUDGET?
>> IT'LL BE VERY SIMILAR, AND THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
IT'LL BE VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE SAW LAST YEAR AND WE GOT AN OPERATIONAL BUDGET AT THE BEGINNING, BUT WE DIDN'T GET OUR CAPITAL OR SPECIAL PROJECTS APPROVE UNTIL IT WAS DECEMBER DAM.
WAS THAT WHEN IT WAS SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE? THAT CAUSED SOME DELAYS IMPLEMENTING THOSE PROJECTS SO THAT'S DEFINITELY ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES.
I'M NOT SURE IF GLENN'S AUDIT IS GOING TO COME WITH BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS.
BUT WHAT I AM GOING TO WORK WITH HIM ON, AND THIS IS WHAT I REALLY ENJOY WORKING WITH GLENN ON IS POLICY IMPROVEMENT.
HE'S GOING TO BE TAKING A LOOK AT OUR CURRENT CREDIT CARD POLICY AND HELPING ME CRAFT A BETTER ONE.
>> I'M NOT LOOKING FOR DELAYS.
I DON'T WANT TO DELAY ANYTHING OVER AT THE PARK BOARD.
I'M JUST TRYING TO BE FINANCIALLY PRUDENT.
>> I PREFER TO WAIT UNTIL WE'RE ALL DONE TO SEE WHETHER WE DO WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING OR NOT BECAUSE I STILL DON'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION.
ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I MIGHT WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS HOW THE MONEY IS DISTRIBUTED TO THE PARK.
I THINK IT'S QUARTERLY OR SOMETHING AT 95%.
>> IT'S DEFINED IN THE HOT CONTRACT.
>> I WANT TO BE CLEAR IS COUNCILMAN PORRETTO'S THOUGHTS ON THIS.
GLENN HAS A PARK BOARD AUDIT THAT HE'S BEEN DOING OVER THERE.
HE'S GOING TO REPORT TO COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 19TH ON THE FINDINGS OF THAT AUDIT.
NOW, WHERE WE GO FROM THERE, I'M NOT SURE WE'LL NEED TO SEE WHAT GLENN'S THOUGHTS ARE ON THAT.
WE ALSO HAVE THE PARK BOARD'S BUDGET FOR THIS COMING FISCAL YEAR BEFORE US.
THIS IS JUST PERSONALLY MY OPINION, AND I UNDERSTAND COUNCILMAN PORRETTO'S THOUGHTS ON THIS.
TO ME, IT'S TWO DISTRICTS, TWO SEPARATE ITEMS HERE.
WE HAVE A BUDGET THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT FOR APPROVAL AND THEN WE HAVE AN AUDIT THAT'S GOING TO COME TO US.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT AUDIT IS GOING TO SAY.
I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE GEARED MORE TO POLICIES AND PROCEDURES THAN ANYTHING ELSE, BUT THAT'S A GUESS ON MY PART.
WE COULD CONDITIONALLY APPROVE THEIR BUDGET, BUT I THINK THAT PERSONALLY, I WOULDN'T TIE THEIR BUDGET UP WAITING FOR THIS AUDIT.
THAT'S JUST ME. BUT THAT'D BE UP TO COUNCIL ON THAT. YES, SIR.
>> ONE MORE SPECIFIC QUESTION BACK ON THE CAPITAL AND SPECIAL PROJECT SLIDE.
>> WE HAVE 1.955 MILLION IN SPECIAL PROJECTS REQUIRE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL.
OF THAT, 1.2 MILLION HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.
DOES THAT MEAN THAT THERE ARE 755,000 LEFT FOR COUNCIL TO APPROVE?
>> CORRECT. THE PROCESS I RECALL LAST YEAR IS THAT STAFF CAME FORWARD WITH A PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL AT ONE OF THE WORKSHOP MEETINGS ON THOSE SPECIAL PROJECTS, AND YOU WERE ABLE TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAD AND ONCE THOSE WERE SATISFIED, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE PROJECTS PROVIDED THAT THE HOT CONTRACT HAD ALSO BEEN APPROVED BECAUSE THAT PROVIDES OUR FUNDING.
>> RIGHT. HOT CONTRACT HAS NOT HAD BEEN APPROVED SO FAR, RIGHT? WE'RE OPERATING UNDER THE LAST YEAR'S CONTRACT.
>> WOULD THAT BE PART OF THE INTERLOCAL AS WELL?
>> WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST WAS SOME OF THESE SPECIAL PROJECTS, WE WOULD BRING BACK A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL AS WE WORK THROUGH PARK BOARD WITH THOSE.
THAT REALLY SHOULDN'T HOLD ANYTHING UP.
>> DAN, EVEN IF THE BUDGET WAS APPROVED, THAT'S NOT A GREEN LIGHT TO MOVE FORWARD ON ALL THESE PROJECTS, THEY'D STILL HAVE TO COME BACK PRESENT PLANS AND ALL THAT STUFF.
>> WE'RE STILL OPERATING, I THINK, AREN'T WE STAFF ON A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF CAPITAL PROJECT HAS TO COME BACK FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL, EVEN THOUGH IT'S APPROVED IN THE BUDGET?
>> EVEN THOUGH WE APPROVED SPECIAL PROJECTS OF X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS, IT'S STILL WHEN THAT BEFORE IT'S APPROVED AND MOVE FORWARD, IT COMES BACK TO COUNCIL.
>> YES, SIR. I GOT ONE MORE ON LIST.
[01:55:04]
IN Y'ALL'S BUDGET ON 15, IT TALKS ABOUT COLLABORATION WITH THE CITY AND REVENUE TO HELP REDUCE THE TAX BURDEN PLACED ON LOCAL TAXPAYERS, WHICH THE REASON THE PARK ORDER WAS CREATED.YOU HEARD OUR BUDGET CONSTRAINTS JUST AN HOUR AGO.
I'M ASKING, AND I'M SURE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO WEIGH IN.
BUT IS THERE ANY REVENUE THAT WE COULD GET FROM YOU GUYS EITHER ONE TIME OR WORK TOWARDS THAT DIRECTION THAT WE CAN PUT ON OUR BUDGET?
>> WELL, COME THROUGH YOUR SOFA CUSHIONS [LAUGHTER].
>> SURE. AGAIN, THANK EVERYONE FOR INVITING US OVER.
I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LONG MEETING FOR YOU GUYS, BUT WE DO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL PRESENTATION THAT I APPRECIATE GOING THROUGH ALL OF THIS.
THAT DOES GO INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL THAT WE HAVE WITH US IF IT PLEASES, COUNCIL.
WE CAN GO AHEAD AND HAVE THAT IN A PROMISE PRICE AND WE'LL KEEP IT AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE.
BUT IN THERE, I DO BELIEVE THAT EACH ITEM THAT YOU LOOK AT, THERE'S THREE QUESTIONS THAT WE ASKED OURSELVES WHEN WE JUSTIFIED THESE EXPENSES AS FIDUCIARIES.
ONE IS, DOES IT GENERATE ADDITIONAL REVENUE THAT WE CAN SHARE WITH THE CITY? TWO, DOES IT SOMEHOW OFFSET EXPENSES THAT ARE ON THE GENERAL FUND, POTENTIALLY.
THEN THREE, DOES IT ENCOURAGE VISITORS FROM FURTHER DISTANCES TO COME HERE, STAY LONGER AND SPEND MORE MONEY.
I'M CONFIDENT TO SAY THAT THIS BUDGET WAS NOT CREATED IN ANY ECHO CHAMBER OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, WE HAVE ENGAGED WITH OUR PARTNERS HERE LOCALLY HERE AT CITY HALL, AS WELL AS THE PORT.
WE'VE EVEN CROSSED THE CAUSEWAY, TALK TO PEOPLE THAT THE COUNTY, THE STATE, FEDERAL PARTNERS AS WELL.
I'M ALSO CONFIDENT IN SAYING THAT WE'VE ENGAGED IN NONPROFIT SIDE, AS WELL AS OUR IMPORTANT PRIVATE SECTOR PARTNERS IN THE HOSPITALITY SECTOR.
IF THAT'S OKAY WITH COUNCIL, BRYSON, I THINK YOU GOT THE GREEN LIGHT.
>> HOW LONG IS THIS PRESENTATION?
>> BEFORE WE GET INTO IT BECAUSE I DO WANT TO BE COGNIZANT OF EVERYBODY'S TIME.
I'M HAPPY TO SHARE IT WITH COUNCIL TO WHEN WE GET DONE THIS.
BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MORE DIRECTLY, COUNCILMAN.
IN THE BUDGET RIGHT HERE, THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS.
THERE'S ALREADY THE $300,000 REVENUE SHARE FROM SEAWOLF THAT I THINK NEEDS TO BE RENEGOTIATED AND POSSIBLY BE A HIGHER AMOUNT.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT, AND I THINK EVERYBODY'S IN AGREEMENT FROM COUNCIL ALL THE WAY DOWN TO STAFF THAT THESE ARE CITY ASSETS AND THE CITY SHOULD GET A RETURN ON THESE.
WE'RE LOOKING AT DELLANIRA PARK.
THAT'S ANOTHER PART THAT'S DOING REALLY, REALLY WELL, MAYBE THERE COULD BE SOMETHING IN THERE.
IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WE STARTED SELLING ADVERTISING, BOTH ONLINE ADVERTISING, THE TROLLEY ADVERTISING, WHICH WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY.
WE SPLIT ALL OF THAT 50/50 SO THERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE'VE DONE.
THEN INCLUDED IN THIS BUDGET IS THAT ON THE CAPITAL AND SPECIAL PROJECT SLIDE, THERE'S A SPECIAL CIRCUS EVENT THAT WE WANT TO HOLD AT STEWART BEACH THAT WE THINK WILL DRIVE QUITE A BIT OF VISITATION.
IT IS ON THE LIST OF AMOUNTS THAT WE WOULD ASK THE CITY TO FUND IF THE CITY APPROVES THAT AND WE GET THAT SEED MONEY AT 180, WHAT IT WOULD DO? I WOULD CREATE PARKING ADMISSIONS AT THE PARK, WHICH WILL BE KEPT AT THE PARK, BUT THEN THERE'S ALSO THE TICKET SALES THAT WE WOULD SPLIT 50/50 WITH THE CITY.
UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T KNOW IF WE COULD SOLVE ALL OF THE PROBLEMS, BUT WE'RE DEFINITELY LOOKING AT OPTIONS TO TRY TO GET MORE REVENUE FOR THE CITY, AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE ONGOING INTERLOCAL DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'VE BEEN HAVING.
>> IF I COULD ADD, BRYSON, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK WILL BE REALLY HELPFUL FOR US MOVING FORWARD IS TO GET VERY SPECIFIC GOALS FROM COUNCIL, AND I BELIEVE THAT'S ON THE JOINT DISCUSSION.
THE SOONER THAT WE GET THE GOALS, THE MORE LIKELY THAT WE CONCLUDE THEM IN THE BUDGET.
I KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THE GOALS AFTER YOU ALL HAVE LOOKED AT THE BUDGET.
BUT PERHAPS FOR NEXT YEAR, BEFORE WE BEGIN THE BUDGET PROCESS, WE COULD MEET WITH YOU AND YOU COULD SHARE YOUR IDEAS AND YOUR GOALS WITH US OF WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE AND AS WE'RE BUILDING THE BUDGET, WE CAN INCORPORATE THOSE IN THERE.
IT'S A LOT EASIER, I THINK TO DO THAT ON THE FRONT END TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK AND GUIDANCE THAN IT IS ON THE BACK END TO GO AND AMEND AND CHANGE OPERATIONS AND DELAY PROGRESS ON CURRENT PROJECT.
THAT WOULD BE MY ASK OF COUNCIL IS MAYBE WE COULD MEET IN FEBRUARY OR MARCH OF NEXT YEAR, 2025 TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO SEE COMING OUT OF THE BUDGET TO ASSIST THE CITY FOR THE FY '26 BUDGET.
>> WE'D ALSO LIKE TO LOOK AT HOW YOU [INAUDIBLE]
>> I'M LOOKING FOR HELP IN THE BOOK THAT WE CAN PUT IN THERE, AND HOWEVER THAT WOULD WORK OUT, TAXPAYERS AND WE WOULD ALL BE REALLY APPRECIATIVE IF SOMETHING COULD FALL OUT OF THE SKY.
>> YOU ALL ARE TAXPAYERS TOO SO YOU CAN RELATE TO THAT.
[02:00:02]
>> I KNOW DAN AND SHEILA HAVE BEEN MEETING WITH BRYSON AND I AND VINCE ON THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT.
PERHAPS THERE'S SOME ASPECTS OF THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THAT WE COULD SPEED UP.
I KNOW WE WANTED TO DO ONE COMPREHENSIVE.
BUT IF WE LOOK AT DAN, DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT? BUT PERHAPS WE COULD SPEED UP SOME OF THE REVENUE SHARING IDEAS AND WE COULD AMEND OUR BUDGETS IF WE NEEDED TO OPERATIONALLY TO ACHIEVE THAT IN THIS NEXT FY.
OF COURSE, WE WOULD HAVE TO TALK TO OUR BOARD ABOUT THAT.
I CAN'T MAKE THAT PROMISE WITHOUT TALKING TO.
>> ONE POINT WE MADE IN OUR DISCUSSIONS ON THE INTERLOCAL IS THE DIRECTIVE WE GOT FROM COUNCIL.
THAT THE CITY ASSETS NEED TO HAVE A RETURN TO THE CITIZENS OF GALVESTON.
WE'RE STARTING ON THAT PREMISE AND WE NEED TO GET THERE TO ENSURE THAT NUMBER ONE, THE MANAGEMENT OF THE PARKS IS THE MOST EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE FOR THE CITIZENS OF GALVESTON.
TO THIS POINT, WE'RE OPERATING UNDER THE PREMISE THE PARK BOARD IS THE WAY TO GO.
BUT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT EVERYTHING AND BRING BACK TO COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS ON THAT.
NONE OF THE CHANGES ARE IMMEDIATE.
YOU CAN'T FLIP A SWITCH, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THAT REVENUES START COMING TO THE CITY.
PARK BOARD HAS SOME IDEAS ON HOW TO ENHANCE REVENUE AT PARKS.
WE'RE GOING TO COLLECTIVELY WORK ON THOSE.
WE ENVISION A PROCESS WHERE THE STAFFS WORK TOGETHER TO BRING A COLLECTIVE RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL THAT YOU'RE NOT GETTING ANYTHING FROM THE PARK BOARD THAT HASN'T COME THROUGH CITY STAFF YET BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS IS IT COMES TO YOU GUYS AND THEN YOU GIVE IT BACK TO US.
WHEN WE SEE SOMETHING FOR THE FIRST TIME, THE SAME TIME YOU ALL DO, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO DISCUSS IT OR PROVIDE ANY INFORMATION ON IT.
WE'VE EVOLVED SO MUCH SINCE LAST YEAR.
THE BUDGET THAT THE PARK BOARD GAVE US THIS YEAR WAS MORE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST.
I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY SOME LITTLE TWEAKING THAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK FORWARD GOING FORWARD.
WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT OF BRYSON ABOUT THAT.
SHEILA DID A GOOD JOB SHOWING YOU A COMPARISON TO THEIR RECOMMENDED BUDGET VERSUS ACTUAL VERSUS THE WAY IT WAS PRESENTED, WHERE IT WAS BUDGET TO BUDGET.
BUDGET TO BUDGET JUST DOESN'T REALLY GIVE YOU A FULL PICTURE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING.
IF YOU COMPARE IT TO WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE PAST, IS THE WAY WE PRESENT OUR BUDGET TO YOU GUYS, THAT GIVES US MORE INSIGHT INTO WHAT WE'RE DOING GOING FORWARD.
BUT AS WE WORK THROUGH THESE INTERLOCAL DISCUSSIONS, OUR DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL, AND YOU ALL WILL HAVE TO CORRECT ME IF IT'S NOT WRONG IS YOU TOLD US TO GO OUT AND FIND REVENUE IN THE ASSETS MANAGED BY EVERYBODY THAT DOES IT FOR THE CITY AND THE PRINCIPAL SOURCE OF THAT IS THE B OF THE PARK BOARD.
>> I THINK WHAT COUNCILMAN PORRETTO IS ASKING IS THERE WE HAVE 10 DAYS TO COME UP WITH POSSIBLY A REVENUE SOURCE FROM THE PARK BOARD THAT WE COULD SUPPLEMENT OUR BUDGET.
>> IT HAD BEEN COUNTERED OPEN THE DOOR EVERY DAY AND GET MONEY OUT.
>> IF YOU WERE ASKING ME DIRECTLY, I'D SAY NO.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE OPERATING UNDER A INTERLOCAL THAT ROLLED OVER YEAR TO YEAR.
THE MANDATES WITHIN THAT INTERLOCAL EXIST ALREADY.
IT WOULD TAKE A PROCESS WHERE COUNCIL AND THE TRUSTEES ADOPT SOMETHING INCONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING INTERLOCAL.
SO THAT WILL TAKE SOME TIME IF I GUESS IN THREE, SIX MONTHS, YOU COULD PROBABLY DO THAT.
THE PROCESS HAS BEEN EXCEEDINGLY SLOW HISTORICALLY, THAT TAKES A LOT OF DISCUSSION BY AND BETWEEN COUNCIL AND THE TRUSTEES.
>> THE MONEY'S NOT SITTING THERE. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO JUST SEND YOU THE MONEY, MAYOR.
PEOPLE GOING TO HAVE TO BUY A CERTAIN NUMBER OF ENSERITAS OUT THERE AT THE DELLANIRA IN ORDER FOR US TO GET A PROFIT SHARE ON THAT OR TO GET A PROFIT SHARE ON THE PART. THEY'VE GOT TO EARN IT.
IT'S GOING TO BE A DIFFERENT CASH FLOW SITUATION. I AGREE WITH DAN.
I THINK ANYTHING IN 3-6 MONTHS IS PROBABLY REASONABLE.
IF YOU'D LIKE US TO TRY TO WORK WITH THEM TO PROGRAM SOMETHING IN, WE COULD TRY, BUT I HAVE SOME SUGGESTIONS IN THAT LETTER THAT I GAVE YOU GUYS.
>> JUST REMEMBER, WE DON'T SHARE IN THE ALCOHOL SALES AT DELLANIRA.
>> MAYBE WE JUST GET CONNED [LAUGHTER].
>> YOU'RE A RESIDENT OF GALVESTON.
>> AS PART OF STAFF AND ALL OF OUR EFFORTS TO TRY TO FIND MORE REVENUE, COULD WE SAY THAT WE'LL HAVE THAT INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT DONE BEFORE WE MEET FOR OUR FIRST GOALS MEETING IN '25? IF WE MEET IN MARCH OF '25 FOR OUR FIRST GOALS MEETING WITH THE PARK BOARD, WHICH IS GOING TO HELP INFORM THE BUDGET, WE HAVE THE INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT DONE BY THEN, SO WE'LL HAVE THAT TO HELP INFORM HOW WE PROCEED.
>> WE WANT TO ESTABLISH THAT AS A DEADLINE, I THINK THAT'S DOABLE.
WE HAVE TO TALK TO THE PARK BOARD.
>> WELL, MY QUESTION IS, IS THAT DO YOU DO THE INTER-LOCAL AND THEN HAVE JOINT MEETING OR DO YOU PRESENT THE DRAFT AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, GET INPUT, SET GOALS, AND THEN FINALIZE YOUR INTER-LOCAL?
>> A LOT OF THE INTER-LOCAL ARE OPERATIONAL TYPE ISSUES.
I THINK WHAT YOU DO IS YOU BRING THOSE OPERATIONAL ISSUES FORWARD TO COUNCIL,
[02:05:04]
SO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE AND WHAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS COLLECTIVELY FROM THE PARK BOARD AND THE CITY ARE ON THOSE THINGS.I THINK FROM A GOAL PERSPECTIVE, IT'S IF YOU'VE SEEN FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS THEY WANT TO BUILD AN RV PARK AT SEAWALL PARK, COUNCILS IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN HESITANT WITH THAT.
IT'S STILL THERE. IT'S STILL BEING RECOMMENDED.
THERE'S THINGS THAT THE PARK BOARD WANTS TO DO TO ENHANCE REVENUES.
NOW, IS IT A BOOK OF BUSINESS THE CITY WANTS TO BE IN OR THE CITY WANTS TO BE COMPETITIVE WITH PRIVATE BUSINESSES ON? THOSE ARE ALL POLICY DECISIONS.
COUNCILS IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN HESITANT TO COMPETE WITH LOCAL BUSINESSES.
>> WHAT YEAR INTER-LOCAL ARE WE WORKING ON?
>> WHERE HAS THE STOPPING BLOCK BEEN ON ACHIEVING A NEW INTER-LOCAL?
>> I DON'T THINK THERE'S A STOPPING BLOCK.
>> IT WAS TIME AND THEN, OF COURSE, I THINK WE WERE PLANNING ON STARTING IT, THEN KELLY LEFT AND THEN, OF COURSE, YOU GAVE KIMBERLY JUST A LITTLE BIT OF TIME [INAUDIBLE]
>> THERE'S A PROVISION IN THE INTER-LOCAL TO ROLL YEAR TO YEAR. SO EARLY.
>> JUST MET ON IT LAST WEEK, FOR EXAMPLE.
>> YOU'VE BEEN MEETING FOR SEVERAL MEETINGS NOW.
>> YEAH. WE JUST HAD A DELAY BECAUSE OF BERYL.
>> THIS STORM DID NOT CONSULT WITH US BEFORE IT CAME.
>> DAN, THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING.
I'D SUPPORT COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN'S POSITION OF GETTING THAT INTER-LOCAL BEFORE WE SET GOALS.
>> DAN, LET ME ASK THIS, WHEN IS THE INTER-LOCAL IN THE HOT CONTRACT EXPIRE?
>> AUGUST NEXT YEAR, I THINK, IS WHEN IT ROLLS AGAIN.
WE'RE OPERATING UNDER AN EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING.
>> YOU'RE JUST GOING TO HOLD OVER THE CONTRACT?
>> IT'S ALREADY RENEWED, MAYOR.
>> THERE'S TWO SEPARATE ITEMS THOUGH.
>> THE HOT CONTRACT AND THE INTER-LOCAL.
>> THE HOT CONTRACT AND THE INTER-LOCAL.
THE INTER-LOCAL ROLLS OVER, THE HOT CONTRACT WILL NEED TO BE APPROVED AGAIN.
>> BUT THE HOT CONTRACT, WHEN DOES IT EXPIRE?
>> IT'S UP. IT'LL BE COMING TO A MEETING.
> ALREADY TO HAVE IT. WE'VE BEEN WAITING TO PUT THE NUMBERS IN.
>> WE HAVE IT READY TO COME TO COUNCIL.
WE'RE JUST WAITING FOR THE NUMBERS AND THE NUMBERS WILL BE THEIR BUDGET.
>> WE WOULD NEED TO TALK TO OUR TRUSTEES ABOUT THIS OBVIOUSLY, BUT IF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING FOR THIS YEAR, ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE COULD DO IS LOOK TO DELLANERA RV PARK AND SEE WHERE WE COULD AMEND THAT BUDGET IN TERMS OF SOME OF THE CAPITAL THAT WE WERE GOING TO DO AND SEE IF WE COULD PROVIDE SOME CASH TO YOU RIGHT NOW.
WE WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE BOARD WITH SOME LANGUAGE AND SOME NUMBERS AROUND THAT, BUT PERHAPS THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO IN THE IMMEDIATE TURN TO HELP.
>> I WOULD ALSO LIKE YOU TO LOOK, AND IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT WOULD BE THAT EXTREMELY DIFFICULT, BUT WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE OPERATIONAL COST, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT FALL ONTO WHILE BARBARA WAS BACK THERE ON OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT THAT WOULD FALL UNDER BEAUTIFICATION OF ENTRY POINTS THAT ARE RELATED TO TOURISM.
A LOT OF THAT COMES DIRECTLY OUT OF OUR GENERAL FUND.
IF WE COULD COVER THAT, THROUGH HOT TAX, IF YOU COULD COME UP WITH A WAY TO MAKE AN ALLOTMENT FOR THAT.
THE OTHER THING THAT AND THIS WON'T BE A FAST THING, BUT A LOT OF THE ISSUES THAT [INAUDIBLE] POLICE ARE ON THE BEACH AND SOME WAY THAT WE COULD GET RELATED TO THE BEACH, SIMILAR LIKE WE DO IN THE STRAND, SIMILAR LIKE WE DO ON THE SEAWALL, GET SOME HOT SUPPORT FOR THE POLICE ON THE BEACH.
>> DON'T WE DO THAT FOR SPECIAL STAND-UPS?
>> WHAT WE DO ON THE WESTON BEACHES.
>> IF I COULD, AND I THINK THOSE ARE ALL WONDERFUL IDEAS, BUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT USING HOPPER POLICE, THAT'S A CITY THING.
I DON'T THINK THAT WE WOULD OPINE ON IT.
WE WOULD ASSIST HOWEVER WE COULD, BUT THAT WOULD BE A CITY ISSUE TO RESOLVE, I THINK.
>> WELL YOU'D HAVE TO TAKE THE MONEY OUT OF THE ANNUAL HOT.
SO LESS HOT FOR THE PARK BOARD, OFFSET SOME OF IT WITH OTHER EXPENSES.
THAT'S THE WAY YOU'D HAVE TO DO IT.
THAT'S WHY IT WOULDN'T HAPPEN RIGHT NOW IF YOU'RE IN APPROVING BUDGET.
>> IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD SET AS A GOAL FOR NEXT YEAR.
>> I'M JUST SAYING IT'S SOMETHING I WOULD DEFINITELY LIKE TO LOOK AT.
>> I KNOW, CHAIRMAN HARDCASTLE WILL AGREE WITH YOU ON THE BEAUTIFICATION EFFORTS THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE BROUGHT UP LAST YEAR AND WE WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO ASSIST WITH THAT.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. I REGRET THAT WE WEREN'T ABLE TO HAVE A JOINT MEETING OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS AND EVERYTHING,
[02:10:02]
BUT THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, IN ADDITION TO WHAT KIMBERLY SAID, IS THAT WE WANTED TO CONFIRM WITH THE NEW COUNCIL.IF THE GOALS THAT WE NEED TO WORK ON THAT ANSWER THOSE THREE QUESTIONS THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE STILL ON THE RIGHT TRACK WITH THIS COUNCIL AS WELL, AND BEAUTIFICATION WAS ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM A PRIOR COUNCIL TOO.
>> I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR NEWER COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO MAY NOT BE AWARE THAT, CORRECT, WE'RE NOT PAYING FOR THE POLICE DETAIL OUT ON THE WEST END, THE PARK BOARD DOES PAY FOR THE OFFICERS WHO ARE AT OUR BEACH PARK, THE STEWART BEACH, EAST BEACH, AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE AN OFFICER DETAIL AT SEAWALL PARK.
>> A HOT DOESN'T ALLOW YOU TO PAY FOR THEM IN ANY OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES.
WELL, AND THAT'S NOT HOT THAT'S PAYING FOR THEM.
THAT'S ACTUALLY BEACH USER FEES THAT ARE PAYING FOR THOSE OFFICERS.
>> IT'S BEACH USER FEE THAT'S USED TO PAY FOR THEM.
>> THERE'S NO DOUBT FOR THE '25/'26 BUDGET, WE'LL BE ABLE TO REALLY HONE IN ON EXTRA REVENUE SOURCES.
IT'S JUST TRYING TO GET SOMETHING FOR THIS YEAR'S BUDGET.
>> I WOULD APPRECIATE THE EFFORT.
>> IT'S PHILOSOPHICAL COMING FROM YOU GUYS AS PROVIDING OUR DIRECTIVE OF WHAT YOU WANT US TO DO.
THAT IS THE GUIDANCE THAT I THINK THE PARK BOARD IS SEEKING AND STAFF'S SEEKING IS THE DIRECTION COMING FROM THE CITY LEADERSHIP ON WHERE YOU WANT US TO GO WITH THIS.
I THINK THAT ONCE WE RECEIVE THAT, THAT COLLECTIVELY, WE CAN CERTAINLY GET THERE, BUT WE JUST NEED THAT DIRECTION FROM YOU GUYS.
>> I THINK, BRYSON, VINCE AND I CAN MEET FOLLOWING THIS MEETING AND PERHAPS HAVE A PROPOSAL AS EARLY AS THE SEPTEMBER.
WELL, I DON'T KNOW, THAT'S COMING UP PRETTY FAST, BUT PERHAPS THE SEPTEMBER MEETING TO THE TRUSTEES ON WAYS THAT WE CAN FIND FUNDING FROM DELLANERA.
>> WHEN IS YOUR DATE OF YOUR TRUSTEE MEETING IN SEPTEMBER? PROBABLY AFTER THE 19TH.
>> WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT APPROVING THIS BUDGET ON THE 19TH ON THAT.
>> IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE THE PROMISE OF LOOKING AT IT AND COMING UP WITH A NUMBER.
THERE'S NO WAY WE COULD GET YOU A NUMBER.
>> UNLESS YOU HAD THE INFORMATION THEY NEED.
>> WE COULD PROVIDE A SUGGESTION THAT WE WOULD BE MAKING THE RECOMMENDATION WE WOULD BE MAKING TO THE TRUSTEES.
WE COULD PROVIDE THAT WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE TRUSTEES WOULD ULTIMATELY HAVE TO APPROVE THAT.
>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE VALUABLE.
>> VINCE IS NODDING HIS HEAD, HE HAS HOMEWORK.
>> WE HAVE A PRESENTATION BY THE PARK BOARD.
>> I WILL TRY TO MOVE THROUGH AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
>> DO WE HAVE YOUR WORD IT FITS WITHIN THE AGENDA ITEM?
>> YOU CAN BE LIKE THAT ANNOUNCER ON THE ADVERTISEMENTS.
>> MOST OF WHAT I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU [INAUDIBLE] PRESENTATION SO I WILL MOVE PRETTY QUICKLY THROUGH THAT STUFF.
>> BRYSON, JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOU HAVEN'T SENT THIS TO THE CITY.
>> I JUST FINISHED IT UP RIGHT BEFORE I CAME HERE.
I WILL EMAIL IT TO YOU AS SOON AS WE'RE DONE.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. I'LL GO QUICKLY.
FY25 BUDGET AND '25 TO '29 IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER ALL OF THIS TODAY BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEEN COVERED QUITE A BIT, BUT I'M GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT FUNDS WE HAVE, WHAT OUR FUNDING SOURCES ARE, WHAT IS HOT, HOW DO WE USE IT IN TERMS OF THE PARK BOARD, A QUICK LITTLE SLIDE ON HOT COLLECTIONS AND TRENDS, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER THE BUDGET ITSELF, BUT I'LL BE BRIEF ON THAT BECAUSE YOU ALREADY TALKED ABOUT A LOT OF THAT.
JUST LIKE THE CITY, WE'RE A LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITY.
OUR FISCAL YEAR FOLLOWS THE SAME FISCAL YEAR AS THE CITY PER THE HOT CONTRACT THAT YOU'VE HEARD US REFER TO.
WE HAVE TO HAVE THE BUDGET SUBMITTED BY AUGUST 1ST, WHICH WE WERE ABLE TO DO, BUT AMENDED IT AFTER BERYL TO ACCOUNT FOR DUTY FUNDING.
CHAPTER 102 REQUIRES WHAT WE HAVE TO KEEP IN THE BUDGET OR WHAT WE HAVE TO INCLUDE.
WE INCLUDE ALL OF THAT IN OUR BUDGET, AND THEN SOME ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL SCHEDULES AND OTHER INFORMATION TO TRY TO BE MORE TRANSPARENT.
WHAT'S IN THE BUDGET? AS YOU GUYS ARE LOOKING AT OUR BUDGET BOOK, IT'S GOING TO BE VERY SIMILAR TO THE CITIES, NOT AS LONG OR AS COMPLICATED, OF COURSE, BUT AS YOU GO INTO IT, IT GOES FROM HIGH-LEVEL TO MORE DETAILED SCHEDULES.
IN THE INTRODUCTION SECTION, IT'S YOUR TYPICAL STUFF, WHO WE ARE, WHAT WE DO, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, OUR ORGANIZATIONAL CHART.
YOU HAVE THE SUPPLEMENTAL SCHEDULES, SOME OF THE STUFF THAT WE REVIEWED EARLIER.
[02:15:02]
THERE'S A REVENUE AND EXPENSE SUMMARY, THERE'S THE BUDGETED EMPLOYEE ACCOUNT, ESTIMATED CASH BALANCES AND RESERVE CALCULATION, CASH IMPACT ANALYSIS, SO ON AND SO FORTH.THEN YOU GET INTO THE CONSOLIDATED BUDGET.
THAT'S THE BUDGET FOR THE ENTIRE AGENCY WRAPPED UP INTO ONE, AND THEN WE ACTUALLY BREAK EVERYTHING DOWN BY THE FUND BUDGETS BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS AND THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS, AND THEN THE BUDGET IS ROUNDED OUT WITH THE FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
WE HAVE BEACH CLEANING, BEACH PATROL, DEBT SERVICE FOR THE SETTLEMENT FUND THAT'S FROM THE OIL SPILL SEVERAL YEARS AGO.
WE RECEIVED A SETTLEMENT FROM THAT.
WE HAVE THE GENERAL FUND, THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES FUND, NOURISH BEACH, AND THE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT.
THAT ROUNDS OUT OUR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS.
ON THE ENTERPRISE SIDE, YOU HAVE DELLANERA RV PARK, EAST END LAGOON, [INAUDIBLE] EAST BEACH, STEWART BEACH, SEAWALL PARK, AND URBAN PARK.
FUNDING SOURCES. WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT IT.
HOT IS OUR BREAD AND BUTTER, ACCOUNTS FOR ABOUT 41% OF THE TOTAL BUDGET.
YOU TAKE OUT GRANTS AND FEMA, IT'S MORE LIKE 60%, SO IT'S DEFINITELY A BIG PART.
BEACH USER FEES AND PARK ADMISSIONS ARE A HUGE PART OF OUR BUDGET AS WELL.
THEN OF COURSE, WE DO GENERATE SOME OTHER REVENUE.
THERE'S CONCESSIONARY REVENUE, LEASE REVENUE, RENTAL, INCOME, INSURANCE PROCEEDS, LOANS, LINE OF CREDIT USE, ADVERTISING REVENUE, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
GRANTS, FEMA, THEN WE DO HAVE SOME BUDGETED USE OF RESERVES.
SKIP OVER THAT. HOT, YOU GUYS HAVE PROBABLY ALREADY BEEN OVER THIS QUITE A BIT.
IT'S JUST THE TAX RATE APPLIED TO SOMEONE WHO RENTS A ROOM FOR LESS THAN 30 DAYS.
IN GALVESTON, THAT RATE IS 15%.
IN A NUTSHELL, YOU COULD DEBATE AND TALK ALL DAY LONG ABOUT WHAT HOT IS CHARGED ON.
WHENEVER I'M TALKING WITH TAXPAYERS, ESSENTIALLY WHAT I SAY IS THE BASE RENT AND ANYTHING TO GET THE ROOM READY FOR OCCUPANCY IS WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER TAX PROCEEDS.
>> I GOT A QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU RIGHT THERE ON WHAT HOT IS CHARGED ON.
READING SOME OF THE DOCUMENTS HE SENT ME, IT APPEARS THAT HOT CAN ALSO BE CHARGED FOR RENTAL FOR CONFERENCE ROOMS AND HOTELS WHERE THERE ARE OTHER ROOMS. ALL OF THAT IS JUST ROLLED UP INTO THE HOT PAYMENT?
>> IT SHOULD BE, YEAH. ABSOLUTELY. WHETHER OR NOT AN INDIVIDUAL HOTEL IS REPORTING RECEIPTS FROM THE RENTAL OF THEIR CONFERENCE ROOM, LET'S SAY, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE FLUSHED OUT IN AUDIT.
>> THAT'S PART OF WHAT THE AUDITOR DOES.
HE MAKE SURE THEY'RE PAYING THE HOT ON THE THINGS THAT HOT IS SUPPOSED TO BE PAID ON.
>> IF YOU GET CAUGHT SMOKING IN A ROOM.
>> IF SOMEBODY HAS TO FUMIGATE A ROOM AND YOU'VE SMOKED IN THE ROOM.
>> IT HAPPENS SOMETIMES. THIS IS THE HOT DISTRIBUTION AGAIN.
SHEILA ALREADY WENT OVER THAT, HOW THOSE PENNIES ARE BROKEN OUT.
OUT OF THE 15%, 11 STAYS ON THE ISLAND AND [INAUDIBLE] THAT.
I ALWAYS SUM IT UP WHENEVER I'M TALKING TO PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC, WHAT DOES THE PARK BOARD DO WITH HOT? OBVIOUSLY, IT'S MORE COMPLICATED THAN THIS, BUT THE WAY THAT I ALWAYS SUM IT UP TO PEOPLE IS WE ATTRACT THEM.
WE TRY TO GET THE PEOPLE HERE.
WE TRY TO KEEP THEM SAFE WHEN THEY ARE HERE ON THE BEACH, AND THEN OF COURSE, WE CLEAN UP AFTER THEM AFTER THEY LEAVE.
THEN OF COURSE WE DO USE IT FOR SOME BEACH NOURISHMENT ACTIVITIES.
THOSE ARE OUR THREE MAIN THINGS: TOURISM, BEACH PATROL, AND COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT. YOU ALREADY SAW THIS.
THERE WAS A REALLY NICE CHART THAT SHEILA HAD IN HER PRESENTATION.
IT'S JUST TO ILLUSTRATE HOW HOT AND SALES TAX GO HAND IN HAND FROM A TREND POINT, BUT I DIDN'T NOTICE SOMETHING, AND THIS IS SOMETHING I JUST THOUGHT ABOUT THE OTHER DAY, AND IT'S INTERESTING, DOESN'T PERTAIN TO THE BUDGET TOO MUCH, BUT YOU CAN NOTICE HOW THE LOCAL HOT AND SALES TAX RATES, THE TREND LINES CONVERGE THERE IN '22.
YOU SEE THAT HUGE SPIKE FROM '20 TO '22 AND THEN THEY CONVERGE.
I THINK PART OF THAT WAS THE ORDINANCE THAT A PREVIOUS COUNCIL PASSED TO REQUIRE AIRBNB AND VRBO TO COLLECT AND START PAYING HOT.
I THINK THAT WE WERE COLLECTING A LOT OF HOT THAT WAS ALREADY OUT THERE THAT WE WEREN'T COLLECTING BEFORE.
IT WASN'T JUST NECESSARILY NEW SHORT-TERM RENTALS, ALTHOUGH THERE WAS INCREASED VISITATION NEW SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
YOU CAN SEE IT STARTS TO DELTA AGAIN A LITTLE BIT AS WE GET INTO '23 AND '24.
OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS AN IMPACT.
THERE'S A STRAIN ON PUBLIC SERVICES WHEN IT COMES TO TOURISM, STRAIN ON INFRASTRUCTURE, STRAIN ON PUBLIC SAFETY.
ALL THESE THINGS ARE ABSOLUTELY TRUE, AND WE CAN SEE THOSE THINGS IN YOUR BUDGET.
HOW CAN WE HELP? THIS IS TO COUNCILMAN PRORETOS [PHONETIC] QUESTIONS.
WE DEFINITELY WANT TO IDENTIFY SOURCES OF REVENUE THAT CAN TRY TO REDUCE THE TAX BURDEN.
WE NOTICED THAT IN YOUR FY 25 PROPOSED BUDGET, THAT'S A GOAL THAT WE FEEL LIKE THE PARK BOARD CAN GET BEHIND AND HELP YOU WITH.
THERE WAS ANOTHER GOAL IN THERE TO PROCURE AN ANALYSIS THAT WILL IDENTIFY THE COST OF TOURISM ON THE CITY AND ITS TAXPAYERS.
WE'RE ABSOLUTELY INTERESTED IN WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND HAPPY TO CONTRIBUTE HOWEVER WE CAN TO THAT STUDY WHEN THE CITY GETS READY FOR THAT.
>> WE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT ALREADY.
WE DO PRESENT A BALANCED BUDGET.
YOU HAVE THE TOTAL REVENUE OF 51 MILLION, TOTAL EXPENSE OF 50 MILLION.
[02:20:02]
THAT DOES INCLUDE YOUR BUDGETED CASH USE OR RESERVE USE AND YOUR INTER-FUND TRANSFERS.BUT THAT'S ESSENTIALLY IN A NUTSHELL WHAT THE BUDGET LOOKS LIKE.
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AGAIN ALREADY.
YOU SAW G LIZ ANALYSIS WHERE THEY COMPARED IT TO PRIOR YEAR PROJECTED ACTUALS.
THIS, OF COURSE, IS A COMPARISON TO PRIOR YEAR BUDGET.
OVERALL, WHEN YOU EXCLUDE FMA AND CAPITAL, WE REDUCED THE BUDGET 4.4% COMPARED TO THE FY24 BUDGET.
OF COURSE, WHEN YOU FACTOR IN PROJECTED ACTUALS, IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THAT.
THERE WAS A NUMBER OF CONTRIBUTING FACTORS FOR WHY THE ACTUALS CAME IN A LITTLE BIT LOWER THAN BUDGET.
BUT IN A NUTSHELL, THAT'S WHAT THINGS LOOK LIKE.
REVENUE SHARING. WE HAD TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT REVENUE SHARING.
YOU JUST SO YOU KNOW, THERE'S $242,000 IN ADVERTISING AND SPONSORSHIP REVENUE IN THE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT BUDGET THAT WE HAVE BUDGETED TO SHARE WITH THE CITY.
THEN THE $300,000 FROM SEAWOLF PARK, I THINK WE NEED TO SEE WHAT ELSE THERE IS BEYOND JUST THOSE TWO ITEMS. OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS.
AS SHEILA MENTIONED, THE CONTRIBUTIONS FROM URBAN PARK TO THE CITY'S CAPITAL RESERVE AND MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR FUNDS IN THE BUDGET, 458,700.
THAT IS CITY REVENUE, OR THE CONDUIT, WE COLLECT IT, WE TRANSFERRED OVER TO THE CITY.
BUT THOSE ARE THE AMOUNTS THAT WE HAVE IN THE BUDGET FOR THOSE TWO ITEMS, $458,000.
>> THOSE ARE THE BEACH FEES, CORRECT?
THIS IS THE INTER-FUND TRANSFER SCHEDULE, WHICH I WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT UP TO SHEILA FOR HELPING US DEVELOP THIS ONE.
IT'S A LOT EASIER TO DIGEST THAN OUR OLD ONES, SO KUDOS FOR HELPING US OUT THERE.
TOTAL INTER-FUND TRANSFERS FOR THE ENTIRE BUDGET IS ABOUT $3.3 MILLION.
THAT'S A REDUCTION OF 3.7 FROM THE PRIOR YEAR, ABOUT A 9.6% REDUCTION.
THEN OF COURSE, YOU HAVE THE TRANSFERS INTO THE GENERAL FUND.
THAT'S THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES FUND THAT PROVIDES ALL YOUR IT, PAYROLL ACCOUNTS PAYABLE.
ALL THAT GOOD STUFF, MANAGEMENT, OVERSIGHT, ALL THAT STUFF IS HOUSED IN THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET, AND IT'S COVERED BY TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FUNDS.
BUT WE WERE ABLE TO BUDGET A $74,000 REDUCTION OR AT ABOUT A 3% REDUCTION COMPARED TO '24, TRYING TO REDUCE THAT ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN ON THE OTHER FUNDS.
AS I MENTIONED, TRANSFERS TO THE GENERAL FUND FOR THOSE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, AND THEY EQUATE ABOUT 4.8% OF THE TOTAL BUDGET.
WHEN YOU TAKE TOTAL TRANSFERS TO THE GENERAL FUND, DIVIDED BY TOTAL BUDGETED EXPENDITURES, IT'S ABOUT 4.8% OF THE TOTAL BUDGET.
OF COURSE, WE DO TRANSFER SOME FROM NOURISH BEACH TO BEACH CLEANING AND BEACH PATROL.
WE JUSTIFY THAT TRANSFER IN OUR MINES THROUGH TEXAS TAX CODE, 156.2511, TALKS ABOUT THE REBATE OF 2% OF STATE AT TO ELIGIBLE COASTAL MUNICIPALITIES LIKE GALVESTON.
CITY OF GALVESTON CHOOSES TO ALLOCATE THOSE FUNDING TO THE PARK BOARD TO CLEAN AND MAINTAIN THE BEACH AS THAT ITEM OR THAT TERM IS DEFINED IN SECTION 61-063.
WHEN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THAT DEFINITION IS, IT'S CLEAN AND MAINTAIN, WHICH INCLUDES THE EMPLOYMENT OF LIFEGUARDS BEACH PATROLS AND LITTER CONTROLS.
>> RAWLINS AND I GOT A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT BEFORE.
IN TERMS OF THE BREAKDOWN OF THAT AND WHAT PART OF THAT DOES, I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO FAR IN THE WEEKS, BUT YOU'VE GOT BEACH CLEANING, BEACH PATROL, AND BEACH NOURISHMENT.
BEACH NOURISHMENT ALSO INCLUDES SOME SALARIES OF THE PEOPLE WHO MANAGE THESE BEACH RENOURISHMENT PROJECTS.
HOWEVER, IT APPEARS THAT THE BEACH CLEANING AND THE BEACH PATROL IS LIKE AUTOMATIC.
BUT THE 0.57 OF THE BEACH RENOURISHMENT IS DISCRETIONAL OR SOMETHING, AM I GETTING THE RIGHT? THERE WAS SOME LACK OF CLARITY AROUND WHETHER YOU WERE GOING TO GET THAT EVERY YEAR AND IF YOU'RE USING IT BY SALARIES TO MANAGE THESE BEACH PROJECTS, THAT'S NOT A VERY GOOD WAY TO BE ABLE TO BUDGET BECAUSE IF IT SOMEHOW IS NOT THERE THE NEXT YEAR, YOU CAN'T JUST FIRE PEOPLE AND HIRE THEM LIKE THAT.
THE DISCUSSION WE HAD WAS IS THAT REALLY DISCRETIONARY OR IS THAT AUTOMATIC AND JUST TO BE SURE THAT WE CAN USE TO PAY THE SALARY FOR SOME OF THOSE FATE NOURISHMENT PROPS?
>> IS THAT BASED OFF OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEES CHARGED ON THE GRANTS RECEIVED FROM. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IS THIS THE TRANSFER BASED OFF THAT?
>> NO, SO WHAT BOB'S TALKING ABOUT IS OUR PROJECT MANAGER AND OUR GRANT MANAGER.
>> ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR. THOSE ARE THE THREE SALARIES THAT SIT IN NOURISH BEACH.
NOURISH BEACH ISN'T JUST SOLELY FUNDED BY HUNT.
IT HAS A LOT OF GRANT FROM FMA REVENUES IN THERE AS WELL.
[NOISE] THOSE TWO EMPLOYEES, THE PROJECT MANAGER, OF COURSE, I GUESS SHE'S DIRECTOR OF COASTAL OPERATIONS AND THE GRANT MANAGER.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF WHAT THEY DO IS GOING TO BE RELATED TO
[02:25:03]
BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECTS AND BEACH NOURISHMENT ACTIVITY.THAT'S WHY WE'VE ALLOCATED THOSE SALARIES THERE.
IF I'M HEARING COUNCILMAN BROWN RIGHT, I THINK WHAT HE'S SAYING IS, IF THAT FUNDING WERE TO EVER NOT COME TO THE PARK FOR ANYMORE, WHAT WOULD WE DO WITH THOSE INDIVIDUALS? OF COURSE, THAT IS ABSOLUTELY A CONCERN AND WE SHARE THAT.
BUT ULTIMATELY, WHAT WE THINK IS CLEAN AND MAINTAIN, AS THAT IS DEFINED BY THE NATURAL RESOURCES CODE, ALLOWS FOR THOSE POSITIONS TO BE BUDGETED THERE AND THEN OF COURSE ALLOWS FOR THE TRANSFERS OUT OF THAT FUND TO NOURISH BEACH AND BEACH CLEANING.
ULTIMATELY, THOUGH, THAT IS A POLICY DECISION FOR COUNSEL TO MAKE.
>> THAT ALL TO BE CLEAR, THOSE THREE BUCKETS THAT I TALKED ABOUT COME FROM THE REBATE FROM THE STATE OF THE 6%, THEY GIVE US 2% BACK.
THAT'S WHERE THAT IS ALL MADE UP.
THAT'S WHAT I GUESS DICTATES WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T DO WITH IT ACCORDING TO THAT.
BUT I JUST THOUGHT THAT SINCE WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT, THAT WE NEED TO CLARIFY THAT PROCEDURALLY, HOW THAT MONEY IS TRANSFERRED AND WHETHER IT'S DISCRETIONAL OR AUTOMATIC OR SOME OTHER FASHION.
>> I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I THINK THE ALLOCATION TO THE CAR COURT IS PROBABLY DISCRETION.
>> KIMBERLY WAS JUST SAYING THAT'S IN THE HOT CONTRACT.
>> I'M NOT SURE WHAT IT SAYS IN THE HOT CONTRACT, BUT I GUESS IT SAYS THE CITY WILL TRANSFER THAT ALL THAT 2% PERIOD TO THE DEPART BOARD.
>> YEAH, IT'S DON HAS RESEARCHED THAT, AND WE'RE GOING TO I THINK THEY'LL BE DISCUSSING THAT WHEN THEY FINALIZE THIS HOT.
>> THERE'S A LITTLE PARK IN THE CITY COVE THAT PROVIDES IT'S NOT TO BE USED FOR BEACH RESTORATION.
>> DID IT NOT BE USED FOR BEACH RESTORATION?
>> NO, THAT WAS NOT AN ISSUE COUNSEL WANTED TO DEAL WITH LAST YEAR.
>> TO BE AT ODDS WITH WHAT THIS SAYS HERE, BEACH NOURISHMENT IS SUPPOSED TO GET 0.57 THAT 2%.
>> [LAUGHTER] I GUESS WE'LL FIGURE THAT OUT WITH A HOT CONTRACT, BUT FOR NOW, THEY'RE OKAY.
>> MOVING RIGHT ALONG. THE OTHER TRANSFERS THAT WE HAVE GOING TO AND PRO.
THERE'S TRANSFERS FROM THE BEACH PARKS TO SEAWOLF AND SEAWOLF TO BEACH PATROL.
THAT'S FOR THE SECURITY SERVICES PROVIDED AT THOSE LOCATIONS, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT EARLIER.
THERE IS A BUDGET TO TRANSFER FROM OUR OIL SPILL SETTLEMENT FUND TO RAAL EAST BEACH.
IT'S $120,000 THAT WE PLAN TO USE FOR BERN REMOVAL AND VEGETATION MITIGATION PROJECT AT THE PARK.
THE PROJECT IS AIMED AT REMOVING BEACH SIDE BERM AND WESTERN SECTION AREAS OF THE PARK, WHICH IS DEVELOPED THROUGH A RESEARCH PROJECT WITH TAMBO THAT WE DID.
THE MATERIAL. THE BERMS WILL BE DISTRIBUTED ACROSS THE PARKING AREA, WHERE ON PARKS WEST SIDE TO HELP ALLEVIATE FLOODING CONCERNS.
SORRY. MY EYES GOT ACROSS THERE FOR A SECOND.
ANYWAYS, THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE DEVELOPED AND SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF GAMSON AND THE TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE THROUGH A BEACH FRONT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT PROCESS.
MR. MAYOR, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT IF IT WAS APPROVED IN THE BUDGET, IT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK UP.
FUND BALANCES. WE DON'T NEED TO BELABOR THAT TOO MUCH.
SHE HAD A REALLY GOOD SLIDE ON THAT.
THE ONLY THING THAT I WILL POINT OUT IS IT'S CHANGED A LITTLE BIT FROM THE 12.3, I THINK IT WAS DOWN TO THE 10.9.
THAT'S THE IMPACT OF HURRICANE BARREL ON OUR FUND BALANCES.
IN JUNE 2018, THE PARK BOARD DID ADOPT A RESERVE POLICY.
IN A NUTSHELL, WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN CASH RESERVE BALANCES EQUAL TO 120 DAYS OF THE OPERATIONAL COSTS OF THE CURRENT YEAR'S FISCAL BUDGET.
AVAILABLE REVENUES WILL BE MAINTAINED IN THE FUND BALANCE, THE PORTION OF THE FUND BALANCE IS DESIGNED TO BE USED ONLY IN CASE OF EMERGENCY.
THAT 120 DAYS, WE CAN ONLY TOUCH IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY, AND IF SEVEN TRUSTEES ALLOW FOR US TO USE THAT.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT OUR 120 DAY REQUIREMENT.
YEAH, IT'S 10.9, AND THEN WE HAVE THE OPERATING BUDGETED EXPENSE IN FY25.
THE REQUIRED RESERVE AMOUNT IS 8.2.
WE HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THAT'S HOW THE PARK BOARD FUNDS, CAPITAL PROJECTS, CAPITAL EQUIPMENT, AND STUFF LIKE THAT IS THE FUND BALANCE ABOVE THE 120 DAYS THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO KEEP PER OUR BY LAWS.
IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO AT LEAST HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF MOBILITY, A BIT OF ABILITY TO MAINTAIN THOSE FUND BALANCES ABOVE 120 DAYS JUST FOR THAT PURPOSE FOR CAPITAL REPLACEMENT, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET THIS YEAR IS $795,000 WORTH OF BUDGETED CASH USE.
THERE IS A SCHEDULE IN THE BUDGET BOOK ITSELF THAT BREAKS THIS DOWN.
BUT OUT OF THE DEBT SERVICE FUND, WE'RE TRANSFERRING IT'S THE OIL SETTLEMENT FUND, 120,000, ABOUT 118 TO COVER THE BERM REMOVAL AND VEGETATION MITIGATION.
[02:30:02]
WE JUST TALKED ABOUT NOURISH BEACH DOES BUDGET SOME.USE OF THE HOT FUND BALANCE FOR FMA GRANT LOCAL MATCHES, THAT'S RELATED TO BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECTS.
THEY DID BUDGET IT'S $139,000 HERE, BUT COUNCILMAN LEWIS, I WANT TO ASSURE YOU THAT IT IS $200,000 THAT WE HAVE IN THE BUDGET.
THIS IS JUST THE CASH THAT WE NEEDED TO FUND THAT PROGRAM.
THEN WE HAVE EASTON LAGOON, THE RESTORE GRANT LOCAL MATCH OF ABOUT 343,000.
THE RESTORE GRANT AT EASTON LAGOON IS 100% REIMBURSABLE, SO WE THINK THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO GET THAT FULL 343,000 REIMBURSED IN FY26.
AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR THIS TOO MUCH BECAUSE SHEILA HAD A SLIDE ON THIS ALREADY, TALKING ABOUT OUR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT.
THIS GIVES YOU A REALLY HIGH LEVEL LISTING OF WHAT'S INCLUDED IN OUR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
BEACH CLEANING, THERE'S THE DIAGNOSTIC COMPUTER AND THE DUMP TRAILERS.
THE BEACH PATROL A JET SKI THAT'S PART OF THEIR REGULAR ROTATION, A PASSENGER VAN THAT THEY USE FOR JUNIOR GUARD, AND THEY ALSO USE THAT TO MOBILIZE LIFEGUARDS AROUND AND STUFF LIKE THAT TO USE THE PASSENGER VAN TO MOVE THEM UP AND DOWN THE SEA WALL.
I DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO GO OVER EACH ONE OF THESE ALL THE TIME, IT'S IN THE BUDGET, AND SHE HAD ALREADY TALKED ABOUT IT, BUT THAT'S A BRIEF LIST.
THESE ARE THE CAPITAL PROJECTS AND APPROVAL STATUS.
NOW, AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO GO OVER EACH ONE OF THESE, BECAUSE I DO WANT TO BE MINDFUL OF YOUR TIME.
EVERYTHING THAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THIS PRESENTATION IS INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET ITSELF, AND WE HAVE A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN NARRATIVE AT THE END.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE I'M PULLING THIS INFORMATION FROM.
BUT I DID TRY TO INCLUDE IN THAT NARRATIVE, WHETHER OR NOT THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, JUST AN ONGOING PROJECT AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY NEED TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL MOVING FORWARD.
SO GREAT ONE IS THE SEAWOLD PARK.
OBVIOUSLY, THAT ONE HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED, SO IT WOULD BE SOMETHING FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER.
BUT WE STARTED IT WITH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS THAT NEED COUNCIL APPROVAL, AND THEN ROUND OUT THE PRESENTATION WITH COASTAL PROJECTS, REQUIRING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL.
OF COURSE, IT WILL DENOTE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S ALREADY RECEIVED IT.
WITH THAT, I'LL GO AHEAD AND NOW WRAP IT UP WITH OUR SPECIAL PROJECTS.
THESE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE OPERATIONALLY FUNDED.
AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR BECAUSE SHEILA HAD A REALLY GOOD SLIDE ON THIS ALREADY.
THESE ARE THE PROJECTS THAT WE WERE REQUESTING BEING FUNDED BY HOT HEALTH OF THE CITY.
THESE ARE CONTINGENT ON COUNCIL APPROVAL.
WE DON'T GET APPROVAL. THEY DON'T HAPPEN.
IT'S THAT SIMPLE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WAY FINDING SIGNAGE.
SO THANK YOU, COUNSEL. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND ALLOWING US TO BE HERE.
>> YOU'RE GOING TO SEND THAT TO US.
>> WE COULD GET THIS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT.
I'M GLAD TO HAVE YOU GUYS HERE. APPRECIATE IT.
>> I THINK BOB HAS VOLUNTEERED TO TAKE ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS IN THE MEANTIME.
>> I'LL GET YOU FOR THAT. BUT PLEASE FEEL FREE TO REACH OUT TO ANY OF US.
IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS THAT ARRIVE AND I KNOW THAT PARK WORLD STAFF IS ALSO AVAILABLE TO SPEAK TO CITY STAFF AT ANY MORE TIME HERE.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO THANK SHEILA.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT A LOT IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS.
I SEE BRYSON WORKING NO JOKE 12, 13 HOUR DAYS, AND HE'S JUST LOOKING AT OUR BUDGET.
SHE'S LOOKING AT Y'ALL'S BUDGET AND OUR BUDGET.
I DON'T KNOW THAT SHE'S ACTUALLY SLEEPING.
THANK YOU TO YOU AND YOUR TEAM AND EVERYBODY WHO HELPS WITH THAT BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S A LARGE UNDERTAKING. THANK YOU.
>> SHE'S HELPED US OUT WITH A LOT OF STUFF.
>> I GET EMAILS FROM HER ON THE WEEKENDS LATE AT NIGHT, [LAUGHTER] SHE'S DOING A LOT.
>> THANKS FOR PUSHING THE STORE IN THE OTHER DIRECTION.
>> OH, YOU'RE WELCOME. [LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND]
>> LET'S TAKE A BREAK. WE'RE GOING TO GO IN HERE.
COUNSEL, LET ME GO AHEAD AND ANNOUNCE EXECUTIVE TO TAKE A SHORT BREAK, PLEASE.
[4. EXECUTIVE SESSION]
LET ME ANNOUNCE THE EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEM AND THEN WE CAN.[BACKGROUND] PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.074.
PERSONNEL MATTERS TO DELIBERATE THE EMPLOYMENT EVALUATION, REASSIGNMENT OF DUTIES OF A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE.
>> YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO I GOT TO GET THIS IN.
[02:35:02]
[LAUGHTER]>> THEN I GOT TO COME BACK AND PUT UP.
>> BOB, LET'S PUT MY TEA DOWN.
>> HEY, BOB. SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU.
I WANT TO GET US IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, THEN WE CAN TAKE A BREAK HERE, FA1, CITY COUNCIL APPOINTEE EVALUATIONS CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY, CITY SECRETARY, AND CITY AUDITOR.
WE ARE NOW INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.