[00:00:01]
THE OBLIGATION, BUT YOU HAVE A GOOD ARGUMENT THAT YOU'VE ALREADY ESTABLISHED.[CALL TO ORDER]
MY NAME'S ROLANDO CRUZ AND WE ARE READY.UH, I'D LIKE TO CALL THE TRANSACTION AND USE TAX CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING TO ORDER FOR AUGUST THE 27TH.
[ROLL CALL]
CALL THE ROLE MEMBER HOWARD? PRESENT.[1. 25-56150 Recommendation to approve the minutes for the Transactions and Use Tax Citizens’ Advisory Committee meeting of Wednesday, May 28, 2025. Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]
ON WITH AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE.CAN I GET A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? ITEM ONE, RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE TRANSACTION AND USE TAX CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, MAY 28TH, 2025.
IT HAS BEEN, UM, MOVED, UH, BY DAVID OCHOA AND SECONDED BY JAN HOWER, UH, STAFF.
IS THERE A REPORT OR PRESENTATION FOR THIS ITEM? NO, THERE IS NOT.
UH, CLERK PLEASE CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM.
IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE, PLEASE LINE UP AT THE PODIUM.
MEMBERS, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM BEING NONE? CLERK, CAN WE PLEASE CALL THE VOTE? MOTION IS CARRIED.
[2. 25-56151 Recommendation to receive and file a report on an update on Fiscal Year 2025 Measure A expenditures and revenues. Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]
ITEM NUMBER TWO.UM, RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT ON AN UPDATE ON FISCAL YEAR 2025.
MEASURE A EXPENDITURE AND REVENUES.
CAN I GET A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? IT HAS BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER OCHOA AND SECONDED BY MEMBER HOWER, UM, STAFF.
IS THERE A REPORT OR PRESENTATION FOR THIS ITEM? YES, THERE IS.
AND I WILL TURN IT OVER TO NADER CAMUSH TO PROVIDE THE PRESENTATION.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
THIS ITEM IS TO GIVE A BRIEF UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF MEASURE A EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES IN THE CURRENT, UH, FISCAL YEAR FY 25.
THERE IS NO PRESENTATION FOR THIS ONE.
THIS ONE UP ON THE SCREEN WILL BE FOR THE NEXT ITEM.
SO ATTACHED TO THIS ITEM AND POSTED ONLINE IS A BRIEF SUMMARY REPORT ALONG WITH A ATTACHMENT THAT SHOWS DETAILED LINE ITEM SOURCES AND USES OF MEASURE A IN FY 25.
THE FY 25 MEASURE A PLAN WAS REVIEWED BY THE TRANSACTION AND USE TAX CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE DURING THE MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 21ST, 2024, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2024.
SINCE THE BUDGET WAS ADOPTED, THE MEASURE A PLAN WAS ADJUSTED TO ACCOUNT FOR 1.08 MILLION OF PRIOR YEAR ONE-TIME PROJECTS THAT WERE NOT FULLY EXPENDED BUT WERE SET ASIDE AND REAPPROPRIATED INTO THE FY 25 MEASURE A PLAN AS TO THE MEASURE A REVENUE PERFORMANCE.
FY 25 ESTIMATES ANTICIPATE A REDUCED REVENUE FROM FUEL AND SERVICE STATIONS, AS WELL AS AUTOS AND TRANSPORTATION CATEGORIES, WHICH DE UH, BEGAN DECLINING IN FY 23.
THE PERFORMANCE MIRRORS A BROADER DOWN DOWNWARD TREND OBSERVED ACROSS LOS ANGELES COUNTY AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGION.
UPDATED PROJECTIONS FOR MEASURE A REFLECTS A SHORTFALL OF 1 MILLION OR 2% LOWER THAN BUDGET LEVELS FOR REVENUE.
THE MEASURE A FY 25 PLAN INCLUDED THE 2.2 MILLION CRITICAL NEEDS RESERVE, WHICH HELPED ABSORB THAT REDUCTION IN REVENUE FORECAST, WHICH WILL HAVE NO IMPACT TO PLAN PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS.
THIS ENDING PERFORMANCE, THE ENDING PERFORMANCE FOR MEASURE A WILL BE REVISITED AT FY 25 YEAR END WHEN ACTUAL STATUS OF THE FUND IS FULLY DETER DETERMINED.
IF ANY AVAILABLE FUNDS REMAIN AT THE END OF THE PROGRAM, UH, IT WILL BE PROGRAMMED AND BROUGHT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE YEAR END FOR APPROVAL AND ALSO THE TRANSACTION AND USE TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WHICH USUALLY IS THE FIRST MEETING OF THE, THE CALENDAR YEAR, WHICH TYPICALLY HAPPENS IN MARCH.
SO THIS CONCLUDES MY QUICK, UH, PRESENTATION OR STAFF REPORT ON FY 25.
UH, CLERK, PLEASE CALL FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM.
IF THERE'S ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THEY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM TWO, PLEASE LINE UP WITH THE PODIUM.
SEEING NONE, THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT.
MEMBERS, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? UH, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
THIS, THIS REPORT ITSELF IS JUST AN UPDATE FROM YOU GUYS TO US AS TO YOUR FISCAL YEAR 25, RIGHT? IT IS NOT GOING TO ANYBODY ELSE
[00:05:01]
OR I MEAN, I GUESS IT GETS POSTED PUBLICLY.THERE IS A QUICK UPDATE THAT'S BROUGHT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS WELL.
IT'S JUST STATUS OF FUNDS ACROSS ALL CITY FUNDS AND DEPARTMENTS.
JUST A QUICK UPDATE FOR THE CCAC, WHICH OVERSEES MEASURE A.
UH, CLERK, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE VOTE? MOTION IS CARRIED.
[3. 25-56152 Recommendation to receive and file a presentation on the use of Measure A in the Proposed Fiscal Year 26 Budget, including infrastructure projects; and Confirm that City Manager’s proposed Measure A spending plan in the Proposed Fiscal Year 26 Budget conforms with the intent of Resolution No. RES-16-0018 and RES-19-0127 prioritizing spending and with the language contained in the ballot measure expressed in Resolution No. RES-16-0017 and RES-19-0173. Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]
ITEM NUMBER THREE.UM, CAN I GET A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? ITEM THREE IS RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE A PRESENTATION ON THE USE OF MEASURE A IN THE PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 26 BUDGET, INCLUDING INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS, AND CONFIRM THAT THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED MEASURE A SPENDING PLAN IN THE PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 26 BUDGET CONFORMS WITH THE INTENT OF RESOLUTION NUMBER RES DASH 16 DASH 0 0 8 AND RES 19 DASH 27.
PRIORITIZING SPENDING WITH THE LANGUAGE CONTAINED IN THE BALLOT MEASURE EXPRESSED IN RESOLUTION NUMBER RES DASH 16 DASH ZERO SEVEN AND RES DASH 19 DASH 73.
UM, STAFF, IS THERE A REPORT OR PRESENTATION FOR THIS ITEM? UH, YES.
FOR THIS ITEM, WE DO HAVE A PRESENTATION, SO WE'LL BRING THAT UP.
THIS PRESENTATION WILL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF USES OF MEASURE A IN THE FY 26 PROPOSED BUDGET.
ALSO, AS PART OF THIS PRESENTATION, WE'LL HAVE THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDED MEASURE A PROJECTS IN THE FY 26 PLAN.
ATTACHED TO THIS ITEM AND POSTED ONLINE ARE MEASURE A ATTACHMENTS IN THE FY 26 BUDGET BOOK SUCH AS ATTACHMENT A THAT SUMMARIZES ALL THE FY 26 USES SOURCES AND USES THE ATTACHMENT B THAT PROVIDES A LIST OF NEW INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS AND FY 26 ATTACHMENT C THAT PROVIDES A LONG LIST OF INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS FUNDED BY MEASURE A SINCE INCEPTION TO DATE.
AND ATTACHMENT D THAT PROVIDES A DETAILED OVERVIEW OF HOW MEASURE A HAS BEEN PROGRAMMED SINCE ITS INCEPTION YEAR OVER YEAR, ALONG WITH AN OUT YEAR PLAN.
IN FY 26 MEASURE A REVENUES ARE PROJECTED TO GENERATE APPROXIMATELY 66.8 MILLION, WHICH REFLECTS AN ALIGNMENT TO SLOWED SALES AND USE TAX THROUGHOUT THE STATE.
USES OF MEASURE A REVENUE IN FY 26 BUDGET TOTAL 66.8 MILLION, WHICH INCLUDES 51.1 MILLION OF STRUCTURAL USES AND 50 15.6 MILLION IN ONE-TIME USES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND INFRASTRUCTURE.
ADDITIONALLY, 3.1 MILLION FROM INTEREST EARNINGS ON UNSPENT 2023 LEASE REVENUE BONDS PROCEEDS ANTICIPATED TO BE AVAILABLE FOR PROGRAMMING WILL BE BUDGETED AS PART OF THE FY 26 MEASURE A INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN TOWARDS THE FIVE YEAR ELEVATE 28 PROGRAM.
ON THIS SLIDE, WE SHOW THE USES OF MEASURE A REVENUE BY CATEGORY, WHICH WE'LL GO OVER IN DETAIL IN THE NEXT FEW SLIDES.
THE FY 26 PLAN WILL CONTINUE STRUCTURALLY SUPPORT CRITICAL PUBLIC SAFETY POSITIONS AND PROGRAMS WITH NO CHANGES FROM PRIOR YEAR, OTHER THAN ALIGNING THE DEBT SERVICE FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS TO THE SCHEDULED PAYMENTS.
WITHIN THE FISCAL YEAR, MEASURE A HAS ALLOWED THE CITY TO MAINTAIN PUBLIC SER SAFETY SERVICES WITH AN EQUIVALENT OF 155 SWORN POSITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED.
AND IF NOT FOR MEASURE A WOULD'VE BEEN NEEDED TO ELIMINATE FROM THE BUDGET.
ADDITIONALLY, MEASURE A HAS ALLOWED TO STRUCTURALLY INVEST IN RESTORE AND ENHANCE PUBLIC SAFETY, TOTALING $14.4 MILLION A PROGRAM.
ON THIS SLIDE, I WANTED TO SHARE A QUICK LOOK AT THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND PROJECTION, WHICH EXCLUDES MEASURE A.
THE FY 26 PROPOSED BUDGET REFLECTS A STRUCTURAL CHALLENGE.
DIFFICULT BUT NECESSARY DECISIONS WERE MADE THROUGHOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS TO REDUCE THE FUNDING GAP AND LAY THE GROUNDWORK FOR A STRONGER FISCAL POSITION.
THE FY 26 PROPOSED BUDGET IS UTILIZE, UH, IS BALANCED, UTILIZING NON MEASURE A ONE-TIME FUNDING SOURCES LARGELY MADE AVAILABLE FROM THE LONG BEACH RECOVERY ACT PROGRAM, WHICH WE HAD SECURING OUR CITY FUTURE FUNDS, WHICH WERE FOR THIS PURPOSE THAT ALLOWED THE CITY TO MAINTAIN AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SUPPORT TO COMMUNITY UNTIL ANTICIPATED REVENUE STREAMS ARE REALIZED.
AVAILABLE FUND FUNDS IN THE FY 26 MEASURE A PLAN WERE PRIORITIZED ON A ONE-TIME BASIS TO SUPPORT CRITICAL PUBLIC SAFETY INITIATIVES THAT WOULD'VE OTHERWISE NOT HAVE BEEN FUNDED DUE TO IN INSUFFICIENT FUNDING ALTERNATIVES.
THE FY 26 MEASURE A PLAN ALSO CON CONTINUES TO INVEST IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE AS PLANNED
[00:10:01]
IN THE FIVE YEAR ELEVATE 28 PLAN IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ONE-TIME, MEASURE A INVESTMENTS INCLUDE 1.3 MILLION FOR THE HIGH CRIME FOCUS TEAM TO PROACTIVELY ADDRESS VIOLENT, UH, CRIME CITYWIDE AND TAKING ILLEGAL GUNS OFF THE STREET.AND 1.5 MILLION FOR THE REALTIME REALTIME CRIME CENTER FACILITY CONSTRUCTION TO HAVE ALL INTEGRATED ANALYSTS WORK WITHIN THE SAME SHARED SPACE.
TO VIEW THE CITY ASSETS, 300,000 FOR THE DRONE PROGRAM EQUIPMENT TO ENHANCE SITUATIONAL AWARENESS AND PROVIDE CRITICAL SUPPORT FOR LARGE EVENTS, LARGE SCALE EVENTS, 150,000 FOR THE YOUTH AND WOMEN'S LEADERSHIP ACADEMY TO SUPPORT TWO STRUCTURAL MENTORSHIPS AND A CAREER DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM IN THE LONG BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ONE-TIME, MEASURE A INVESTMENTS INCLUDE 100,000 FOR GENDER AND DIVERSITY FOCUSED RECRUITMENTS AND RETENTION EFFORTS.
360,000 FOR AMBULANCE OPERATING BACKGROUND CHECKS AND AMBULANCE.
ONGOING ONBOARDING COSTS 400,000 FOR OVERTIME COSTS RELATED TO STATE MANDATED PANDEMIC, UH, CERTIFICATE CERTIFICATION SCHOOL AND FIRE FIREFIGHTER BACKFILLS 330,000 TO EXTEND THE LEASE OF THE TEMPORARY FIRE STATION.
NINE FIRST ADDITIONAL SIX MORE MONTHS UNTIL THE NEW MEASURE A FUNDED FIRE STATION NINE IS OPERATIONAL FOR INFRASTRUCTURE.
THE FY 26 MEASURE A INVESTMENTS INCLUDE 0.76 MILLION FOR NETWORK CAMERA MONETIZATION THAT WILL CONTINUE TO UPGRADE OBSOLETE CAMERAS ESTABLISH A LIFECYCLE REPLACEMENT 3.4 MILLION FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT FOR THE FY 23 INFRASTRUCTURE BOND BACKED BY MEASURE, A 9.2 MILLION FOR A TRANSFER TO THE ELEVATE 28 CIP INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN.
AND, AND THEN IT'S MENTIONED EARLIER, A 3.09 MILLION TRANSFER TO THE ELEVATE, UH, 28 CIP INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FROM INTEREST EARNINGS ON UNSPENT 2023 LEASE REVENUE BONDS.
THE TOTAL ELEVATE 28 IFY 26 INVESTMENT IS 12.3 MILLION IN WHICH THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT WILL REVIEW IN MORE DETAILS LATER IN THIS PRESENTATION.
ALSO, AS A REMINDER, THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR, FY 27 IS PLANNED TO INVEST THE THIRD INFRASTRUCTURE BOND, WHICH WILL BRING ANOTHER 50 MILLION IN CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS TO THE ELEVATE 28 PLAN.
OTHER USES OF MEASURE A IN THE FY 26 PLAN, UM, INCLUDES CRITICAL NEEDS RESERVES OF 1.8 MILLION FOR UN UNFORESEEN PRIORITY NEEDS ADMINISTRATION SUPPORT OF 208,000 AND A MEASURE B SET ASIDE OF SIX HUNDRED AND SIXTY SEVEN, SIX HUNDRED AND SIXTY 7,000, WHICH IS 1% OF ANY NEW GENERAL TAX DEPOSITS INTO THE STABILIZATION FUND.
TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE FUTURE OUTLOOK OF MEASURE A AS MENTIONED EARLIER, THE FY 25 PROJECTION ANTICIPATES A REVENUE SHORTFALL OF ABOUT 1 MILLION OR 2% FROM THE BUDGET.
FY 26 REFLECTS AN ALIGNMENT TO THE SLOW AND, UH, SALES AND USE TAX TRENDS THROUGHOUT THE STATE.
THE FORECAST ASSUME STEADY GROWTH FROM THERE FROM A REDUCED BASE ON AN AVERAGE OF 3% PER YEAR AFTER FY 26 AND INCLUDES MEASURE A RETURNING TO A FULL 1% IN FY 28, WHICH WILL PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT UNALLOCATED FUNDS TO BE PROGRAMMED IN THE FUTURE.
BUDGET DEVELOPMENT DETAILS OF THE OUT YEAR PLAN AND ALLOCATIONS IS OUTLINED IN ATTACHMENT D AS MENTIONED, AND AT THIS POINT, I'LL HAND IT OVER TO ANNA DENDA, OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS OFFICER IN THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR AN OVERVIEW OF INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS IN THE FY 26 BUDGET.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
I'M ANNA DENDA, CAPITAL BUDGET OFFICER, AND IN THIS SLIDE, UM, WE'LL GO OVER AND WE'LL PROVIDE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING ALLOCATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026.
THE TOTAL PROPOSED BUDGET IS 12.3 MILLION DEDICATED TO CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS THE CITY.
THESE PROPOSED INVESTMENTS REFLECT A BALANCED APPROACH TO IMPROVING PARKS, PUBLIC FACILITIES, AND MOBILITY INFRASTRUCTURE.
THE FOCUS REMAINS ON ENHANCING COMMUNITY SPACES, SUPPORTING SAFETY AND ENSURING LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF CITY ASSETS.
WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED FY 26 CIP BUDGET, OVER 405 MILLION OF MEASURE A DOLLARS WILL BE COMMITTED TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS BETWEEN FY 17 AND FY 26 PROPOSED BUDGET.
WE WILL NOW BRIEFLY DISCUSS THE
[00:15:01]
ELEVATE 28 INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PLAN, INCLUDING PLANNED INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2023 TO 2027.SHOWN HERE IS THE ELEVATE 28 MAP, SHOWCASING THE HISTORIC INVESTMENTS PLANNED THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
THE FY 26 PROPOSED CIP PRIORITIZES ELEVATE 28 PROJECTS WHENEVER POSSIBLE TO ENSURE THE PROJECTS OUTLINED WITHIN THE PLAN ARE MOVING TOWARDS COMPLETION.
THIS SLIDE PROVIDES AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON THE CITY'S ELEVATE 28 INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PLAN, WHICH IS OUR LONG-TERM, UH, ROADMAP TO PREPARE LONG BEACH FOR 2028 AND BEYOND.
OVER THE PAST YEAR STAFF CONDUCTED A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF THE ELEVATE 28 PLAN.
THE UPDATE NOW REFLECTS ALL GRANT AWARDS AND ADDITIONAL SECURED FUNDING RECEIVED SINCE THE LAST VERSION OF THE PLAN.
AS A RESULT OF THESE EFFORTS, THE ELEVATE 28 NOW TOTALS 1.0 BILLION IN PLAN INVESTMENTS.
THIS REFLECTS A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE AND DEMONSTRATES OUR CONTINUED SUCCESS IN LEVERAGING LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL RESOURCE TO SUPPORT MAJOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.
THE FOLLOWING SLIDE WILL FURTHER DETAIL HOW ELEVATE 28 AND MEASURE A WORK TOGETHER TO FUND AND IMPLEMENT KEY PROJECTS IN OUR COMMUNITY.
AND PICTURED HERE IS THE NEWLY COMPLETED BIXBY BANDSHELL PROJECT.
THE FY 26, UH, 28 ANNUAL UPDATE INCLUDES $156.5 MILLION INCREASE TO THE OVERALL INVESTMENT PLAN, A MAJOR STEP FORWARD IN FUNDING OUR LONG-TERM INFRASTRUCTURE GOALS.
THE INCREASE REFLECTS BOTH NEW PROJECT ADDITIONS AND THE INCLUSION OF RECENTLY SECURED FUNDING FROM GRANTS AND OTHER SOURCES.
ELEVATE 28 NOW INCLUDES $123.9 MILLION OF FEDERAL FUNDING ALREADY AWARDED TO SUPPORT THE PROJECTS IN THE PLAN.
WHILE THERE'S NO CURRENT CONCERN ABOUT THESE FUNDS BEING REVOKED, STAFF ARE CLOSELY MONITORING ALL FEDERAL DIRECTIVES AND WILL RESPOND PROACTIVELY IF CHANGE ARISES.
THIS SLIDE HIGHLIGHTS 38.8 MILLION IN NEW PROJECTS AND FUNDING BEING ADDED TO THE ELEVATE 28 PLAN AS A PART OF THE FY 26 UPDATE.
THESE ADDITION REFLECTS BOTH CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS AND STRATEGIC ENHANCEMENTS TO MOBILITY, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND PUBLIC SAFETY.
AND PICTURED HERE IS THE NEWLY RECENTLY COMPLETED LB MUST WETLANDS.
THIS TABLE SUMMARIZES THE FINANCIAL GROWTH OF THE ELEVATE 28 PLAN AS A RESULT OF THE FY 26 ANNUAL UPDATE.
THE OVERALL ELEVATE 28 INVESTMENT PLAN INCREASED BY 156.5 MILLION, BRINGING THE TOTAL PLAN TO $1.09 BILLION.
THE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE OUTLINED THE REVISED ELEVATE 28 PLAN.
THEY'RE BROKEN DOWN BY INVESTMENT CATEGORIES.
THESE SLIDES INCLUDE THE REVISED AND UPDATED 28 PLAN FUNDING AS WELL AS CURRENT STAGES OF EACH PROJECT AND ADDITIONAL FUNDING IDENTIFIED FOR EACH PROJECT IF APPLICABLE.
THIS TABLE PROVIDES A DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF THE FULL ELEVATE 20 INVESTMENT PLAN BY CATEGORY.
IT REFLECTS MEASURE A FUNDING AND ADDITIONAL EXTERNAL FUNDING PLAN THROUGH FY 27.
TO ENSURE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCESSIBILITY, THIS CITY LAUNCHED A DEDICATED WEBSITE, ELEVATE LB ELEVATE 20 EIGHT.COM, ALSO ACCESSIBLE VIA THIS QR CODE ON THE SCREEN.
EACH PROJECT HAS ITS OWN INFORMATION PAGE WITH SCOPE AND BUDGET DETAILS, LOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION TIMELINES FAN UH, FUNDING STATUS AND CURRENT PROJECT STATUS.
IT ALSO HAS AN INTERACTIVE TOOLS WHICH USERS CAN, UH, USE TO FILTER BY COUNCIL DISTRICT PROJECT CATEGORY AND MAP VIEW.
THIS WEBSITE IS A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT TOOL DESIGNED TO MAKE THE ELEVATE 28 PLAN CLEAR, INTERACTIVE AND ACCOUNTABLE.
LASTLY, THE ELEVATE 28 WEBSITE HAS A POWER BI REPORT, WHICH ALLOWS THE PUBLIC TO EASILY FILTER THE PLAN AND PROJECTS THEREIN.
IT'S DESIGNED FOR PUBLIC TRANSPARENCY AND ONGOING UPDATES.
THE DATA IS REFRESHED QUARTERLY TO DATE.
OVER 25% OF THE OVERALL PLAN HAS BEEN COMPLETED, INCLUDING 22 PROJECTS COMPLETED 19 IN CURRENT CONSTRUCTION, THREE R AND D BID AND AWARD PHASE AND 40 IN THE DESIGN PHASE, AS WELL AS 52% OF MOBILITY IMPROVEMENTS COMPLETED TO DATE AND 18 ONGOING MOBILITY PROGRAMS FUNDED BY THE PLAN.
WITH OVER TWO YEARS REMAINING IN THE PLAN AND FURTHER FUNDING BEING DISPERSED IN 26 AND 27, THE DEPARTMENT IS MAKING SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS IN DELIVERING THE PROJECTS WITHIN THE ELEVATE 20 PLAN WITH MORE PROJECTS BEING COMPLETED EACH MONTH.
[00:20:01]
THAT CONCLUDES THE SLIDES AND WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.UM, CLERK, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM? IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE END, ENTER THE PODIUM NOW.
SEE, NONE THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT.
UH, MEMBERS, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? UM, YES, I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.
UM, I'VE DONE A LITTLE BIT OF ANALYSIS ON THIS AND I'VE PREPARED, UM, A LITTLE HANDOUT.
IS IT OKAY TO SHARE THIS WITH ANYBODY? MADAM CLERK? JUST FOR EASE OF OF THE DISCUSSION, MAY I SHARE IT WITH THE OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS? YES.
YEAH, IT'S, IT'S JUST A RE RE RE UM, UM, REORGANIZATION OF THE SAME DATA.
UM, I'LL, IT'S FINE THAT THE INFORMATION IS DISTRIBUTED.
I WOULD JUST ASK THAT IN ADVANCE THAT THAT BE INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC AGENDAS FOR, UM, TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S PROPER PUBLIC NOTICE OF ANY MATERIAL THAT THE BODY IS REVIEWING.
AND, UM, THE AGENDA IS PREPARED, UM, AT THE SAME TIME THAT THE INFORMATION IS GIVEN TO US.
SO THE AGENDA SENT OUT WITH WHEN THE INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED TO US.
IS THAT CORRECT? THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA WAS INCLUDED IN OUR PACKAGES, CORRECT? OH, YES.
SO I WOULD NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY THEN TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA IF I'M ANALYZING THE CURRENT DATA THAT I WAS BEING GIVEN FOR THE MEETING.
IS THAT CORRECT? AND, AND IF I CAN ALSO SAY, I MEAN, THIS IS A QUESTION THAT WE'VE RAISED AND MAYBE WE NEED TO MAKE IT OFFICIAL THAT, YOU KNOW, ONLY THE CHAIR AND STAFF GET TO TALK ABOUT THE AGENDA.
WE HAVE NO OPPORTUNITIES TO ASK OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR ANY AGENDA ITEMS. UM, THE AGENDA AND ALL THE ITEMS ARE NOT DELIVERED EXCEPT ELECTRONICALLY UNTIL 72 HOURS BEFORE THIS MEETING, AND WE DON'T GET TIME TO REVIEW 'EM.
I'VE, I'VE ASKED, AND I THOUGHT, AND ACCORDING TO THE BYLAWS, IT SAID AROUND SEVEN DAYS UP TO, YOU KNOW, FROM SEVEN TO WHATEVER, AND THEY SAID, BUT THE MINIMUM WAS 72, SO THEREFORE Y'ALL WERE DOING 72 HOURS.
SO WE LITERALLY DO NOT GET THIS AND AREN'T ABLE TO REVIEW IT UNTIL A FEW DAYS BEFORE.
SO IF YOU'RE ASKING HER TO DO ANY ANALYSIS AND PRESENT IT BEFORE TO STAFF, WE DON'T GET IT UNTIL TWO OR THREE DAYS BEFORE.
AND IT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION.
AND I'VE ASKED CAN WE EXTEND IT TO SEVEN TO SEVEN DAYS, AND WE STILL HAVE NOT REALLY TRULY GOT, OH, IT SAYS MINIMUM 72, SO WE'RE COMPLYING.
AND, AND EVEN MORE THAN THAT, IF THE AGENDA IS PUBLISHED AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE'RE GIVEN THE INFORMATION, THEN THERE'S NO WAY TO REVIEW THE SCHEDULES AND SUBMIT SOMETHING TO BE ON THE AGENDA USING THE CURRENT INFORMATION.
IT WOULD HAVE TO WAIT, I MEAN, TO COMPLY WITH WHAT YOU'RE ASKING, IT WOULD HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE NEXT MEETING, WHICH WOULD BE MONTHS LATER.
AND YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELL TAKEN.
UM, TO CHAIR HOWARD'S COMMENTS, I WASN'T AWARE OF THE, WHERE THIS INFORMATION CAME FROM, SO NOW I UNDERSTAND THAT IT WAS IN RESPONSE TO THE INFORMATION PROVIDED, UM, ALONG WITH THE AGENDA.
SO OF COURSE THAT MAKES, MAKES SENSE.
BUT JUST AS A GENERAL PRACTICE, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT MAYBE YOU HAD THIS BEFORE, BUT I THINK THAT I HAVE THAT CLARITY NOW.
IT'S JUST REORGANIZING THE SAME INFORMATION.
BUT ANYWAY, WHAT I BASICALLY DID WAS, WAS JUST TAKE EVERYTHING THAT IN THESE BEAUTIFUL SCHEDULES, BY THE WAY, WHICH TAKE SO MUCH TIME TO MAINTAIN, AND I'M SO IMPRESSED WITH ALL OF THE WORK THAT, THAT, UM, PUBLIC WORKS DOES ON THIS.
SO I JUST WANT TO PREFACE EVERYTHING WITH THAT AND JUST, I'M JUST, I JUST DROPPED IT INTO THE CATEGORIES AND EVERY RECONCILED EVERYTHING SO THAT IT ALL, UM, TIES INTO THE SCHEDULES.
UM, AND I JUST, I JUST WANTED TO LOOK AT THE PERCENTAGES OF, OF THE, THE TOTALS IN EACH OF THE CATEGORIES.
AND YOU KIND OF DID THAT ON THIS LAST PAGE HERE.
UM, ALTHOUGH IT'S A LITTLE BIT BLURRED, MAYBE IN THE ONLINE VERSION, IT'S EASIER TO SEE, BUT MY CONCERN IS THAT THE COMPLETION, UM, THERE'S ONLY 18 PROJECTS COMPLETED, AT LEAST ACCORDING TO THE, THE SCHEDULES.
AND, UM, AND THEN, UH, SO THAT'S, THAT'S A CONCERN.
AND OF THAT, THAT 6.7% OF THE, THE, THE $1 BILLION,
[00:25:01]
AND EVEN WHEN YOU EXPRESS THAT AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE NUMBER OF PROJECTS VERSUS THE THE TOTAL DOLLARS, IT ONLY COMES OUT TO 10% OF THE TOTAL DOLLARS.'CAUSE SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS ARE HAD BIG DOLLARS EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NOT THAT MANY OF THEM.
I'M ALSO CONFUSED ABOUT THE TERM PLANNING.
UM, I, THE, I THINK THAT, I MEAN, THE WAY I'M READING THIS, THE, THE, THERE ARE, THERE'S PROJECTS ON THE SCHEDULE THAT, UM, ARE JUST SITTING THERE WAITING TO BE WORKED ON.
AND, AND I'M, I THINK THAT PLANNING MEANS THAT THAT'S, THAT IS THE, IS THAT THE CATEGORY THAT THEY'RE FALLING UNDER? HELLO? UM, THIS IS MARILYN REIKIS WITH PROJECT MANAGEMENT BUREAU PUBLIC WORKS.
SO, UM, IS A RULE OF THUMB FOR PROJECT MANAGE PROJECT DELIVERY.
UM, WE CATEGORIZE OUR PROJECTS IN PLANNING AS WE ARE SCOPING, UM, RIGHT SIZING THE PROJECT TEAM.
AND THEN ONCE WE HAVE HIRED A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL, WHETHER IT'S AN ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT, THEN WE CATEGORIZE IT AS INDESIGN.
SO THE ONES IN PLANNING ARE, UM, THERE CAN BE A RANGE OF SCOPING EXERCISES GOING ON, UM, TEAM, TEAM WORKLOAD EVALUATIONS AND ASSIGNMENTS HAPPENING.
SO ARE THERE, ARE THERE IS EVERY SINGLE PROJECT BEING ACTIVELY WORKED ON OR ARE SOME BEING PRIORITIZED? NO, NO, WE CANNOT WORK.
WE DON'T HAVE THE CAPACITY TO WORK ON EVERY PROJECT AT THE SAME TIME.
AND, AND THAT'S COMPLETELY REASONABLE, BUT I THINK IT MIGHT BE INSTRUCTIVE TO HAVE A, A CATEGORY THAT SAYS, UM, PENDING INSTEAD OF PLANNING.
SO WE, WE JUST KNOW THAT IT'S, IT'S MOVING UP IN THE PRIORITY AND, UM MM-HMM
ANYWAY, JUST A SUGGESTION THERE.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A LOT IN DESIGN.
I ALSO DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CONSTRUCTION AND ONGOING.
SO FIRST I'D LIKE TO TOUCH ON ONE COMMENT.
SO THIS, THIS DATA IS FOR ELEVATE 28, THE FY 23 TO 27 PLAN, RIGHT? WHICH DOES NOT INCLUDE EVERY PROJECT HAS MEASURE A IN IT, BUT I JUST WANT TO FLAG THAT FOR THE COMMITTEE.
UM, SECONDLY, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE ORIGINAL MEASURE A PLAN, WHICH WE'LL HEAR ABOUT IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE UPDATE FOR THE NEXT MEETING, THAT'S THE ORIGINAL MEASURE, A PLAN FROM 2017 TO 2022, ELEVATE 28.
AS YOU ALL KNOW, WE'RE TWO AND A HALF YEARS IN ABOUT HALFWAY THROUGH THE PLAN.
YES, WE'VE COMPLETED, UM, TECHNICALLY IT'S 22 PROJECTS IS IS THE LATEST, BUT THIS, THIS DATA IS A LITTLE, OR ACTUALLY, I THINK, YEAH, THIS DATA IS A LITTLE STALE, BUT, UM, THE 43, 40 4% OF PROJECTS IN CONSTRUCTION, UH, IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT, UH, OF, OF PROJECTS IN CONSTRUCTION FROM THE OVERALL PLAN.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CONSTRUCTION AND ONGOING.
SO ONGOING ARE OUR ONGOING PROJECTS SUCH AS OUR CONCRETE CREW.
SO THERE'S PROBABLY 200, 300 PROJECT SITES FOR THAT ONE GROUP.
THE WORK IS ONGOING, MEANING THAT THEY'RE GONNA COMPLETE A PROJECT TODAY, THEY'RE GONNA COMPLETE A PROJECT TOMORROW.
SO ONGOING IS OUR ONGOING CIP PROGRAM.
SAME FOR LIKE RESIDENTIAL STREETS, YOU'LL SEE THAT AS LISTED AS ONGOING.
UM, BECAUSE THERE ARE MANY PROJECTS IN CONSTRUCTION.
WE'RE ALSO DESIGNING OTHER RESIDENTIAL STREET PROJECTS.
UM, BUT IT, IT DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, IT WOULDN'T BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO HAVE ALL 50 RESIDENTIAL STREET PROJECTS, RIGHT? SO WE CONTAIN THEM IN A PROGRAM.
SO TYPICALLY ONGOING IS THE WORK IS BEING DONE, UM, BUT IT'S AT A PROGRAMMATIC LEVEL VERSUS FIRE STATION NINE ONE PROJECT IN CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW THAT'S LISTED AS CONSTRUCTION.
AND THEN, UM, UM, CAN I JUST, I GUESS I, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THERE, BUT TO EXPAND ON, I THINK THE POINT THAT I'M HEARING WITH HOWARD, AND AS I'M LOOKING AT THIS SHEET AND UNDERSTANDING THE PERSPECTIVE THAT'S BEING LAID OUT IS THAT THIS PLAN WAS A FIVE YEAR PLAN, 23 TO 27, WE ARE AT THE END OF YEAR THREE OF THIS PLAN, AND THEREFORE THAT MEANS YOU ONLY HAVE TWO MORE MONTH, TWO MORE YEARS LEFT FISCAL YEARS COMING UP.
SO YOU'VE GOT 24, 27 MONTHS, AND FOR THE COMPLETION RATE TO BE AS LOW AS IT IS, AND THEN THE ONGOING AND CONSTRUCTION, EVEN IF YOU ADD THAT UP AND YOU'RE TALKING 40, YOU'RE LESS THAN HALF IN MOAT.
IS, IS WAS THE ATTEMPT OR GOAL THAT BY THE END OF FISCAL YEAR 27, ALL THIS WAS GONNA BE DONE? OH, IT'S NOT, NO.
SO THERE ARE, YOU CAN SEE IN THE PLAN THERE, THERE'S ANOTHER DISBURSEMENT, I THINK IT'S LISTED AS $55 MILLION BEING DISPERSED IN FY 27 AS
[00:30:01]
PART OF THIS PLAN.SO THERE ARE NO EXPECTATIONS THAT WE ARE GONNA BE ABLE TO DISPERSE $55 MILLION AND CONSTRUCT $55 MILLION ALL WITHIN THE SAME FISCAL YEAR.
THE, THE FIVE YEAR INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN IS FIVE YEARS OF FUNDING.
THE PROJECTS BEING COMPLETED WILL BE COMPLETED AFTER THOSE FIVE YEAR PERIODS.
SIMILARLY TO HOW THE FY 27 TO FY 22 MEASURE A PLAN, WE'RE AT, I THINK, 94% COMPLETED.
BUT AGAIN, IT TAKES SIGNIFICANT TIME TO COMPLETE THOSE PLANS.
UM, AND JUST TO, SORRY, JUST TO, JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT POINT, THAT IS A, THAT IS A POINT THAT THE MAYOR RECENTLY SPOKE ABOUT, UH, IN HIS LATEST COMMUNICATION REGARDING ELEVATE 28 AND THE FIVE YEAR PLAN.
AND THAT HAS BEEN OUR COMMUNICATION INTERNALLY, UH, IN PUBLIC DOCUMENTS AS WELL.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE LINE ITEM, OLYMPIC LEGACY ARE, SHOULD THOSE PROJECTS EXPECT TO BE, UM, COMPLETED FOR THE OLYMPICS THEMSELVES? SO THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
UM, WE GAVE A, A, A DETAILED OVERVIEW FOR THE BUDGET OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE THIS YEAR, UM, A COUPLE WEEKS AGO REGARDING THIS SPECIFIC ELEVATE 28 CATEGORY.
UM, THE, THE SHORT ANSWER IS NO.
UH, SO OF THE OLYMPIC LEGACY PROJECTS, THERE ARE ONLY A SMALL HANDFUL OF PROJECTS THAT ARE DIRECTLY RELATED TO HOSTING OLYMPIC EVENTS.
THE REMAINING PROJECTS IN THE OLYMPIC LEGACY CATEGORY ARE TO, UH, INVEST IN CITY INFRASTRUCTURE TO LEAVE THE CITY IN A BETTER SPOT AFTER LA 28, BUT ALSO TO SUPPLEMENT, UM, THE IMPACTS OF THE INCREASED VISITATION OF LA 28.
THAT BEING SAID, MOST OF THOSE PROJECTS WILL BE COMPLETED BY THE OLYMPICS.
UM, FOR INSTANCE, ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS IS LIKE PARKING GARAGE IMPROVEMENTS AT THE TIDELANDS AREA.
THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE IN PLACE BY THE OLYMPICS.
UM, FIRE STATION NINE IS ALSO ON THERE AS WELL.
SO AS WE'RE GONNA BE HOSTING THE OLYMPICS AND HAVING, UH, MORE VISITORS INTO THE CITY, UH, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT FIRE STATION IS PRIORITIZED AND COMPLETED PRIOR TO THE OLYMPICS.
BUT CAN I GUARANTEE THAT ALL 28 OF THOSE PROJECTS, UM, ARE GONNA BE COMPLETED BY THE OLYMPICS? NO.
AND IF YOU PULL OUT THE ONGOING AND THE FUTURE, UM, ALMOST HALF IS ALREADY IN CONSTRUCTION.
SO YEAH, I MEAN, IT'S REASONABLE THAT YOU COULD PUSH THE REST OF IT THROUGH PRETTY CLOSE THROUGH BY 2028.
UM, I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE, UM, THE FED THE, THE POTENTIAL OF FEDERAL FUNDING AT RISK.
AND I WONDER IF, UM, WITH THE INCREASE TO THE PLAN, UM, I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, WE'RE ADDING MORE PROJECTS TO THE PLAN, BUT, UM, I WOULD JUST PERHAPS SUGGEST IT MIGHT ALSO BE USEFUL AND CONSERVATIVE BUDGETING TO MAYBE PULL BACK ON SOME OF THAT AND CREATE, UM, A, A, UM, YOU KNOW, A, UH, A, UM, A CUSHION FOR, FOR THAT REDUCED FUNDING RATHER THAN ADDING MORE PROJECTS TO THE SO I DO, YEAH, I CAN RESPOND TO THAT.
UM, THE, THE INCREASE IN PROJECTS AND FUNDING ARE, BECAUSE THOSE SPECIFIC PROJECTS RECEIVE SPECIFIC FUNDING, IT'S NOT THAT WE HAVE $38 MILLION OF GENERAL FUND TO ALLOCATE TO THESE NEW PROJECTS.
IT'S, UH, FOR INSTANCE, LB MUST PHASE TWO WAS RECEIVED A GRANT AWARD FOR THAT PROJECT.
UM, WE CAN'T PULL BACK THAT FUNDING AND TAKE IT TO ANOTHER PROJECT.
SO THAT'S WHY THOSE PROJECTS ARE BEING ADDED TO THE PLAN BECAUSE IN THE LAST YEAR, THEY'VE RECEIVED SIGNIFICANT FUNDING SPECIFIC TO THOSE PROJECTS.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE ADDING THOSE SPECIFIC PROJECTS TO THE PLAN.
UM, REGARDING THE FEDERAL FUNDING, THE FEDERAL FUNDING, THAT $123 MILLION FIGURE, I BELIEVE THAT'S REFERENCED MM-HMM
THAT FUNDING IS SECURED GRANTS, UH, FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ACTIVE IN HAND.
SO WHILE I DON'T WANT TO SAY THOSE ARE NOT NECESSARILY AT RISK, UM, WE FEEL CONFIDENT THAT THOSE PROJECTS WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR FEDERAL FUNDING.
BUT AGAIN, WE ARE CONSTANTLY MONITORING THAT.
WE'RE CONSTANTLY MONITORING THE GRANT AGREEMENTS WE'RE GETTING FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
WELL, MY COMMENT STILL STANDS, I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD AND CONSERVATIVE ACCOUNTING TO HAVE A, A CUSHION, MAYBE HAVE A, A, SOMETHING ON THE BOTTOM THAT SHOWS, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL CUSHION.
UM, I'D MAYBE SUBTRACT IT FROM THE TOTAL AS, UM, I WOULD, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THAT.
THE OTHER, THE OTHER THING IS, UM, UH, ALSO ON THE STATE LEVEL, I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF GRANTS THAT ARE ON THE STATE LEVEL, AND AS WE SAW IN THE LAST, UH,
AND IT'S STILL POSSIBLE, EVEN THOUGH THINGS ARE IN A BUDGET, THAT THEY CAN BE TAKEN AWAY ON THE STATE LEVEL.
I, YOU KNOW, I WAS PART OF THE PERFORMING ARTS EQUITABLE FUND, AND THEY TRIED TO TAKE AWAY
[00:35:01]
THAT, THAT PROGRAMMING THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN ALLOCATED FOR QUITE SOME TIME.UM, AND IT WAS JUST THROUGH A GRASSROOTS MOVEMENT THAT IT WASN'T.
SO I KNOW FIRSTHAND THAT THAT CAN HAPPEN.
SO MY COMMENT ALSO STANDS FOR POTENTIAL STATE FUNDING WITH THAT'S IN HERE AS WELL.
UM, OUR GRANTS ADMINISTRATION DIVISION IS ALONG WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, UH, GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS OFFICE IS CONSTANTLY MANAGING THOSE, UH, THOSE STATE FUNDING AGREEMENTS.
UM, SIMILARLY, WHEN WE RECEIVE, UH, A GRANT FROM THE STATE, WE PUT THAT FUNDING IN THE PLAN.
IF THAT FUNDING ULTIMATELY DOES NOT, YOU KNOW, COME THROUGH TO THE A HUNDRED PERCENT, THEN WE WILL UPDATE THE PLAN TO REFLECT THAT ONCE THE PROJECT IS CLOSED OUT OR ONCE THE GRANT IS REDUCED.
AND THEN, UM, MY LAST QUESTION WAS ABOUT PRIORITIZING PROJECTS.
THERE IS ISN'T ANYTHING, I MEAN, I THINK THESE PROJECTS ARE, ARE THEY, ARE THEY ON THE SCHEDULES ALPHABETICALLY? IS THAT HOW THEY'RE ON THERE? UM, I WONDER IF THERE'S SOME WAY OF, OF HAVING A PRIORITY, UM, RE REDOING THEM BY A PRIORITY OR HAVING A PRIORITY NUMBER IN THERE, EVEN IF YOU LEAVE THEM ALPHABETICAL SO THAT WE CAN SEE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, PRIORITIZATION OF, OF THE PROJECTS IS, IS DIFFICULT AS OUR INTERNAL PRIORITIZATION WILL CHANGE DEPENDING ON FUNDING SOURCES.
SO A REALLY, YOU KNOW, JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, WE MAY HAVE A PROJECT THAT HAS A $10 MILLION FUNDING GAP NOW, AND THEN WE FIND OUT WE GOT A $10 MILLION GRANT.
SO NOW THAT PROJECT, WE'RE, WE'RE FULLY FUNDED, WE'RE READY TO GO TO CONSTRUCTION, WE DON'T WANNA WAIT BECAUSE THINGS ARE JUST GETTING MORE EXPENSIVE EVERY DAY.
UM, AND SO I WOULD SAY INTERNALLY, WE, WE ARE WORKING ON THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE SECURED FUNDING FOR.
UM, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU'RE COMMENT ABOUT THERE'S, THERE'S ONLY 50% OR 43% IN CONSTRUCTION AND, AND, YOU KNOW, SIX, 7% COMPLETED, A THIRD OF THE PLAN IS STILL NOT FUNDED.
SO A THIRD OF ELEVATE 28, WE DO NOT RECEIVE ANY FUNDING UNTIL FY 27.
AND SO WE'RE PRIORITIZING BASED ON WHAT FUNDING WE HAVE, UH, HOW FAR ALONG DESIGN IS, AND ARE WE SHOVEL READY AND DO WE HAVE THE FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE CONSTRUCTION.
HELLO AGAIN, I'D JUST LIKE TO ADD ONE MORE COMMENT ABOUT PROJECT PRIORITIZATION.
SO, UM, MY TEAM WORKS REALLY CLOSELY WITH ALL THE CITY, UH, PROJECT OR DEPARTMENTS THAT HAVE, UH, PROJECTS ON THE ELEVATE 28 PLAN, INCLUDING MY COLLEAGUES HERE AT POLICE AND FIRE.
AND WE MEET, UM, REGULARLY, MONTHLY, OR MORE OFTEN TO REVIEW THE PRIORITIZATIONS OF THESE PROJECTS AND OTHER PROJECTS WHICH HAVE DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES.
AND SO, UM, WE'RE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION INCREASED, UM, YOU KNOW, NEED AT A FACILITY IF YOU, IF A ROOF LEAK COMES UP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR A, A CHANGE IN PROGRAMMING.
UM, SO WE CONSTANTLY ARE WORKING, UM, TO LOOK AT NOT ONLY ARE AVAILABLE FUNDING, BUT THE NEED, UM, AND IT CHANGES, IT CHANGES OVER TIME, BUT WE ARE PRIORITIZING PROJECTS, BUT IT ISN'T SOMETHING THAT WAS SET, UM, OTHER THAN THERE WAS A PRIORITIZATION SORT OF BAKED IN BY WHEN THE FUNDING IS RECEIVED.
SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PLAN AS A WHOLE, YOU DO HAVE TO DRILL DOWN TO SEE WHAT FISCAL YEAR THAT FUNDING FOR THAT PROJECT COMES IN TO UNDERSTAND THAT SORT OF PRIORITIZATION FROM FISCAL YEAR.
SO NOT EVERY PROJECT, AND IT WAS, I I HAVE TO SAY, AS A PERSON WHO'S REGULARLY AT THE COMMUNITY BUDGET MEETINGS AND WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY AS WELL, THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION THAT EVERYTHING WAS HAPPENING DAY ONE.
UM, AND WE'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK TO CORRECT THAT.
AND SO I HOPE THE COMMITTEE HERE ALSO UNDERSTANDS THAT.
OH, A ABSOLUTELY, AND, AND MAYBE A PRIORITY, A PRIORITY FACTOR WOULD BE MOST VALUABLE WITH THE, THE PROJECTS THAT DON'T HAVE FUNDING.
I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY IF THEY HAVE FUNDING, THEY'RE, THEY'RE IN PROCESS AND, AND YOU KNOW, AND THEY'RE GONNA BE COMPLETED AS, AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
BUT WITH THE UNFUNDED ONES WHERE, WHERE WE'RE, IT'S GONNA COME LATER.
UM, AND, AND I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT IT WILL CHANGE.
I MEAN, ALL OF THE NUMBERS CHANGE EVERY TIME WE GET A REPORT, IT'S UPDATED.
AND SO I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH HAVING PRIORITIES CHANGE FROM, FROM MEETING TO MEETING AND REPORT TO REPORT.
THAT'S WOULD BE, UM, ABSOLUTELY REASONABLE.
Y YEAH, I MEAN, WE, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT, UM, MAYBE IN GREATER DEPTH.
I, I THINK RIGHT NOW PRIORITIZING, YOU KNOW, 180, 190 PROJECTS, ALSO OUR INTERNAL STAFF PRIORITIZATIONS MAY BE DIFFERENT THAN, YOU KNOW, UH, COMMITTEES PRIORITIZATIONS OR COUNCIL, THE MAYOR, THE PUBLIC.
BUT, UM, CURRENTLY WITH THE, WITH THE STAFFING CAPACITY TO, TO BE CONSTANTLY CHANGING A PRIORITY LIST THAT'S GONNA BE SHOWN TO THE PUBLIC WOULD, WOULD, WOULD BE
[00:40:01]
VERY CUMBERSOME.AND I, I THINK IT MIGHT CAUSE, UM, JUST A, A, A LOT OF CONCERN AND COMPETITION WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE THE, THE COUNCIL DISTRICT OR THE COMMUNITY'S LIKE INTEREST.
SO AS I SAID BEFORE, IT'S, IT'S BASED ON WORKLOAD, IT'S BASED ON AVAILABLE FUNDS, UM, AND IT'S BASED ON CONSISTENT CHANGING NEEDS TO OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS.
SO WE ARE LOOKING AT THAT FROM A NUMBER OF ANGLES.
UM, NOT ONLY DO WE MEET WITH EACH DEPARTMENT TO REVIEW THEIR PRIORITIZATIONS, BUT WE MEET WITH EACH COUNCIL DISTRICT TO REVIEW PRIORITIES, UM, AND THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
SO WE ARE TAKING IN A LOT OF FACTORS ON A WEEKLY BASIS.
UM, AND SOME THINGS HAVE A, YOU KNOW, A, A START AND THEY MOVE MORE QUICKLY THAN OTHER PROJECTS, RIGHT.
UH, SOMETIMES WE LAP LAP EACH OTHER SOMETIMES, RIGHT? LIKE WE STARTED SOMETHING AFTER THE FACT AND IT FINISHES BEFORE A PROJECT THAT WE STARTED A LONG TIME AGO.
UM, THE VARIETY OF PROJECTS ON THIS INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PLAN ARE, ARE, THEY RANGE QUITE A LOT.
UM, SOME ARE VERY LONG-TERM PLANNING EFFORTS THAT WE'LL BE WORKING WITH, UH, VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS ON FOR FIVE, 10 YEARS.
AND SOME ARE PROJECTS THAT WE CAN GET DONE IN A YEAR OR TWO, RIGHT? SO THE TIMELINES ARE VERY, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF CONCURRENT PATHS HAPPENING IN JUST ONE LAST THING TO ADD HERE, UM, REALLY HOW THE PLAN WAS BUILT AND FORMULATED, OUR, OUR LARGER PROJECTS ACCUMULATE FUNDING OVER, OVER MULTIPLE YEARS.
SO WE MAY HAVE A DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS FOR PLANNING, RIGHT? UM, IN 23, LET'S SAY A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS, AND THEN IN 24 A MILLION DOLLARS FOR FORMAL DESIGN, AND THEN MAYBE IN 25 IS THE BIG BOND FOR, TO DO THE CONSTRUCTION.
AND SO THAT PROJECT COULD BE PRIORITY ONE, BUT WE KNOW WE DON'T HAVE THE STAFF.
IF, IF YOU GAVE US $30 MILLION RIGHT NOW, IT WOULD STILL TAKE US TIME TO PLAN DESIGN CONSTRUCT.
AND SO HOW WE FORMULATED THE PLAN IS THAT WE HAVE, WE'RE BUILT IN THOSE TIMELINES.
UM, SO WE'RE NOT JUST LETTING CASH SIT AND NOT BE SPENT.
WELL, CAN I JUST SUGGEST, UH, IN, IN REFERENCE TO ELEVATE 28, I, I THINK THIS COMMITTEE DUG DEEP IN REFERENCE TO 17 TO 22 TO TRY, TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHERE IT WAS TOTALLY AT WHAT WE PROMISED THE VOTERS AND WHEN THEY VOTED IN 16 AND Y'ALL SPENT A LOT OF TIME EDUCATING US AND CATCHING US UP, AND I THINK IT GOT TO A POINT WHERE WE COULD TRULY SEE, AND I THINK MADE IT A LITTLE EASIER FOR OTHER PEOPLE TO SEE WHERE THE PROJECTS WERE.
THIS I THINK IS MORE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF A, A, A FIRST TRUE GLANCE AT IT FOR MYSELF.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, FOR COMMITTEE MEMBER HOWARD, AND DEFINITELY FOR OCHOA, THIS IS OUR FIRST CYCLE WITH THIS BUDGET ON 28.
SO MAYBE, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE DISCUSS LATER THE AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE FUTURE, THAT WE COULD HAVE A WORKSHOP ON ELEVATE 28, BECAUSE I DO SEE SOME OF THE POINTS, AND I WANNA DRIVE IN ON QUESTIONS WITH YOU, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE TIME TODAY.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT PREPARED REALLY TO ADDRESS ALL, BUT, BUT IF WE HAVE A TRUE WORKSHOP, UNDERSTANDING ELEVATE 28, WHERE IT'S AT AND GETTING TO THE POINT OF, AND I HEAR YOU, OKAY, WE, WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT'S AT.
AND IT'S NOT REALLY IN PLANNING STAGE, IT'S, IT'S WAITING MONEY.
OH, THIS ONE'S DEFINITELY GONNA GO HAPPEN STARTING IN 27 OR 28 ONCE THE MONEY'S COME, BECAUSE SOME OF THE PROJECTS YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT GONNA EVEN DO 'EM.
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
UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY, SO THERE'S NONE FOR PATROL.
I JUST WANNA HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION ON THE OPERATING BUDGET, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I'M SEEING THIS CORRECTLY BECAUSE GOING BACK TO SLIDE FOUR WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THE OPERATING OF 66.74 MILLION, I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS RELATED TO IT.
FIRST, IN REFERENCE TO THE REVENUE I AM LOST AS FAR AS WHAT IS THE TRUE PERCENTAGE OF MEASURE A IS BEING COLLECTED, BECAUSE AT ONE POINT IN TIME WE HAD TALKED THAT WHEN THE MEASURE A COUNTY HAD PASSED, THERE WOULD BE MORE MONIES COMING IN AND OUR BUDGETS WERE GONNA GO UP TO 90 900 MILLION.
[00:45:02]
BUT THEN I HEARD SOMETHING AT THE, ONE OF THE LAST WORKSHOPS THAT THERE WAS, UH, SOMETHING AGAINST THE CITY PREVENTING US FROM COLLECTING THE MONEY.CAN WE GET AN UPDATE AS TO WHERE WE'RE AT AS FAR AS A, THE SIMPLE, IN SIMPLE LANGUAGE, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF MEASURE A IS COMING TO THE CITY NOW AND WHAT'S ON HOLD AS A RESULT OF PENDING LITIGATION OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT? UH, YEAH, CHAIR, UH, FOR THE CURRENT PROJECTION, FY 26, WHICH IS THE $66.8 MILLION, THAT PROJECTION INCLUDES MEASURE A AT THE 0.75%.
THAT IS THE RATE THAT OUR OUTLOOK IS HOLDING THROUGH FY 28.
AND FROM FY 28, THAT PROJECTION REFLECTS A BUMP UP TO 1%.
UM, I CAN HAND IT OVER TO OUR ATTORNEY IN CASE THERE'S ANY OTHER DETAILS TO ADD THERE, BUT THAT'S CURRENTLY HOW OUR PROJECTION HOLDS THE, UH, THE PERCENTAGE LEVEL.
AS THE BODY MAY BE AWARE, THERE IS ONGOING LITIGATION, UH, THERE'S A CLAIM AGAINST THE C-D-T-F-A REGARDING THIS, SO I'M NOT, UM, PREPARED TO PROVIDE A LEGAL UPDATE AS TO THAT, AND OF COURSE, I'M LIMITED AS TO WHAT I WOULD EVEN BE ABLE TO DISCUSS ON THAT POINT.
UM, BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, WELL, WE DON'T NEED TO UNDERSTAND, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING AGAIN, THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE IT TO 1%, OR WE BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE 1% BASED ON THE NEW RULES AND LAWS, BUT WE'RE ONLY DOING 0.75 BECAUSE OF THE QUOTE UNQUOTE LITIGATION.
AND THEN UNTIL THAT GETS RESOLVED, WE'RE GONNA BE AT 0.75.
THAT, THAT WE DON'T NEED TO KNOW ANY MORE THAN THAT
UH, AND THEN THE LAST THING, AND JUST GLANCING AT THE NUMBERS AGAIN, AND I LOOKED IN THE BOOKS AND I HAD TO DO IT DIFFERENTLY BECAUSE WE LOOKED AT IT DIFFERENTLY, BUT I JUST WANNA CLARIFY.
SO IF I LOOK ON SLIDE FOUR, THE MAINTENANCE RESTORATIONS AND THE ONETIME USES, THAT MEANS 77% OF OUR OPERATING DOLLARS ARE GOING INTO PUBLIC SAFETY.
UH, AND THEN IF I ADD THE TWO, UH, INFRASTRUCTURE ONETIME SUPPORTS AND, AND CIP PROGRAM, 14.7% IS GOING TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE SALES TAX.
AND THEN THE REMAINING 8% IS FOR JUST OTHER OBLIGATIONS, IE THE DEBT SERVICE, UH, UH, BONDS, THE TWO BONDS THAT WE HAVE, UH, AND THEN THE, JUST THE OTHER THREE ITEMS? THAT'S CORRECT.
I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T HAVE THE PERCENTAGE OFFHAND, BUT I CAN CONFIRM THE TOTALS PER CATEGORIES THAT YOU JUST CALLED OUT, WHICH IS THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND FY 26 WITH 51 MILLION, 51.2 MILLION.
INFRASTRUCTURE USES, WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 13.47 MILLION.
AND THEN FOR OTHER USES, WHICH INCLUDES OUR MEASURE A, UM, ADMINISTRATION CONTINGENCY AND MEASURE B STABILIZATION, WE HAVE SCHEDULED 2.06 MILLION.
SO THE 13 MILLION THOUGH, IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE OTHER $3 MILLION INTEREST THAT'S NOT PART OF THE 66 MILLION? UH, YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT.
THERE'S, THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL 3 MILLION, THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL 3 MILLION THAT WAS MADE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE BY THE BOND INTEREST.
WE LOOK AT THAT JUST LIKE BOND PROCEEDS.
IT'S JUST ADDITIONAL BOND PROCEEDS THAT COULD BE PROGRAMMED TOWARDS PROJECTS.
SO WE PRIORITIZE IT EARLY TOWARDS THE PROJECTS AND THE PLAN.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, WHERE WE BE, SO I DON'T THINK, ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? WE WAIT.
UH, SO CLERK, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL FOR A VOTE? I KNOW WE'RE DOING RECEIVE.
[4. 25-56153 Recommendation to receive and file an update from the City Auditor’s Office on the City Auditor’s Measure A Highlight Report. Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]
FOUR, CAN I GET, WELL, I GUESS YOU WANNA READ IT FIRST, DON'T YOU?CAN I GET A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT.
IT HAS BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER OCHOA AND SECONDED BY MEMBER HOWER, UH, STAFF.
IS THERE A REPORT OR PRESENTATION FOR THIS ITEM? UH, YES THERE IS.
AND I WILL TURN IT OVER TO THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE TO PROVIDE THAT PRESENTATION.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
I AM A ASSISTANT CITY AUDITOR IN THE CITY AUDITOR'S OFFICE, AND I HAVE WITH ME RICHARD COE.
HE'S A PERFORMANCE AUDIT MANAGER WHO JUST HANDED OUT A COPY OF OUR MEASURE A IMPACT SUMMARY REPORT THAT
[00:50:01]
WAS RELEASED BY THE CITY AUDITOR'S OFFICE.SO THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION TO SPEAK WITH YOU REGARDING OUR REVIEW OF MEASURE A FUNDS THAT WAS GENERATED AND SPENT.
SO MEASURE A, UH, WAS A BALLOT MEASURE THAT WAS IMPROVED IN 2016 AS THE 10 YEAR TRANSACTIONS IN USE TO SALES TAX, AND THEN IT WAS EXTENDED BY THE VOTERS IN 2020.
AS PART OF OUR REVIEW, WE EXAMINED MEASURE A TRANSACTIONS, UH, BOTH THE REVENUES AND THE EXPENDITURES.
UM, AS YOU SAW ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, THERE'S ADDITIONAL EXPENSES THAT RELATE TO ADMINISTRATION AND TRACKING OF THE TAX THAT INCLUDE SUPPORT FOR THIS COMMITTEE.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, THERE'S THAT 1% OF THE TAX THAT IS DEPOSITED INTO A SPECIAL RAINY DAY FUND, UH, TO HELP BALANCE POTENTIAL FUTURE GENERAL FUND SHORTFALLS PURSUANT TO MEASURE B.
SO OUR EXAMINATION INCLUDED A RECONCILIATION COMPARISON AND VERIFICATION OF MEASURE A FUNDS AS EXPENDED BY THE CITY AND CONFIRMED THAT THE FUNDS WERE SPENT AS INTENDED PER THE ORDINANCE.
I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT MEASURE EIGHT FUNDS ARE AUDITED INDEPENDENTLY BY OUR, BY THE CITY'S EXTERNAL AUDITING FIRM, UH, CURRENTLY IT'S CROW AND PREVIOUSLY KPMG TO ENSURE THAT THE AMOUNTS AS NOTED IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ARE ACCURATELY STATED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AND THE EXACT LANGUAGE THAT THEY SAID FOR FY 24, WHICH IS THE MOST RECENT COMPLETED, UH, FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
UM, AND THIS IS CROW'S LANGUAGE IN OUR OPINION BASED ON OUR AUDIT, THE PROCEDURES PERFORMED AS DESCRIBED ABOVE AND THE REPORT OF ALL OTHER AUDITORS, THE COMBINING AN INDIVIDUAL GENERAL GAS UTILITY, TIDELANDS OPERATING MEASURE A AND NON-MAJOR FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ARE FAIRLY STATED IN ALL MATERIAL RESPECTS IN RELATION TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS A WHOLE.
SO THAT'S THE AUDITOR'S LANGUAGE FOR FY 24.
UM, OUR REVIEW DOES NOT INCLUDE EXPENDITURES AS IT RELATES TO THE BOND PROCEEDS IN OUR REPORT, WE DID A YEAR OVER YEAR TRENDING OF THE ANNUAL REVENUE.
UH, I'M SURE THIS INFORMATION HAS PRESENTED, BEEN PRESENTED THROUGHOUT THE YEARS TO THIS COMMITTEE, BUT IT'S ALWAYS HELPFUL TO SEE IT ALL IN ONE PLACE.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT ORIGINALLY STARTED AT 39 MILLION AND PEAKED AT 86 MILLION IN REVENUE FOR 2022 AND HAS SINCE FALLEN BACK DOWN TO AROUND 64 MILLION FOR FY 24.
AND THE LATEST FY 26, UH, PROPOSED AMOUNT, I THINK IS 66 MILLION THAT WAS JUST DISCUSSED.
SO HERE'S OUR GRAPH ON HOW THE EXPENDITURES PLAYED OUT WHEN YOU SEPARATE IT BETWEEN PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES AND EQUIPMENT AND PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO OUTSIDE OF 2017, EVERY OTHER YEAR, YOU CAN SEE THAT MORE MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT ON PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES EQUIPMENT THAN ON INFRASTRUCTURE.
UM, BETWEEN FY 2017 AND 2024, THE CITY SPENT 444 MILLION OF MEASURE A FUNDS.
268 MILLION OF THOSE FUNDS WERE SPENT ON PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, INCLUDING PERSONNEL EQUIPMENT AND 176 MILLION ON PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE MOST RECENT FISCAL YEARS COMPLETED, FY 23 AND 2024, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE CITY HAS STARTED TO INCREASE THAT SPENDING AMOUNT ON INFRASTRUCTURE.
WHEN YOU BREAK IT DOWN BETWEEN, UM, THE TWO, YOU CAN SEE THE PERCENTAGE BREAKS OUT TO BE 60% FOR PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES WHILE 40% WAS SPENT ON INFRASTRUCTURE.
UM, OF THAT 40% ON INFRASTRUCTURE, UH, ABOUT HALF OF IT WAS FOR CITY STREET REPAIRS.
UH, A QUARTER WAS ON CITYWIDE PARK IMPROVEMENTS AND TREE MAINTENANCE, AND THEN ANOTHER QUARTER ON OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS SUCH AS PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS, CITYWIDE FACILITY AND LIBRARY IMPROVEMENTS, AND MARINA STORM WATER AND DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS.
SO GOING INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON THE 60% THAT WAS SPENT ON PUBLIC SAFETY.
SO, UM, 65% OF THAT PUBLIC SAFETY AMOUNT WAS SPENT ON POLICE SERVICES AND 35% WAS SPENT ON FIRE SERVICES.
THERE'S ALSO AN ADDITIONAL 10 MILLION THAT WAS SPENT ON PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHERS,
[00:55:01]
COMMUNICATION, TECHNOLOGY AND ADMINISTRATION.THE PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES FOR UM, UH, CAN INCLUDE POLICE PATROL RESPONSE INVESTIGATION, APPREHENSION AND LAW ENFORCEMENT, POLICE ACADEMIES, ET CETERA.
UM, IT ALSO CAN INCLUDE EMERGENCY 9 1 1 RESPONSE, FIRE PARAMEDIC AND AMBULANCE SERVICES.
SO PEELING THAT LAYER OF THE ONION A LITTLE BIT MORE, LOOKING AT SPECIFICALLY THE 168 MILLION FOR FY 2017 THROUGH 2024 THAT WAS SPENT ON POLICE SERVICES, IT HELPED REESTABLISH THE POLICE SOUTH PATROL DIVISION, WHICH ALLOWS IT TO OPERATE AT THE SAME LEVEL AS OTHER DIVISIONS WITHIN THE CITY.
IT ALSO HELPED WITH THE CREATION OF THE LONG BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY BIKE TEAM.
AND THIS BIKE TEAM IS CREATED TO ENGAGE WITH THE COMMUNITY PROACTIVELY ADJUST CRIME, IMPROVE SAFETY.
IT ALSO CREATED NINE ADDITIONAL FULL-TIME EQUIVALENTS IN DEDICATED POLICE ACADEMY POSITIONS, WHICH ALLOW FOR PATROL OFFICERS TO RESPOND TO MORE EMERGENCY CALLS.
OTHER AREAS THAT RECEIVE FUNDING INCLUDE THE QUALITY OF LIFE TEAM AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT JAIL CLINICIAN PROGRAM.
OF THE 90 MILLION THAT WAS SPENT ON FIRE SERVICES, THIS MONEY WAS HELPED, UH, WAS USED TO HELP RESTORE FIRE ENGINE EIGHT ENGINE 17, ALONG WITH RESCUE 12 AND OTHER FIRE POSITIONS WHICH ALLOW FOR RAPID RESPONSE TO CRITICAL INCIDENTS IN THE SOUTH SOUTHEAST REGION.
OTHER AREAS THAT RECEIVED THE FUNDING INCLUDE THE HEART TEAM, WHICH IS THE HOMELESSNESS EDUCATION AND RESPONSE TEAM, WHICH IS A SPECIALIZED UNIT WITHIN THE LONG BEACH FIRE DEPARTMENT THAT CONSISTS OF TWO FIREFIGHTER PARAMEDICS WHO CONNECT PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS WITH APPROPRIATE SERVICES AND RESOURCES IN THE CITY.
THE MONEY ALSO WANT TO HELP TOWARDS FIRE RECRUIT ACADEMY AND FIRE ENGINE ACADEMY EFFORTS.
ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE SIDE, PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS RECEIVED 176 MILLION OF MEASURE A FUNDS.
UM, MAJOR AREAS INCLUDE, AGAIN, THE C UH, THE STREETS, SIDEWALKS, PARKS, PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES, CITYWIDE FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS, AND THE MARINA STORM WATER AND DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS.
OUR REPORT ALSO TOUCHED ON THE ROLE OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE, THE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHED THIS COMMITTEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVIEWING AND PROVIDING CITIZEN INPUT REGARDING THE USE OF MEASURE A REVENUE.
UH, IT'S THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COMMITTEE TO PERIODICALLY REVIEW THE CITY'S USE OF MEASURE A REVENUE AND ALL ACTIONS OF THE COMMITTEE.
WE UNDERSTAND TO BE ADVISORY ONLY.
COMMITTEE DUTIES MAY INCLUDE RECEIVING AND REVIEWING THE CITY'S ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORTS AND ASSOCIATED AUDITS OF MEASURE A.
AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS MAY INCLUDE THE INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S ANNUAL MEASURE A FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, UH, AS WE JUST SAW ALSO REVIEWING THE PROJECTS THAT ARE FUNDED WITH MEASURE A REVENUE AND RECEIVING UPDATES FROM CITY STAFF ON THE STATUS OF THESE PROJECTS.
RECEIVE AND REVIEW PROJECT, UH, REPORTS PREPARED BY THE CITY REGARDING THE ANALYSIS OF THE USE OF MEASURE A REVENUE.
AND OF COURSE, AT ANY TIME YOU MAY SUBMIT REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY MANAGER ON HOW MEASURE A SPENDING ALIGNS WITH ESTABLISHED PRIORITIES AND THAT THAT REPORT WOULD THEN BE TRANSMITTED TO CITY COUNCIL.
WE ALSO WANT TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ON WAYS THAT THEY CAN PROVIDE INPUT REGARDING THE USE OF MEASURE A FUNDS RESIDENTS CAN DO.
SO, UM, DURING THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS THAT ARE SCHEDULED THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, ALSO THROUGH THE CITY'S COMMUNITY BUDGET MEETINGS AND CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND ALL THAT INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND ON THE LINK SHOWN ON THE SLIDE.
WE WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT TO YOU AND ALSO WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT AND WORK.
AS WE REVIEW THE MEASURE A REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES.
WE KNOW THAT YOU'RE COMMITTED TO PROVIDING VALUABLE INPUT REGARDING THE USE OF THESE FUNDS AND HOW IT IMPACTS THE CITY IN CREATING A SAFE AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY OR AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
OKAY, CLERK, UH, CAN YOU BE PLEASE CALL FOR A VOTE.
IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE UN THE PODIUM NOW.
SEEING NONE, THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT.
MEMBERS, UH, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, MR. OSHOA, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
[01:00:01]
GRAPH THAT YOU'VE SHOWN ABOUT THE EXPENDITURES WITH PUBLIC SAFETY AND INFRASTRUCTURE.UM, I KNOW ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT THE COMMITTEE HAS HAD IS THE GROWING DISPARITY BETWEEN PUBLIC SAFETY EXPENDITURES AND INFRASTRUCTURE EXPENDITURES AND KIND OF A FEAR THAT WE'RE TRADING ONE FOR THE OTHER.
AND YOU HAD MADE THE NOTE THAT THAT DISPARITY HAS SIGNIFICANTLY, UM, DECREASED.
IS THAT BECAUSE OF A LOT OF THE INVESTMENTS WE'RE MAKING IN ELEVATE 28, OR IS THERE SOME OTHER REASON WHY? UH, WE DIDN'T GET INTO THAT TYPE OF ANALYSIS AS PART OF OUR REVIEW? UH, WE REALLY WANTED TO JUST TO PUT EVERYTHING IN THE AGGREGATE BASIS ON A EASY TO SEE TREND LINE CHART.
UM, THOSE TYPES OF QUESTIONS I THINK WOULD BE BETTER ANSWERED BY EITHER PUBLIC WORKS OR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT IN TERMS OF HOW THEY WENT ABOUT DETERMINING THE ALLOCATION BETWEEN, UH, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SAFETY.
UM, AND THEN THIS ALSO, THIS MIGHT NOT BE SOMETHING YOU CAN ANSWER AS WELL, UM, BUT UM, FOR THE SAKE OF ASKING IT, FOR THE, UM, PUB FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY, IS THE, THOSE ROLES BEING FILLED, ARE THOSE, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S MORE BEING PRIORITIZED BECAUSE IT'S A MEASURE A, UH, FUNDING SOURCE? OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT IS, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, IS THERE SOME KIND OF PRIORITIZATION BETWEEN SOMETHING THAT'S FUNDED BY THE GENERAL FUND AND SOMETHING THAT'S FUNDED THROUGH MEASURE A? UM, I
UM, I WILL SAY THOUGH THAT, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THIS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IN THE MEASURE A ORDINANCE, SPECIFICALLY THE ORIGINAL 2016, IT STATES, AND AS I QUOTE TO FUND, ENHANCE AND MAINTAIN IMPORTANT CER CITY SERVICES INCLUDING PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES AND AN INVESTMENT IN CITY INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO, UM, FROM US AS A AUDITOR PERSPECTIVE, UM, WHENEVER WE DO ANY TYPE OF REVIEW, WE ALWAYS LIKE TO GET TO THE SPECIFIC CRITERIA UPON WHAT YOU'RE EVALUATING, UM, TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT CAN BE IMPROVED OR IF WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH ANYTHING.
THE LANGUAGE THAT WE SEE THERE TO FUND, ENHANCE, ADMIN, MAINTAIN.
IT DOESN'T SAY SPECIFICALLY THAT IT MUST BE USED FOR ONLY ENHANCEMENT.
UM, HOW THE CITY GOES ABOUT DOING THAT.
WE DIDN'T GET INTO THAT PROCESS.
AND THEN, UM, OBVIOUSLY YOUR OFFICE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS TO, UM, ADJUST SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT THEY FOUND, UH, SOME BEING MORE EASY TO GET STARTED WITHIN OTHERS.
IS THERE ANY KIND OF, UM, KIND OF PROGRESS REPORT SO FAR ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS? IS THAT IN REFERENCE TO OUR STREETS AUDIT OR IS THAT IN REFERENCE TO THIS MEASURE IMPACT SUMMARY? BECAUSE I FORGOT TO MENTION, WE ALSO RELEASED AROUND THE SAME TIME A STREETS AUDIT, WHICH FOCUSED SPECIFICALLY ON PUBLIC WORKS AND HOW THEY MANAGE ALL OF THEIR STREETS PROJECTS, IF IT'S IN RELATION TO THAT, THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHEN WE ASK A DEPARTMENT TO UH, RESPOND, THEY AGREE TO ALMOST EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM.
I THINK THERE WERE JUST TWO RECOMMENDATIONS THEY DID NOT AGREE TO.
WE ALSO ASKED THEM TO PROVIDE A TIMELINE UPON WHICH THEY EXPECT THAT THEY WOULD, UH, COMPLETE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF OUR RECOMMENDATION.
SO, UM, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT TAKES TIME AND WE UNDERSTAND.
SO WE HAVEN'T YET FOLLOWED UP JUST BECAUSE I THINK WE RELEASED THAT AUDIT.
IT WAS PRETTY RECENT IN THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS.
UM, TYPICALLY WE WILL COME BACK IN SEVERAL YEARS AND WE MAY FOLLOW UP AND SAY, HEY, REMEMBER THIS AUDIT, THESE ARE THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
WHERE ARE YOU AT WITH THAT? UM, TO THE DEPARTMENT'S CREDIT, UM, THEY HAD AGREED THAT THEY WOULD NOT ONLY IMPLEMENT, BUT SOME OF THEM THEY WERE ALREADY IN THE PROCESS OF.
AND SO WE ALWAYS LIKE TO RECOGNIZE THAT, UM, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THERE CAN BE ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT.
WE MUST ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT DEPARTMENTS ARE TAKING IT SERIOUSLY AND BEING VERY PROACTIVE AND, AND GETTING STARTED ON THOSE IMPROVEMENTS.
AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AT, SO THANK YOU.
AGAIN, THANK YOU ALSO FOR THE PRESENTATION AS WELL.
I THINK THE FIRST ONE IS PRETTY SIMPLE AND I KNOW YOU KNOW THE ANSWER.
UM, THE FIRST ONE IS IN REGARDS TO THE MEASURE A FUNDS.
'CAUSE I, I TRIED TO DO A QUICK RECONCILIATION, I RECONCILED TO THE FULL ON YOUR REPORT FOR THE TOTAL REVENUE.
AND THEN THE BREAKDOWN SEEMED A LITTLE DIFFERENT THOUGH THE OTHER CATEGORY, AND IT USED TO ONLY BE 2% BECAUSE IT WAS FOR, UH, MEASURE B
[01:05:01]
REQUIRED AND IT WAS LIKE A PERCENT OR WHATEVER.BUT THEN NOW MEASURE A HAS SOME MONIES COMING OUT AND THEN NOW THE BOND INTEREST AND EVERYTHING.
I MEAN, IT'S ALMOST A 10TH OF IT EVERY YEAR IS GONNA GO TO OTHER.
WHERE DOES THAT OTHER GET CATEGORIZED BETWEEN YOUR THREE BUCKETS? 'CAUSE YOU'VE ONLY CREATED THREE BUCKETS, RIGHT? YOU KNOW, PUBLIC SAFETY, UH, AND, AND, AND INFRASTRUCTURE.
UM, SO WHAT DO YOU DO? THE OTHER, UM, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, UH, THIS REVIEW EXCLUDED THE BONDS.
NO, NO, BUT, BUT THERE'S OTHER MONIES.
IE THERE'S, YOU HAVE TO RESERVE MEASURE B 1%.
THEY'RE NOW MEASURE A ADMINISTRATION AND THERE IS INTEREST BEING PAID OUT OF OPERATING DOLLARS ON THE BONDS.
SO THAT OTHER IS 8% AND IT'S EVENTUALLY GONNA GROW TO 10, 12, 14, 15% ONCE ALL THESE BONDS ARE EXECUTED.
I, I DON'T THINK WE SAW ANY INTEREST PAYMENTS.
I'M NOT SURE THE EXACT DATE IN WHICH THIS BOND WENT THROUGH.
UM, BUT WE CAN GO BACK AND DOUBLE CHECK OUR NUMBERS TO SEE IF IT WAS INCLUDED IN ANY OF THESE BUCKETS.
I, I, I WOULD LOVE TO GET AN UPDATE ON THAT AND UNDERSTAND WHAT Y'ALL DOING BECAUSE IT'S BIGGER.
I, I THINK MAYBE IN, IN, IN THE FIRST THREE, FOUR YEARS IT WAS SO INSIGNIFICANT.
I THINK Y'ALL MIGHT HAVE JUST LUMPED IT UP INTO PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT NOW IT'S SO BIG, I HOPE IT'S NOT GETTING LUMPED UP INTO INFRASTRUCTURE.
ALRIGHT, SO THEN THE SECOND QUESTION THAT I HAVE, AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU'RE THE RIGHT PERSON TO ANSWER THIS OR NOT, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AND AFTER I READ THE WHOLE THING AND I'M UNDER, NOW MEASURE A IS JUST GOING INTO THE GENERAL FUND AND IT BOOM, IT GOES THERE.
AND THEN WHEN THEY CREATE THIS BUDGET, THEY BUDGET STAFF POSITIONS TO A HUNDRED PERCENT.
AND, BUT OUR POLICE AND FIRE STRUGGLE GETTING PERSONNEL.
SO WHEN WE ONLY GET 90% OF THE STAFF POSITIONS FILLED AND 10% WERE UNFUNDED, DOES, DOES THAT SPLIT? DO WE GET BACK THE 10% OR THE 10% BACK INTO MEASURE A DOLLARS? OR DOES MEASURE A JUST GO ALL THE WAY AND THEN THAT'S JUST CONSIDERED A GENERAL FUND SAVINGS AND MEASURE A DOESN'T REALLOCATE THAT.
SO OUR UNDERSTANDING IS ACTUALLY THE, THE REVENUE GENERATED BY MEASURE RATE IS NOT GOING INTO THE GENERAL FUND.
AND THAT'S WHY THE, UH, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS SPECIFICALLY CALL IT OUT AS A FUND THAT THEY'VE REVIEWED, UM, AS PART OF THE OVERALL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
SO I BELIEVE THE WAY IT WORKS IN, UH, MAYBE NADER CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT IT GOES INTO A SPECIFIC MEASURE, A FUND.
AND SO WE CAN SEE THOSE REVENUE TRANSACTIONS GOING DIRECTLY THERE.
AND THEN ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, WE THEN CAN SEE HOW THAT MONEY THEN GETS PUT INTO THE SPECIFIC DEPARTMENTS.
EITHER IT'S POLICE AND FIRE OR IF IT GOES INTO PUBLIC WORKS FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO THAT'S THE ACCOUNTING THAT WE SEE ON THE BACKEND.
IT DOESN'T GO DIRECTLY INTO THE GENERAL FUND, BUT WITH RESPECT TO YOUR QUESTION AS TO WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY AREN'T FULLY FUNDED WITH THEIR POSITIONS, IS THERE A REFUND? WE DIDN'T LOOK AT ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION SPECIFICALLY FOR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT.
AND I COULD ADD TO THE COMMENTS AS WELL.
AS FAR AS THE OVERALL GENERAL QUESTION OF MEASURE A TRACKING AND ITS DEPOSIT, ALTHOUGH MEASURE A IS PURPOSED FOR CERTAIN REASONS, IT IS A GENERAL PURPOSE TAX.
IT'S A SALES TAX THAT GETS DEPOSITED INTO THE GENERAL FUND, BUT THE CITY IS KEEPING A, A TIGHT TRACKING ON IT WITHIN ITS FUND GROUP OF THE GENERAL FUND TO ENSURE THAT IT'S SPENT ON THE PURPOSE THAT IT'S PROMISED TO THE VOTERS.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE QUESTION ON THE HOW IS IT SPENT WHEN THERE'S SAVINGS THERE, THAT HAPPENS.
AND FOR AS FAR AS THE OVERALL OPERATIONS, ESPECIALLY WITH PD AND FIRE, ALTHOUGH THEY MAY HAVE EMPTY POSITIONS, THEY NEED SLOTS FILLED AND THEY ACTUALLY USE OVERTIME TO FILL THAT.
SO THEY ACTUALLY STILL SPEND DOLLARS AGAINST THAT.
WHEN MEASURE A ACTUALLY HAS A PROGRAM THAT'S SPECIFICALLY FUNDED BY MEASURE A, LET'S SAY THE, UH, JAIL CLINICIAN FOR EXAMPLE, THAT POSITION, ALTHOUGH ADDED LAST YEAR, WAS NOT ACTUALLY FILLED.
AND AT THAT POINT, NO CHARGES TO MEASURE A WERE MADE BECAUSE THE POSITION WAS NOT FILLED.
SO THOSE ARE THINGS WE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE MEASURE A SPENDING.
UH, I THINK COMMITTEE HOWARD HAS A QUESTION.
IT KIND OF HARKING BACK TO WHAT, UM, CHAIR CRUZ WAS TALKING ABOUT.
UM, YOU, UM, THE, THE TITLE HERE SAYS WE'VE COLLECTED 521 MILLION, UM, IN REVENUE,
[01:10:01]
AND YOUR ANALYSIS SHOWS, UH, 44, 440 4 MILLION FOR, AND SO THAT'S 77 MILLION.THAT'S NOT, UM, UH, CALLED OUT IN HERE, UM, AT ALL.
SO I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD RECONCILE THAT FOR US.
SO YES, UM, THE REVENUE IS WHAT WE'VE, UH, VERIFIED TO HAVE COME IN AS FAR AS THE EXPENDITURE GOES.
WE'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT IT FROM ACTUAL SPEND, SO INCEPTION TO DATE.
SO SOME OF THOSE ARE GOING TO BE TIED WITH PUBLIC WORKS.
SO YES, WE DO SEE A LITTLE LESS SPENDING ON PUBLIC WORKS, BUT THAT'S ALSO BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE FUNDS OR AMOUNTS OR YEAR MARKS FOR PROJECTS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN SPENT YET.
SO THEY ARE BEING SET ASIDE FOR THOSE SPECIFIC PROJECTS.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE KIND OF SEE THAT VARIANCE.
AND, UH, I THINK WE'RE DONE WITH THE QUESTIONS.
SO, UH, CLERK, CAN WE PLEASE CALL FOR A VOTE TO RECEIVE? THIS MOTION IS CARRIED.
IT, UH, YOU SAID IT'S PASSED, RIGHT? OKAY.
SO MADAM CLERK, I'D LIKE TO TAKE
[7. 25-56156 Recommendation to receive and file a report and update on Public Safety Personnel budget. Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]
ONE ITEM OUT OF, UH, ORDER IN THE AGENDA.SO IF WE CAN MOVE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN UP AND TAKE CARE OF THAT ONE FIRST.
AND THEN WE CAN GO ON AND DO FIVE AND SIX ITEM SEVEN, RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT AND UPDATE ON PUBLIC SAFETY PERSONNEL BUDGET.
CAN I GET A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? WE'RE SEEING A PATTERN HERE.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY, UH, MEMBER OCHOA AND SECONDED BY HOUR.
HE'S A LITTLE FASTER ON THE, SO STAFF, IS THERE A REPORT OR PRESENTATION ON THIS? UH, NOPE.
UH, CLERK, ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM SEVEN, PLEASE LINE UP AT THE PODIUM NOW.
SEEING NONE, THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT.
AND, UH, MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS? UM, I DO HAVE ONE COMMENT AND I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THE PROCESS TO GET, THIS WAS DIFFICULT, UH, AND IT WAS BASED ON A SPREADSHEET THAT WAS GIVEN TO THE COMMITTEE AND A PRIOR COMMITTEE MEETING.
UH, WE ASKED FOR AN UPDATE FOR THE BASELINE.
ORIGINALLY WE DIDN'T GET IT AT THAT MEETING.
I GUESS THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING.
AND THEN WHEN I GOT THE NUMBERS, UH, BASED ON THE BOOK THAT I WAS SENT A LINK TO FOR FISCAL YEAR SIX BUDGET, UH, THE CHAPTER BOOKS, THE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS SHOW A CERTAIN NUMBER, BUT WE'RE GETTING DIFFERENT NUMBERS ON THE SWORN FTES FOR BOTH POLICE AND FIRE.
AND SO I'M GOING TO ASK STAFF IF THEY CAN EXPLAIN, UH, FOR OUR, FOR THE COMMITTEE MEETING THAT, UH, WHY THE DIFFERENCE OF THE FISCAL, WHAT PUBLIC CAN SEE.
IT SHOWS THAT FISCAL YEAR 16 PERSONNEL HEADCOUNT ON THE SAFETY REPORTS SHOW 7 97, UH, FOR, UH, THE POLICE AND 360 7 FOR, UH, FIRE.
BUT YOU'RE PRESENTING A DIFFERENT NUMBER THAT I CAN'T FIND ON PUBLIC DOCUMENTS OF 8 0 6 AND 360 4.
AND I, I DID GIVE YOU A HEADS UP JUST SO THAT YOU WEREN'T CAUGHT OFF GUARD.
UH, I DO BELIEVE MAYBE WE COULD TRY TO CLARIFY OFFLINE WHERE THE NUMBER FROM THE BUDGET BOOK IS IN THE BUDGET BOOK, ANNUAL BUDGET BOOK.
WE DO PROVIDE A SUMMARY PER DEPARTMENT, WHICH DOES ANALYZE EACH BUREAU'S, UM, BUDGET WITH DESCRIPTIONS, AND THEN ALSO PROVIDES A FINANCIAL SUMMARY ALONG WITH THE PERSONNEL SUMMARY.
EACH YEAR'S BUDGET BOOK IS SEPARATED BY DEPARTMENT AND, AND PROVIDES A TOTAL FTE COUNT, WHICH IS SUPPLIED PER FISCAL YEAR.
ALTHOUGH THAT WE, WE DO CALL OUT THE FISCAL YEAR, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS A REPORTING OF THE, UH, THE SWORN COUNT WITHIN THAT TABLE.
SO I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO CHECK EXACTLY WHERE THAT NUMBER CAME FROM THAT YOU MAY HAVE BEEN REFERENCING.
JUST TO DOUBLE CHECK WHAT MAY HAVE HAPPENED.
I BELIEVE YOU CALLED OUT, IT COULD HAVE BEEN PART OF AN ACCOMPLISHMENT OR A REFERENCED NARRATIVE.
IT WAS A REPORT FROM THE POLICE AND FIRE AT THE, AT THE END OF FISCAL YEAR 16 OF, OF THE, THE ENDING OF WHERE WE WERE AT, WHAT HAPPENED, AND DA DAH, DAH, DAH.
SO IT SAID, YOU KNOW, ALL THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND SUCCESS AND THEN IT HIGHLIGHTED THE PERSONNEL COUNT AND THEN THIS COUNT, UH, UH, OF, OF BOTH OF 'EM.
[01:15:01]
YEAR 16 PUBLIC SAFETY, UH, REPORT.AND I, WE CAN TRY TO PINPOINT THAT AND CHECK HOW IT LOOKED, BUT JUST MY ASSUMPTION, IT COULD HAVE BEEN AN ACCOMPLISHMENT, WHICH COULD HAVE REFERENCED THE PRIOR YEAR, NOT THE CURRENT, NO, IT WAS VERY SPECIFIC BUDGET.
THEY, THEY PUT IT OUT EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
SO WHAT I'LL DO IS I'LL GO BACK AND LOOK FOR IT AND THEN WE'LL REFERENCE IT.
AND THEN I GUESS FOR OUR PURPOSES WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO REFERENCE THAT 'CAUSE THAT'S THE BEST NUMBER THAT WE CAN SEE.
ALTHOUGH WE'RE GETTING THIS NUMBER, IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE PUBLIC, SO I'M PROBABLY GONNA LEAN TOWARDS OUR, THE NUMBER THAT I SEE IS THE ONLY PUBLIC NUMBER.
AND JUST TO GIVE MORE INFORMATION ON THE, UH, SWORN COUNT NUMBER, THE ITEM THAT WE HAVE AS AN ATTACHMENT HERE DOES HAVE A SWORN COUNT NUMBER.
THE WAY WE GET TO THAT IS ACTUALLY LOOKING AT SPECIFIC CLASSIFICATIONS.
SO WITHIN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, ALTHOUGH WE DO HAVE A SUMMARY IN THE BACK OF EACH CHAPTER THAT SHOWS THEIR TOTAL SWORN COUNT AND CLASSIFICATIONS.
ONLY A HANDFUL PER, UH, PER DEPARTMENT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A SWORN CLASSIFICATION.
I DO HAVE REFERENCE, JUST FOR EXAMPLE, FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, WE'D HAVE THE CHIEF OF POLICE, UM, THE ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE, POLICE, COMMANDERS, LIEUTENANTS, OFFICERS, SERGEANTS, AND CORPORALS.
SO, OKAY, WE DO TRY TO LOOK AT IT PER CLASSIFICATION AND GROUP IT THERE.
BUT OF COURSE WE DEFINITELY WANNA PINPOINT WHERE YOU CAUGHT THAT AND JUST TRY TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
ALRIGHT, IF THERE'S NO, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, UH, MEMBERS, UH, I MEAN CLARK, CAN WE PLEASE CALL FOR A VOTE? MOTION IS CARRIED.
AND I THINK WE'RE NOW READY FOR, UH,
[5. 25-56154 Recommendation to receive and file the Ad Hoc Committee FY 26 Proposed Budget recommendation letter. Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]
ITEM NUMBER FIVE.ITEM FIVE, RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE AD HOC COMMITTEE FISCAL YEAR 26, PROPOSED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION LETTER.
CAN I GET A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? ALRIGHT, IT HAS BEEN MOVED BY OCHO AND SECONDED BY, UH, MEMBER HOWER.
UM, ALL RIGHT, AND STAFF, IS THERE A REPORT ON THE PRESENTATION FOR THIS ITEM? I THINK THAT'S, I WAS GONNA SAY, I THINK WE PREPARED A POWERPOINT SLIDE DECK.
UM, ON BEHALF OF THE ATTACHMENTS AND EXHIBITS THAT YOU SENT US.
SO WOULD YOU LIKE THE CLICKER? WOULD YOU LIKE US TO GO THROUGH IT? UM, I THINK WE CAN SAY WHEN TO CLICK.
SO THEY'RE GONNA SHOW THE, SO WHY DON'T WE DO THIS? THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT BECAUSE THIS IS, THE AD HOC COMMITTEE IS REPORTING BACK TO THE COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE.
SO IF WE CAN DO THIS, I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE IT AND THEN JAN HOWER IS GONNA TAKE OVER AND I HOPE THAT'S WITHIN QUOTE UNQUOTE ALL THE RULES AND LAWS THAT WE'RE STILL LEARNING.
SO, UM, I I JUST KIND OF WANNA SAY FIRST OF ALL TO THE, THE COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE, I'M, I'M SAD THAT ONE OF OUR MEMBERS IS NOT HERE, UNFORTUNATELY.
UM, OUR, OUR THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE WITH HIM, UH, RIGHT NOW.
BUT, AND, BUT I DO WANNA THANK YOU AS A, AS, AS A COMMITTEE FOR ALLOWING US TO ADDRESS OUR PAST FINDINGS IN A LETTER TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I DO WANNA, UH, EXPRESS TWO CONCERNS THROUGH THE PROCESS.
FIRST OF ALL, I WANNA SAY THIS AD HOC COMMITTEE WAS NOT A FUN EXPERIENCE FOR ME AT ALL.
UH, IT WAS VERY, UH, DIFFICULT AND DIFFERENT FOR ME TO TRY TO JUST GET INFORMATION FOR US AS AN AD HOC COMMITTEE.
I WAS HOPING WE WOULD GET STAFF COOPERATION ON THIS.
UH, WHEN I ASKED MY FIRST QUESTION, I WAS TOLD STAFF COULD FIRST THEY WILL GET BACK TO ME IN A FEW DAYS, UH, ON IT.
AND, AND THAT WAS THE LAST ITEM THAT WE JUST WENT THROUGH.
I WAS TOLD THAT STAFF COULD NOT ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS AND THAT I NEEDED TO WAIT UNTIL THIS COMMITTEE FOR THE WHOLE COMMITTEE TO GET AN ANSWER TO ANY QUESTION THAT WE HAD.
SO WE JUST OPERATED AND DID WHAT WE DID AS BEST AS WE COULD.
AND, UM, FINALLY OUT OF FRUSTRATION, I SENT AN EMAIL TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND FINALLY GOT A RESPONSE BACK, UH, JUST A FEW DAYS BACK THAT SAYS THAT IT WAS, UH, NOT RIGHT AND THAT IN THE FUTURE AD HOC COMMITTEES COULD ASK QUESTIONS AND, UM, GET ANSWERS AND THEN WE COULDN'T MOVE FORWARD.
UH, I'M NOW LEARNING THAT IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN SOME CONFUSION IN, IN THE COMMUNICATION PROCESS, BUT IT STILL FEELS LIKE AS A COMMITTEE AND AD HOC COMMITTEES, IT, IT, IT'S HARD TO GET INFORMATION.
UH, THE SECOND POINT IS, I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE DOING THIS AND, AND, AND SENDING A RECOMMENDATION LETTER TO THE COUNCIL BECAUSE FOR ME, I SEE THIS AS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN FISCAL YEAR 16 WHERE WE VOTED ON AN ORIGINAL, UM, INFRASTRUCTURE SALES TAX
[01:20:01]
THAT WAS ONLY GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED FOR 10 YEARS AND THEN AT THE END OF THE 10 YEARS IT WAS GONNA GO AWAY.THAT WOULD BE ENDING WITH THIS BUDGET, THIS WOULD BE THE 10TH YEAR OF THE BUDGET.
AND SO OUR WHOLE PAST YEAR HAS BEEN TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HAS OUR INFRASTRUCTURE GOTTEN BETTER AND WE WE'RE GETTING SOME ANSWERS AND SOME YES AND SOME NO.
SO FOR ME, YOU KNOW, YES, I KNOW A COUPLE YEARS LATER WE PASSED IT AND WE SAID IT'S GONNA GO ON FOREVER.
BUT UH, I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT IN MY OPINION, OR FROM WHAT I'M SEEING AND WHAT I'M HEARING, UH, IT'S GETTING HARDER AND TIGHTER FOR OUR INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PUBLIC WORKS TO BE ABLE TO GET THE FUNDS THAT THEY NEED TO, TO DO THE WORK THAT WE GO.
SO WITH THAT, I'M JUST GONNA TURN IT OVER TO THE OTHER AD HOC COMMITTEE MEMBER HOWARD, SO THAT SHE CAN READ THE LETTER.
AND OUR THOUGHT WAS THAT WE WOULD READ THE LETTER INTO THE RECORD SO EVERYBODY CAN HEAR IT.
AND AS WE GO THROUGH AND REFERENCE EXHIBITS, WE WOULD THEN JUST HIGHLIGHT THE EXHIBITS THAT, UH, POP UP HOWARD.
I AM GOING TO READ THE LETTER.
UH, HONORABLE MAYOR, COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER.
AS YOU ARE ALL AWARE, MEASURE A ESTABLISHED A CITIZEN'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO PERIODICALLY REVIEW THE CITY'S USE OF REVENUES GENERATED BY THE TAX AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH REGARD TO THE USE OF THE TAX.
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMISSION WAS SEEN AS A WAY TO INSTILL TRUST AMONG THE PUBLIC THAT THE FUNDS WOULD BE SPENT IN THE AREAS THAT THEY WERE PROMISED DURING THE CAMPAIGN.
IN THE PAST FEW MEETINGS, THE COMMISSION HAS HAD SEVERAL EXPLORATORY SESSIONS TO EDUCATE OURSELVES OF THE ORIGINAL CAMPAIGN IN 2016 AND TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT IN THE LAST EIGHT YEARS.
MEASURE A CAMPAIGN HISTORICALLY MEASURE A WAS TOUTED AS AN INFRASTRUCTURE SALES TAX.
A NEED TO IMPROVE THE CITY'S INFRASTRUCTURE WAS CON THE CONSISTENT MESSAGE FOR MOST ARGUMENTS FOR MEASURE A, C, EXHIBITS A AND B, INCLUDING FIXING POTHOLES AND REPAVING OUR STREETS AND ROADS, UPGRADING STORM DRAINS TO PREVENT TOXIC POLLUTION FROM CONTAMINATING LOCAL WATER RESOURCES AND BEACHES, REPAIRING NEIGHBORHOOD FIRE AND POLICE STATIONS, UPGRADING COMMUNITY CENTERS, NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND LIBRARIES.
THERE WAS ALSO MESSAGING TO USE FUNDS TO INCREASE FIRE AND POLICE PERSONNEL.
ATTACHED EXHIBIT C AND REFERENCE BELOW IS A JOINT LETTER FROM OUR LAST THREE MAYORS, GARCIA FOSTER AND O'NEILL, AND ENDORSED BY OUR CURRENT MAYOR RICHARDSON.
CAN I INTERRUPT REAL QUICK? CAN WE POP UP THOSE EXHIBITS WHEN WE REFERENCED THE EXHIBITS? SO WE ALREADY WENT THROUGH EXHIBIT A.
OKAY, SO THIS WAS EXHIBIT A THAT SHE WAS REFERENCING TO.
AND THEN YEAH, THE FIXING AND THE UPGRADING.
AND THEN AGAIN, THESE WERE SOME OF THE, THE KIND OF THINGS THAT WE WERE GETTING IN OUR MAIL.
AND THEN NOW SHE JUST REFERENCED EXHIBIT C AND THIS IS WHERE WE'RE READING.
OKAY, THERE, THERE WAS ALSO MESSAGING TO USE FUNDS TO INCREASE FIRE AND POLICE PERSONNEL.
ATTACHED EXHIBIT C AND REFERENCE BELOW IS A JOINT LETTER FROM OUR LAST THREE MAYORS, GARCIA FOSTER AND O'NEILL, AND ENDORSED BY OUR CURRENT MAYOR RICHARDSON.
THAT WAS USED AS A PROMOTION OF MEASURE A AND CLEARLY STATES THE OBJECTIVES.
QUOTE, OUR CITY IS FACING TWO PRESSING CHALLENGES.
HOW WE ADDRESS THESE CHALLENGES WILL DETERMINE THE KIND OF CITY WE LEAVE TO FUTURE GENERATIONS.
THE FIRST CHALLENGE IS THE $2.8 BILLION IN UNFUNDED INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS.
WHILE THE CITY CURRENTLY SPENDS MORE THAN $65 MILLION A YEAR ON CAPITAL INFRASTRUCTURE, IT SIMPLY IS NOT ENOUGH TO MEET OUR NEEDS.
MANY OF OUR STREETS, SIDEWALKS, AND ALLEYS ARE IN DESPERATE NEED OF REPAIR.
WE ALSO HAVE A TREMENDOUS NEED TO UPGRADE WATER SYSTEMS FOR CONSERVATION AND STORM DRAIN SYSTEMS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION AND WATER QUALITY.
EVERY YEAR WE FAIL TO MAKE NEEDED INVESTMENTS, THE COST TO UPGRADE OUR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE INCREASES.
OUR SECOND CHALLENGE IS THE NEED TO HIRE ADDITIONAL POLICE TO COMBAT INCREASING CRIME RATES THAT ARE CLIMBING ACROSS THE STATE AND TO RESTORE FIRE STAFFING TO MAINTAIN 9 1 1 PARAMEDIC RESPONSE TIMES AT STATIONS ACROSS THE CITY.
AS A RESULT OF THIS UNDERSTANDING, THE
[01:25:01]
COMMISSION HAS ASKED STAFF TO PROVIDE US WITH THE HISTORICAL SPENDING OF MEASURE A DOLLARS WITH A GOAL OF ANSWERING TWO FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS.NUMBER ONE, ARE MEASURE A INVESTMENTS IMPROVING OUR IN INFRASTRUCTURE.
NUMBER TWO ARE MEASURE A FUNDS PAYING FOR ADDITIONAL POLICE AND FIRE.
NOTE, THE COMMISSION INTERPRETS THE TERM ADDITIONAL POLICE AND FIRE TO MEAN INCREMENTAL POLICE AND FIRE AS MEASURED AGAINST A PRE-MEASURE A BASELINE OF 20 AS OF 2016.
THIS ISSUE IS ADDRESSED BELOW PRIOR YEARS EXPENDITURES.
ATTACHED EXHIBIT D IS A SUMMARY OF OUR MEASURE A FUNDS SPENT IN THE LAST EIGHT YEARS AND FORECASTED TO 2028 PROVIDED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND PRESENTED IN COMMISSION MEETINGS.
TO KEEP IT SIMPLE, WE HAVE CATEGORIZED THESE EXPENDITURES IN THREE BUCKETS.
A, INFRASTRUCTURE, B, POLICE, FIRE WAGES, AND C OTHER.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IN YEAR ONE, 72% OF THE FUNDS WERE SPENT ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND 26% WERE SPENT ON FIRE AND POLICE POSITIONS.
AS THE YEARS PROGRESSED, THIS RATIO SHIFTED SIGNIFICANTLY AND BY BUDGET 2025, ONLY 20% OF THE FUNDS WERE ALLOCATED TO INFRASTRUCTURE WITH A FULL 65% TO POLICE AND FIRE WAGES.
IF WE CONTINUE DOWN THIS PATH, THE FORECAST IS SHOWING 10% AND 66% RESPECTIVELY BY FISCAL 2028.
IN THE MAYOR'S CAMPAIGN PROMOTION, THE PRIOR MAYORS OF OUR CITY HIGHLIGHTED A FIVE YEAR INFRASTRUCTURE NEED OF $2.8 BILLION.
THE COMMISSION REQUESTED AND RECEIVED A GOOD SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENTS AND NEED FOR EACH TYPE OF INFRASTRUCTURE ATTACHED AS A TABLE SHOWING IN EACH INFRASTRUCTURE TYPE, THE ASSESSMENTS USED LAST YEAR CONDUCTED AND THE NEED BY TYPE AND THE PERCENTAGE OF ASSETS IN POOR OR VERY POOR CONDITION.
EXHIBIT E, THE EXHIBIT E, THERE WE GO.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE BUDGETS.
BUDGETS AS CAN BE SEEN, THE FIVE YEAR INFRASTRUCTURE NEED HAS GROWN FROM 2.9 BILLION TO 3.5 BILLION.
AND WE HAVE MANY OF OUR ASSETS IN POOR OR VERY POOR CONDITION.
THE UNANSWERED QUESTION WE CONTINUE TO ASK IS COMPARING AGAINST PRIOR ASSESSMENTS.
IS OUR INFRASTRUCTURE GETTING BETTER? WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE A COMPARISON BUILDING BY BUILDING AGAINST THE LAST FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT, WHICH WE UNDERSTAND WAS DONE PRIOR TO 2016.
IF NOT, CAN WE CONDUCT A NEW ONE AND DETERMINE IF THERE IS ANY IMPROVEMENTS? EVEN AS PROJECTS ARE COMPLETED, EXISTING ASSETS CONTINUE TO DETERIORATE WHILE PROJECT COSTS CONTINUE TO ESCALATE.
A DEADLY COMBINATION THAT HIGHLIGHTS THE NEED TO ACCELERATE THE PACE OF INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE.
MEASURE A IS AN INFRASTRUCTURE SALES TAX AND THESE FUNDS SHOULD BE DEDICATED TO PRIMARILY IMPROVING INFRASTRUCTURE IN REVIEW OF FIRE AND POLICE WAGES.
EXHIBIT F MEASURE A PAID 10% OF FULLY LOADED WAGES FOR EACH DEPARTMENT FOR THE PAST THREE FISCAL YEARS.
THIS IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE THAN ADDITIONAL SLASH INCREMENTAL POSITIONS.
COMPARING TO 2016, THE BASELINE YEAR BEFORE MEASURE A POLICE SWORN OFFICERS HAS ONLY GROWN BY 27 POSITIONS WHILE MEASURE A IS PAYING FOR 140 POSITIONS.
MEASURE A IS PAYING FOR MORE THAN FOR FOR 113 MORE POSITIONS THAN IT SHOULD BE.
THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS GROWN BY 37 SWO POSITIONS, BUT MEASURE A IS PAYING FOR 63 POSITIONS, WHICH IS 26 MORE POSITIONS.
THIS IS NOT THE INTENT OF MEASURE A AS IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE COMMUNITY IN PROMOTIONAL CAMPAIGN LITERATURE.
THE PROMOTION WAS TO PAY FOR ADDITIONAL POSITIONS, NOT PER 10% OF PUBLIC SAFETY WAGES.
WE ARE NOW ASKING YOU TO ADOPT A FY 26 BUDGET THAT UTILIZES MEASURE A ANNUAL SALES TAX DOLLARS PRIMARILY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND TO LIMIT THE FUND'S USE FOR ADDITIONAL SWORN FIRE AND POLICE POSITIONS.
PLEASE NOTE THAT INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS SUPPORTING FIRE AND POLICE ASSETS WILL BENEFIT FROM THIS INCREASED LEVEL OF SPENDING.
SECONDLY, WE ARE ASKING THE CITY TO PROVIDE FUNDING TO CONDUCT
[01:30:01]
MORE FREQUENT INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENTS EVERY THREE TO FIVE YEARS OF EACH INFRASTRUCTURE TYPE.AND THAT WE ARE PROVIDED ANNUAL REPORTS COMPARING MOST RECENT ASSESSMENTS WITH A PRIOR ASSESSMENT TO DETERMINE, DETERMINE IF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE IS IMPROVING.
THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS A REQUEST TO RETURN THE USE OF MEASURE A DOLLARS AS INTENDED AND UNDERSTOOD BY THE VOTERS.
WE REMAIN HONORED TO BE OF SERVICE, BUT ARE COMPELLED TO BRING FORWARD OUR OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
OKAY, SO I GUESS WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT THE STAFF REPORT AND THEN WE WOULD MOVE ON TO ASK FIRST FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, I'M ASSUMING IF THERE'S ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE SIGN UP AT THE PODIUM NOW.
SEEING NONE, THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT.
AND WITH THAT THEN I GUESS I WOULD THEN OPEN IT UP TO, UH, EVERYONE ELSE TO SEE IF WE HAVE ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS ON THIS ITEM FOR MEMBERS OCHOA, I DON'T, UM, I DO HAVE QUESTIONS.
I JUST WANT TO KNOW, AM I DIRECTING THESE QUESTIONS TO THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE OR AM I DIRECTING THEM TO YOU FOLKS? OR IF I HAVE QUESTIONS THAT MAY BE ANSWERED BY YOU FOLKS, SHOULD I, UM, ASK YOU GUYS THOSE QUESTIONS? OR YOU CAN SPEAK FREELY AMONGST YOURSELVES IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE AD HOC COMMITTEE.
UM, AT LEAST, UH, JUST TO KIND OF START OFF, UM, UNDER KIND OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE ASKED, UM, FOR THE COMMISSION INTERPRETS THE TERM ADDITIONAL POLICE AND FIRE, I MEAN INCREMENTAL POLICE AND FIRE, UM, FOR THAT PRE-MEASURE, A BASELINE.
I MEAN, I, I THINK THE FIRST QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS JUST LIKE, KIND OF WHAT WAS THE EXPECTATION OF LIKE AN, AN INCREMENTAL INCREASE? 'CAUSE I KNOW THE, AT LEAST THE WAY IT WAS PITCHED, LOOKING AT THE EXHIBITS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, KIND OF THE, THE PURPOSE WAS TO REINVEST, UH, IN BRINGING A LOT OF LIKE, KIND OF, NOT TO DELVE TOO MUCH BACK INTO THE REPORT THAT WE JUST HEARD, KIND OF LIKE BRINGING BACK SOUTH DIVISION, BRINGING BACK A LOT OF THE ENGINES, UM, AND THEN RETENTION OF A LOT OF OFFICERS AND, UH, FIRE DEPARTMENT FOLKS THAT WOULD BE LOST IF THIS FUNDING WAS NOT APPROVED.
SO I, I THINK THE WAY IN WE, US LOOKING BACK AT SOME OF THE POST THINGS, WE ASSUMED THAT THE GENERAL FUND WAS GOING TO PAY FOR THE EXISTING BUDGETS AND THAT THEY COULDN'T GO BEYOND BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL MONIES.
AND BY US PROVIDING THIS, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO INCREASE STAFF.
I THINK WE ALL BELIEVE AND AGREE, I THINK ALL THREE OF US CAN AGREE THAT WE KNOW AND WANT ADDITIONAL POLICE AND FIRE.
AND THAT'S WHY WE WANTED MEASURE A AND THAT'S WHY WE VOTED BECAUSE WE WANTED TO HAVE MORE ADDITIONAL POLICE.
SO WE DO AGREE WITH THE OPENINGS OF THE NEW, UH, CENTERS OR REOPENING OF THE NEW CENTERS AND BRINGING THEM ON.
AND I THINK THOSE POSITIONS ARE THERE, BUT THERE IS NO RHYME OR REASON OR LOGIC TO JUSTIFY THAT YOU'RE JUST TAKING A FLAT PERCENTAGE OF A BUDGET.
IT'S CONSISTENT ACROSS THE BOARD.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS, YOU CAN SEE THE PERCENTAGE.
IT STARTED OFF AT 4, 5, 8, 9, 9, 8, 10, 10, 10.
YOU GO DOWN TO THE A FIRE AND IT'S THE SAME EXACT PERCENTAGES.
IF YOU FLICK ONE MORE SLIDE, THE SECOND SLIDE, THE PERCENTAGES ARE EXACTLY THE SAME.
SO IT'S JUST TAKING A, A PERCENTAGE OF THEIR BUDGET AND PAYING IT OUT OF MEASURE A.
SO IT'S NOT EVEN TYING TO POSITIONS, IT'S REALLY TYING TO HOW CAN WE GET THE SAME PERCENTAGE FROM EACH BUDGET.
'CAUSE I MEAN WITH, AT LEAST WITH THE PURPOSE BEING TO RESTORE AND RETAIN, I MEAN, I WOULD, I WOULD EXPECT THAT TO MEAN THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE INCREASING FUNDING IN PUBLIC SAFETY.
IF, YOU KNOW, WE ARE HIRING MORE FOLKS AT THE POLICE ACADEMY AND THAT'S BEING BROUGHT INTO THE POLICE BUDGET.
BRINGING BACK MORE FIRE ENGINES, WHICH REQUIRES THE NEED TO BRING ON MORE FIREFIGHTERS, UH, TO STAFF THOSE.
SO MY CONCERN IS MORE THAT, AND I THINK KIND OF THE REASON WHY I DID SUPPORT THE WRITING OF THE LETTER WAS THAT WHILE, YOU KNOW YES, WITH SUPPORTING THE PUBLIC SAFETY ASPECTS OF IT, I MEAN IS THE EXPECTATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO REDUCE THE FUNDING FOR PUBLIC SAFETY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE
[01:35:01]
OR 'CAUSE ONE THING THAT I WAS HEARTENED BY, AT LEAST WITH THE THE AUDIT REPORT THAT WE HEARD EARLIER, WAS THAT KIND OF WHAT I MENTIONED, THAT THE DISPARITY WAS SIGNIFICANT, BUT IT HAS SHRUNK WITHOUT THE SACRIFICE BEING PUBLIC SAFETY FUNDING.BUT THAT INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING IS INCREASING.
WELL, IT, IT, IT SHRUNK FOR THE LAST TWO FISCAL YEARS THAT THEY LOOKED AT FOR FISCAL YEAR 23 AND 24, FISCAL YEAR 25, IT WENT DOWN TREMENDOUSLY.
IN FISCAL YEAR 26, IT'S DOWN EVEN MORE.
AND SO IF WE LOOK AT FISCAL YEAR 26 PROPOSED, WE'RE DOWN TO ALMOST EXACTLY WHAT THEY SAID HERE.
AND I DON'T, I'M NOT SHOWING THE NUMBERS IN IN OUR SLIDE, BUT THE, UM, WE HAVE IT WHERE IT'S SHOWING, WHAT WAS IT? WHAT DID I SAY? 14%? YEAH.
SO YOU SEE THE PERCENTAGES OF, UH, THIS IS ORANGE AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE PERCENTAGES GOING DOWN.
SO ALL THE WAY TO 28, EVEN IN WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO US IN 28, THEY'RE SHOWING, SO HERE'S WHERE THE SIGNIFICANT WENT UP ON THE LAST AUDIT AND THEN NOW YOU CAN SEE IT GOING DOWN.
THE TREND IS BECOMING UNMANAGEABLE WHERE INFRASTRUCTURE WILL GET NO MONEY FROM THE INFRASTRUCTURE SALES TAX TO DO THEIR JOB THIS YEAR.
YOU COULD SEE THE NUMBER NINE POINT, WHATEVER MILLION OUT OF 65 MILLION IS GOING TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE NOW.
YEAH, THEY GOT ANOTHER 3 MILLION HERE AND THEY GOT THIS OTHER PIECES THERE.
SO YES, IT'S 14 MILLION, BUT I MEAN IT'S STILL, THE INCLINE IS DOWN AND, AND UH, WE CAN SEE PUBLIC SAFETY CONTINUES TO TAKE A LARGER, LARGER, LARGER, LARGER PORTION THAT IT IS, IT, IT IS WHAT I THINK A LOT OF TAXPAYERS FEAR THAT IT WAS JUST GONNA BE A GENERAL SALES TAX THAT WOULD GO INTO THE GENERAL FUND AND THEN THEY GOTTA MAKE A DECISION AND, AND WE'RE NOT GETTING THE THINGS THAT WE WERE PROMISED.
MY CONCERN IS AT LEAST WITH KIND OF THE NUMBERS, WHICH IS, UH, SOMETHING THAT I DID KIND OF HIGHLIGHT IS JUST HOW THIS IS ALL BEING CALCULATED.
'CAUSE IT SEEMS KIND OF INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE'VE BEEN HEARING, AT LEAST FROM STAFF AT LEAST TODAY BASED ON THE REPORTS WE'VE BEEN GETTING.
THE NUMBERS ARE GOOD, YOU CAN SEE INCREASE.
AND HE DID SAY IT WAS GETTING BETTER.
SO THIS IS THE AUDIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 24, AND I'M, I'M JUST SHOWING HIM ON THE SLIDE OF WHERE THE 24 IS.
SO IT WENT DOWN AND IT GOT BACK DOWN AND THEN IT STARTED GOING BACK UP.
THIS IS WHERE HE'S REFERENCING, OH, WE'RE SEEING AN IMPROVEMENT.
BUT NOW YOU CAN SEE THE CURRENT YEAR NEXT YEAR AND THEN THE FUTURE PROPOSED YEARS IT DROPPED, IT'S DROPPING.
AND SO WE ARE TRYING TO GET IT BACK TO GO BACK UP INSTEAD.
SO THIS IS THE YEAR HE AUDITED AND YES, THAT WAS A TRUE STATEMENT.
IT HAS GOTTEN BETTER, BUT NOW THEY DID NOT AUDIT CURRENT YEAR.
THEY DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT, OR THEY CAN'T AUDIT 26 AND 27 AND 28.
WHAT'S PROJECTED IN THE FUTURE IS, IS IS EVEN BEST IT'S GONNA BE FISCAL YEAR 28 IS PROJECTING 10% OF OPERATING DOLLARS GOING TO INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO IT'S GONNA DROP DOWN TO SIX SIX SOME ODD MILLION.
IT STAYS AT 9 MILLION BECAUSE IT GOES UP TO A HUNDRED.
AND EVEN AT A HUNDRED WE'RE STILL ONLY GONNA GET 9 MILLION.
SO, SO IT'S 10% OF IT, I MEAN, ARE BASED ON THE STAFF'S PROJECTIONS.
I MEAN, ARE WE REALLY PROPOSING IN 2028 ONLY 10% OF THE MEASURE A DOLLARS TO BE SPENT ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND 9 MILLION? YEAH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
SO AS FAR AS OUR BUDGETING, WE BUDGET PER FISCAL YEAR.
SO WE HAVE THE FY 26 BUDGET, UM, PROPOSED, BUT WE DO PROVIDE AN OUT YEAR PLAN.
SO OUR OUT YEAR PLAN, WHICH IS PROVIDED IN ATTACHMENT D, IT SHOWS FY 27 28.
THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM THAT WE PRESENTED TO ELEVATE 28 GOES FROM FY 23 TO 27.
THE FY 28 PLAN IS NOT FULLY ALLOCATED AS OF RIGHT NOW WE HAVE 25.45 MILLION NOT ALLOCATED TO ANY SERVICES.
IT IS CURRENTLY LEFT AS IS TO BE REDISCUSSED AS A PLAN IN THE FUTURE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT BASED ON WHAT THINGS MIGHT COME UP BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, WHAT THINGS MAY REQUIRE FUNDING THAT IN THE 26, 27 ARE FUNDED.
KIND OF WHAT WAS TALKED ABOUT EARLIER WHERE THIS REQUIRES SOME FUNDING DOWN THE LINE THAT WE'RE GONNA KIND OF PAY AS WE GO.
AND THEN JUST TO ADD ONE LAYER TO THAT, AS FAR AS THIS CURRENT BUDGET YEAR, THE, UH, MAYOR RELEASED HIS RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE FI 26 BUDGET, WHICH ALSO INCLUDED A POLICY DIRECTION FOR STAFF TO COME BACK WITH A NEW FIVE YEAR PLAN TO START THINKING AHEAD ABOUT THAT YEAR.
AND CAN I CLARIFY THOUGH, CAN YOU CLARIFY THE QUESTION THAT
[01:40:01]
THE DATA YOU GAVE US THOUGH IS SHOWING FISCAL YEAR 28 THAT 10% OF THE BUDGET WILL GO TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS? IS THAT A YES OR A NO? RIGHT NOW IN FY 28, THERE'S A COMMITMENT OF ABOUT 7.3 MILLION FOR INFRASTRUCTURE THEN ALONG WITH A DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT FOR 8 MILLION.THOSE ARE ACTUAL COMMITMENTS THAT WE MAKE EVERY FISCAL YEAR.
THERE'S A, A BOTTOM LINE STANDARD OF WHAT MEASURE EIGHT WILL FUND AN INFRASTRUCTURE FOR STREETS.
AND, UM, A DAI BELIEVE PUBLIC WORKS COULD PROVIDE WHAT IT GOES TO, BUT THAT MUST BE PLANNED.
BUT I'M JUST SAYING THE REPORT YOU GAVE US AT THE LAST MEETING, IS IT 10%? IT'S NOT FULLY ALLOCATED.
SO IT'S 10%, BUT YET THERE'S NOT A FULLY ALLOCATED PLAN.
THE PLAN THE REVENUE IS PROJECTED AT, IN FY 28 AT 94.4 MILLION.
THE FY 28 PLAN HAS ABOUT 69 MILLION OF USES ACTUALLY PLANNED.
THOSE ARE STRUCTURAL USES, LET'S SAY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY STRUCTURAL USES.
YOU JUST HAVE TO ASSUME THEY CONTINUE TO GO FORWARD IN FY 28.
THIS FORECAST SHOWS MEASURE A GOING BACK TO THE 1% AND THAT'S WHY THERE'S A BIG BUMP UP OF UNALLOCATED FUNDS.
AND THAT IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT DISCUSSION THAT STAFF WOULD COME BACK IN A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT HERE.
THAT IS NOT THE ACTUAL BUDGET, THAT'S JUST CURRENTLY HOW IT LOOKS.
UM, WE WOULD NOT MAKE A FULL PLAN TO, I I DON'T THOSE DOLLARS.
I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, YES, IT'S POTENTIALLY GONNA CHANGE AND YES, IT MAY GO UP, BUT THE DATA, WHEN WE ASKED YOU TO LET US SEE WHAT YOU'RE FORECASTING AND PROJECTING, YOU GAVE THAT TO US.
WE ARE JUST REFERENCING THAT IN YOUR SHEET THAT YOU GAVE US THAT WE USED THAT IS PART OF THIS.
IT CLEARLY SAYS FISCAL YEAR 28, THE A HUNDRED MILLION YOU'RE GONNA RAISE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, IT'S 10%.
RIGHT NOW IT SAYS INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO WILL IT CHANGE? I DON'T KNOW IT FISCAL YEAR 26 PROJECTIONS ARE ALMOST EXACTLY ON TARGET, RIGHT? IT'S 14%.
SO JUST BASED ON WHAT YOU GAVE US IT SEE IT SHOWS 10%.
SO I DON'T KNOW, WILL IT CHANGE? AND I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THEN IF YOU THOUGHT IT WAS GONNA BE DIFFERENT, SHOULD Y'ALL HAVE NOT SHOWN US 14, 15, 20%? YEAH, AS FAR AS THE, THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT YOU'RE SEEING IN INFRASTRUCTURE FOR FY 28, THOSE ARE THE COMMITMENTS THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FOR STRUCTURAL NEEDS.
STRUCTURAL NEEDS BEING THE ADA A AND STREET AND THE DEBT SERVICE.
THAT IS WHAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOCATED IN THE FY 28 PLAN.
BUT THE 28 PLAN IS NOT FULLY DEVELOPED AND WOULD BE RETURNED THAT THERE'S, RIGHT NOW, IF I COULD REFERENCE IT TO A DOCUMENT, ATTACHMENT D IN THE FY 26 PROPOSED BUDGET, THE TOP BOX SHOWS A SUMMARY OF MEASURE A, WHICH IN FY 28 WILL SHOW YOU THE, UH, 94 MILLION.
THEN THAT BOTTOM LINE WILL SHOW WHAT'S ACTUALLY UN UNALLOCATED THE PROGRAM.
THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE, THE 25 MILLION THAT'S CURRENTLY UNALLOCATED.
SO WHEN THE STAFF RETURNS WITHIN OUT YEAR PLAN, THAT WOULD BE APPLIED TO THE FULL MEASURE A PLAN AS A WHOLE.
BECAUSE AT LEAST, AT LEAST FOR ME, BASED ON PAST EXPERIENCE WITH HOW THE MONEY'S BEEN SPENT SO FAR USING JUST, YOU KNOW, KIND OF THE EXPENDITURES, UH, FROM THE PREVIOUS YEARS, IT DOES, IT SEEMS WEIRD TO ME TO ASSUME THAT IF WE'RE GONNA GO FROM SPENDING, AT LEAST BASED ON SOME OF THESE NUMBERS, YOU KNOW, 35 MILLION ON INFRASTRUCTURE THIS YEAR THAT WE'RE SUDDENLY GOING, YOU KNOW, OF THE 70 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS, UH, WHERE ROUGHLY 45 MILLION IS SPENT ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND THEN JUST OVER 35 MILLION IS SPENT ON INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE'RE SUDDENLY GOING TO DROP SO SIGNIFICANTLY IN INFRASTRUCTURE SPENDING, WHICH IS MY CONCERN WITH THESE NUMBERS THAT ARE KIND OF BEING REFERENCED HERE, UM, IN, AT LEAST IN THE LETTER.
SO, BUT EVEN IN TODAY'S BUDGET, IT DROPPED FROM THE AMOUNT YOU'RE SAYING TODAY, THE FISCAL YEAR 26 PROPOSED BUDGET IS SHOWING $9.4 MILLION OF 65 MILLION.
BUT AGAIN, THAT STILL SEEMS INCONSISTENT THAT WE'RE SUDDENLY GONNA LOSE $30 MILLION IN SPENDING.
I MEAN THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REPORTING.
AND IS IT, 'CAUSE HERE'S HIS NUMBERS RIGHT HERE, 66.7 4000009.22 PLUS THAT 0.76.
SO IT'S ABOUT 10 MILLION OF THE 66 IS GOING TO INFRASTRUCTURE, 14%.
SO IN THE THE OTHER FISCAL YEARS IT WAS HIGHER, 20 SOME ODD 25.
[01:45:01]
SO THE DROP IS GOING DOWN AND ACCORDING TO THE PROJECTIONS OF STAFF, IT WILL DROP TO EVEN 10%.BUT MY CONCERN IS, AT LEAST WITH REFERENCING THIS, THIS IS THE MONEY THAT'S BEING SPENT ON PUBLIC SAFETY IS THE 46 WHICH TRACKS WITH IT, AT LEAST THE NUMBERS I'M THINKING OF.
YES, IT DOES, BUT IT'S TWO YEARS OLD THAT, THAT THAT REPORT, IT ONLY GOES THROUGH 2024.
SO YOU'RE, AND THEN YOU GOT 25 AND 26, RIGHT? BUT THAT IS WHERE I'M KIND OF THINKING LIKE IT'S KIND OF INCONSISTENT THAT WE ARE SPENDING SUDDENLY SO LITTLE ON INFRASTRUCTURE.
FISCAL YEAR 26 BUDGET IS INCONSISTENT AND 27 THEORETICALLY GETS PROJECTED LOWER AND 28 GETS PROJECTED LOWER.
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, BUT THEY'RE SAYING A LOT OF THAT IS JUST NOT ALLOCATED YET, IS PART OF THE PROBLEM ONLY 28.
IF I COULD PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION TO THAT DISCUSSION.
I, I THINK THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT DISCUSSIONS GOING ON WITH THE AUDITOR'S REPORT.
IN THE MEASURE A PLAN AS FAR AS OUR BUDGETED PLAN, THE THE ONES THAT YOU'VE SEEN, THE REPORTS THAT SHOWS ATTACHMENT D FROM FY 17 AND HOW WE'RE ALLOCATING THE DOLLARS, THOSE ARE MORE PLANNING DOLLARS.
THOSE ARE ACTUALLY BUDGETED AMOUNTS AND SPENT IN PUBLIC SAFETY AND WE REPRESENT THEM AS TRANSFERRED TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT.
WHEN THE AUDITOR CONDUCTED HIS, UH, THEIR REPORT THEY CONDUCTED ON WHERE ARE THE DOLLARS BEING SPENT, ARE THEY BEING SPENT AND THEIR, THEIR REPORT IS SHOWING ACTUAL SPEND.
THERE IS, AS PUBLIC WORKS CALLED OUT EARLIER, A CHALLENGE TO SPEND EVERY DOLLAR IN THE FIRST FISCAL YEAR, YOU HAVE TO RAMP UP AND START GETTING PROJECTS MOVING.
SO THAT'S WHY YOU SEE CERTAIN RAMP UP WITH SPEND AND THEN BUDGET ALLOCATIONS COME THERE WITH WHAT THE CHAIR IS CALLING ABOUT, CALLING OUT ABOUT THE ALLOCATION IN FY 26 BEING, UH, A LOWER ALLOCATION.
THAT IS TRUE THAT WE HAVE A SMALL AMOUNT IN FY 26 WITH THE FY 27 ANTICIPATING A BOND.
THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS WORKING THROUGH THAT LAST BOND THAT WE JUST ISSUED ALMOST A HUNDRED MILLION WITH FIRE STATION 22 BUILT INTO THAT, WHICH WAS ALMOST A LOT.
IT WAS A LOT OF PROJECTS TO TAKE ON ONE FISCAL YEAR.
THIS FISCAL YEAR HAS MEASURE A REVENUE NEXT FISCAL YEAR PUBLIC WORKS IS GOING TO TAKE ON ANOTHER $50 MILLION BOND OF PROJECTS.
SO WE SEE THAT JUMP UP, DROP DOWN NEXT YEAR, MEASURE A REVENUE GOES TOWARDS IT, BUT IT'S LEVERAGING THE REVENUE TO, TO UM, LAUNCH THE BOND.
THAT BOND IS GONNA BE THE LAST BOND OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM.
THAT WAS THE THREE YEAR PLAN TO ISSUE THREE BONDS.
SO THAT'LL BE THE LAST, WHAT HAPPENS NEXT AS FAR AS FY 28, WHICH IS WHAT THE COMMITTEE'S CURRENTLY QUESTIONING OR DISCUSSING IS CURRENTLY NOT PLANNED YET.
THAT'S, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ALLOCATED AND IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF WILL HAVE TO RETURN AND MAKE A PROPOSAL HOW TO ALLOCATE IT.
BUT AGAIN, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE DONE TODAY, BUT RATHER WHEN MORE INFORMATION COMES AND WE COME BACK IN THE FISCAL YEAR.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY THAT, WHAT IS BEING TALKED ABOUT WITH THESE GRAPHS WITH THE NUMBERS IS THAT THIS IS WHAT HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, WE ARE EXPECTING TO DO OR WHAT'S EXPECTED TO BE ALLOCATED, BUT WITH THE CAVEAT THAT WITH THAT EXTRA BOND, IT'S NOT GONNA STAY LIKE THAT.
IT, WE ARE GOING TO SPEND MORE BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA HAVE MONEY.
KIND OF WHAT HAS BEEN SAID BEFORE IS THAT WE DON'T ALLOCATE MONEY TO PROJECTS THAT WE DON'T HAVE.
WHEN WE GET THAT MONEY, WE'RE GONNA SPEND THAT MONEY AND THAT'S GONNA MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE THAT I THINK WE'RE BOTH KIND OF TALKING ABOUT IS THAT WE'RE NOT JUST GONNA SUDDENLY SPEND 10% OF MEASURE A, WE'RE NOT GONNA SPEND $9 MILLION ON INFRASTRUCTURE.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE MORE MONEY ADDING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT WE DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT NOW.
AND THAT HASN'T BEEN ALLOCATED YET.
AND ONE CLARIFICATION TO THAT, BECAUSE YOU DO SEE THE RAMP UP OF MEASURE A, UH, SPENDING AND INFRASTRUCTURE ON THE AUDITOR'S REPORT, JUST TO CLARIFY, THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE BONDS.
SO AS WE, WE ISSUE BONDS, THEY TAKE THAT SEPARATELY AND THEIR ANALYSIS IS ON THE MEASURE A REVENUE THAT IS A RAMP UP OF COMMITTED MEASURE A REVENUE TO INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS NOW BEING SPENT IN THE CITY AND COMPLETING PROJECTS.
SO YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S NOW BEING ACTUALLY BUILT UP.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO DISCUSS MORE ON THAT PROCESS OF HOW PROJECT SPENDING HAPPENS OVER THE YEARS.
WE JUST, A PROJECT IS NOT FUNDED AND FULLY EXPEND IN THE FIR THE SINGLE FIRST FISCAL YEAR WITH THE RAMP UP OF MEASURE A BEING THE REVENUES BEING COMMITTED.
IT WAS THE FIVE YEAR PLAN TO LEVERAGE MEASURE A FOR THE EMPHASIS, THE THE BOND.
SO OUTSIDE OF THE AUDITOR'S REPORT, WE HAD A, I BELIEVE, I DON'T WANNA CALL THIS, I'M SHAKY ON THE NUMBER, A $62.5 MILLION BOND, AN 89 OR $99 MILLION BOND AND TWO FISCAL YEARS LATER.
AND THEN NOW ANOTHER $50 MILLION BOND COMING THAT ALL THAT INFRASTRUCTURE MONEY IS GOING BACK INTO THE ELEVATE 28 PLAN TO LAUNCH THESE PROJECTS.
YET THE AUDITOR'S REPORT IS FOCUSED ON
[01:50:01]
THE REVENUE.IT'S ONLY LOOKING AT THE REVENUE PORTION.
IT IS NOT TAKING THE, THE, UM, BOND PROCEEDS TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE RAMP UP.
UH, MEMBER CHOA, CAN I TRY TO ADDRESS A, A COUPLE THINGS? SO 2024 IS, IS OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS THAT AMOUNT OF, OF THAT PERCENTAGE OF ALLOCATION IS THERE.
2025 SHOWS A LOWER AMOUNT FROM MEASURE A S DOES 2026 AND 2027.
BUT IN 2028, WE COULD REVISE THAT GRAPH TO SHOW A PORTION OF IT, THAT INCREMENTAL AMOUNT THAT'S COMING IN FROM THE, THE 1% TO BE, UH, UNKNOWN ALLOCATION.
I, I WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.
BUT PART OF WHAT WE, UM, MIGHT BE SEEING HERE IS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ALL THIS BOND MONEY COMING IN AND WHAT, WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE TOTAL ON THE BOND MONEY NATER? IT'S UM, 150.
CAN YOU GIVE JUST 50 MILLION? IT'S ABOUT 62 PLUS THE 99 PLUS ANOTHER 50.
GIVE ME ONE MINUTE, I'LL ACTUALLY GET THE RIGHT NUMBER FOR YOU.
BUT YEAH, IT'S JUMPING UP THERE ALMOST TO 200 MILLION.
BUT WE ALSO HAVE 3.6 BILLION OR $3.2 BILLION IN, IN PROJECTS.
SO THE, THE BOND MEASURES DON'T, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T COME CLOSE TO, TO FULFILLING THOSE PROJECTS.
AND SO FOR US TO NOT HAVE THOSE INFRASTRUCTURE DOLLARS FLOWING IN FROM, FROM MEASURE A, THE, THE BOND MONEY CAN'T TAKE THE PLACE OF OR SHOULD NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF THE MEASURE A MONEY.
AND I THINK PART OF THAT MIGHT BE PART OF WHAT'S HAPPENING WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT THE EXPENDITURES FROM THE BONDS AND WE'RE SAYING, OKAY, WE'RE SPENDING, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE, WE HAVE 102 HUNDRED AND $20 MILLION OR WHATEVER ALLOCATED TO INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS.
UM, BECAUSE, BECAUSE OF THE BONDS SO THAT WE DON'T NEED TO MAYBE DEVOTE AS MUCH THROUGH THE, THE MEASURE A COLLECTIONS.
AND, AND THE PROBLEM IS THAT YOU THEN GET TIED INTO THESE MAINTAINING THESE POSITIONS AND THERE'S NO WAY TO REVERSE IT UNLESS YOU HAVE A, A COMMIT A A COMMITMENT TO THAT.
AND, AND I GUESS THE OTHER WAY TO SEE IT IS TO SEE THE GROWTH AND DEPENDENCE AND RELIANCE OF THE POLICE AND FIRE SAFETY BUDGET FROM, YOU KNOW, A SMALL AMOUNT IN THE FIRST YEARS, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE IN THE TWENTIES, THEN IT GOES TO 30%, THEN IT GOES TO 40%, THEN IT GETS TO 50%.
WE'RE NOW 60 AND 70% OF THE MEASURE A DOLLARS ARE GOING TOWARDS THAT.
AND THEN MY CONCERN IS THAT YES, YOU CAN GET THESE BONDS AND IF YOU ADVANCE 'EM OUT AND THEN WE SPEND THEM AND THEN WHEN WE GET TO FISCAL YEAR 29 OR 2030, WHEN THERE'S NO MONEY, WILL THE POLICE AND FIRE BE SO DEPENDENT THAT WE WILL HAVE NO MORE INFRASTRUCTURE SALES TAX? THIS WAS MEASURED ALMOST EVERY SINGLE ADVERTISEMENT HEADED UP MEASURE A INFRASTRUCTURE SALES TAX.
THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS TITLED MEASURE A INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO WHEN YOU'RE GETTING DOWN TO OVER, IF 70 SOME ODD PERCENT IS GOING TO SOME OTHER THING, THEN THAT MEANS MEASURE A OR INFRASTRUCTURE IS GETTING LESS.
THOSE BOND MONIES COULD BE SPRINT OUT OVER A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME AND GIVING PUBLIC WORKS THE TIME TO DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO.
SO INSTEAD OF, YOU KNOW, SPENDING 200 MILLION ALL IN ONE POP, COULD WE SPREAD IT OUT AND LET US GET MORE IMPROVEMENTS TOWARDS, I MEAN I'M GETTING CALLS ABOUT LIBRARIES AND I'M GETTING CALLS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE YOU DOING ABOUT, I'M NOT DOING NOTHING ABOUT THIS
I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW THAT'S BEING SPENT.
IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM, TAKE IT TO COUNCIL, BUT IT MAKES SENSE.
I MEAN YOU DRIVE DOWN THE, THE ROADS, IF THEY HAD THAT MONEY MORE DEDICATED LONGER AND WE SPREAD IT OUT LONGER, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE MORE TIME TO DO ALL THOSE PROJECTS.
SO I I'M JUST SAYING IS THIS IS NOT SUSTAINABLE.
I THINK THAT THE CITY IS, HAS TO FIGURE OUT WAYS TO FULLY FUND THE POLICE.
I'M NOT SAYING DEFUND OR ANYTHING.
I SAY GET IT BACK TO WHERE IT WAS AND LET MEASURE A PAY FOR THE ADDITIONAL POLICE AND FIRE AND THEN LET THE CITY FIGURE OUT OUT OF ALL OF ITS RESOURCES.
'CAUSE THIS IS SUCH A SMALL PERCENTAGE, IT IS SMALL AND INSIGNIFICANT TO THE TOTAL CITY BUDGET.
BUT TO INFRASTRUCTURE, THIS IS SIGNIFICANT.
AND I THINK THAT WE AGREE IN THAT THE PITCH WAS, YOU KNOW, INFRASTRUCTURE.
AND PART OF WHY I DID SUPPORT DOING A LETTER WAS BECAUSE I DO WANNA SEE US, YOU KNOW, SUPPORTING MORE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS.
BUT MY ONLY CONCERN, AT LEAST WITH THE NUMBERS THAT ARE CITED IN THE LETTER IS KIND OF GOING BACK TO WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED IS THAT PART OF IT IS THAT
[01:55:01]
THIS ALLOCATION DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE SPENDING THAT THE CITY CAN AND WILL DO AFTER WE GET THE BOND MONEY AND THE INCREASE WITH TO THE 1%.BUT IT'S ALSO KIND OF INCONSISTENT, AT LEAST WITH THE NUMBERS OF ACTUAL SPENDING BECAUSE OF THE BOND.
IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT AT ALL INCONSISTENT.
IT JUST, IT JUST DOESN'T GO BEYOND THE 2024 COMMISSIONER PLEASE, WHY ON YOUR MIC DOESN'T KNOW.
THIS IS THE ONLY NUMBER THAT I THINK SHE I'M SORRY.
THE ONLY NUMBER THAT MAY I COULD AGREE WITH YOU BASED ON WHAT YOU KNOW, NADER SAYING, HEY, 2028, WE'RE GONNA PULL A MAGIC OUTTA THE HAT.
WE'RE GONNA ALLOCATE THAT, BUT THESE OTHER NUMBERS ARE A HUNDRED PERCENT CONSISTENT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE PERCENTAGES.
SO 2025 IS DONE AND THAT IS ACTUALLY A, AN ACTUAL NUMBER.
SO IN 2028 WE COULD CHANGE THAT.
AND IF YOU WANNA REFERENCE JUST TO THE 2026 BUDGET, WE COULD CHANGE THAT AND SAY 15% 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT IS, IT'S 14 POINT WHATEVER.
AND THEN REFERENCE THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR BUDGET.
SO, SO MAYBE WE CAN SAY IF WE DO THIS, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD DO, DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WHICH ANDREW WE SAY, YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH A QUESTION MARK OR, OR, OR JUST TO CLEAR THE LETTER.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? NO, I, I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
BUT IF WE WANNA CLARIFY THIS, WE KNOW THAT 2025 ACTUALLY HAPPENED AND WE KNOW THAT FISCAL YEAR 26 IS PROPOSED.
WE CAN SAY AND CURRENT FISCAL YEAR 26 BUDGET, THE FORECAST IS SHOWING, OR THE BUDGET IS SHOWING 14.4% TOWARDS THIS AND 70 SOME ODD PERCENT THING.
SO WE CAN SAY THOSE NUMBERS 'CAUSE THAT IS ON HIS REPORT RIGHT HERE.
AND IT WOULD, AND IT WOULD TIE TO THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET.
SO THAT IS WHAT IS ACTUALLY BEING PROPOSED RIGHT HERE.
AND WE COULD REFERENCE THESE TWO NUMBERS, 14.7 AND 77.08 IF THAT MAKES YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE.
AND HE, I THINK HE WOULD AGREE TO EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE NUMBERS.
AND IF YOU'RE QUESTIONING AS TO WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IN 2020, OKAY, WE DON'T KNOW THAT, BUT WE DO KNOW 26 'CAUSE IT'S RIGHT HERE.
WELL AT LEAST WITH THE, WITH THE, IF WE WERE TO MAKE IT 2026, AND I'M ASSUMING WE'RE KIND OF GOING OFF THESE NUMBERS FOR THE 26, WE'RE GOING OFF HIS PRESENTATION THAT WE HAD IN SLIDE THREE, PRESENTATION THREE.
I MEAN AT LEAST FOR THE, WHAT DID WE SAY FOR THE CHANGE FOR 26 IT WAS WHAT, 15% OR IT'S 14.7.
I MEAN IS IT 15%? IS THAT I, I MEAN GIVEN THAT'S NOT A HARD NUMBER, IT'S, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST THE CALCULATION THAT HE HAS IS 14%.
I MEAN IS IT 14% FOR INFRASTRUCTURE OR IS IT, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING DIFFERENT KIND OF NA WOULD Q TO WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT BY ADDING THOSE TWO NUMBERS OF THE 66.74 BUDGET, IF I TOTAL UP THE TOP THREE, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, THAT'S 77.08 AND THEN I DO THE NEXT TWO, WHICH IS INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT'S 14.7 AND THEN THE REMAINING OTHER FIVE ITEMS, FOUR ITEMS. THOSE ARE JUST OTHER, AND THAT'S KIND OF THE WAY YOU'VE BEEN PRESENTING THAT CHART TO US.
SO IF WE REFERENCED OUR FISCAL YEAR 26 BUDGET, IT IS FAIR TO SAY, AND IN OUR CURRENT FISCAL YEAR 26 PROPOSED BUDGET INFRASTRUCTURE IS BEING ALLOCATED 14.7% AND PUBLIC SAFETY IS BEING ALLOCATED 77.08.
SO I'M JUST LOOKING AT MY TABLE.
THAT'S ALSO THE ATTACHMENT IN THE BUDGET BOOK AND YOUR, UM, GROUP FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AS FAR AS TRANSFER TO MEASURE A REVENUE NON BOND, THERE IS, UH, 9.22 MILLION COMMITTED TOWARDS THE, UM, CIP PAYS.
YOU GO THE TRANSFER FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS ALONG WITH A SMALL AMOUNT FOR 760,000 THAT HELPS CAMERA INFRASTRUCTURE.
WE DO ALSO SHOW THE, UH, DEBT SERVICE BOND PAYMENT OF 3.4 MILLION.
BUT I UNDERSTAND SOME MAY WANT TO NOT ACCOUNT FOR THAT AS BOND SERVICE OR INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING OR NOT.
BUT JUST TO SHOW THAT TOTAL IT IS THE 13.47 MILLION FOR FY 26 PLAN.
I DID ALSO WANT TO GET, UH, COMMITTEE MEMBER JAN'S NUMBER AS I WAS DIGGING THAT UP ON THE BOND FUNDING AND WHAT THE TOTAL WAS.
AND IT IS ACROSS ALL YEARS NINE 197000000.75 MILLION PLAN FOR INFRASTRUCTURE.
THE WAY, UH, THAT WORKED WAS STARTING IN FY 23, IT COULD HAVE BEEN A FULL BOND THAT ISSUED ALL THAT, BUT TO THE CHAIR'S COMMENT, YOU COULD SPREAD THAT OUT AND THAT WAS THE PLAN TO NOT JUST UPFRONT IT, BUT RATHER USE 50 MILLION, 50,000,050, WHICH WAS THE ORIGINAL PLAN, BUT THEN MORE THINGS GOT ADDED TO IT.
THE REASON, UH, WE DID ISSUE THE BOND,
[02:00:01]
THE ONE THING WITH THE TIMING OF THE BOND, THE FIRST BOND WAS ISSUED IN FY 23, WHICH IS ALSO THE DROP OF MEASURE A SALES TAX AND FY 23, THAT'S WHEN THE RATE WENT FROM 1% TO 0.75%.THAT DROPS THE AVAILABLE FUNDING BY ALMOST 25 MILLION WITH NO ADJUSTMENT TO STRUCTURAL NEEDS.
WE HAVE TO CONTINUE FUNDING OUR STRUCTURAL COMMITMENTS.
THE BOND FROM FY 23 TO 27 HAD THREE BONDS TO HELP THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM.
AFTER FY 27 THERE, THERE'S NO BOND IN DISCUSSION AND MEASURE A GOES BACK TO 1%, WHICH LEADS INTO THE, THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT'S ALLOCATED.
THE, UH, BONDS THAT WERE ISSUED WAS IN FY 23, 60 0.25 MILLION AND FY 24 THERE WAS ANOTHER FOR 22 MILLION, 65.5 MILLION.
ANOTHER PLAN FOR FY 27 FOR 50 MILLION.
BUT ONE, ONE COMMENT TO MAKE ON THAT WAS TO THE COMMENT OF HOW YOU HAVE TO SPEND IT AND SPREAD IT OUT, THERE IS AN IRS COMMITMENT THAT 85% OF THOSE FUNDS HAVE TO BE SPENT IN THE FIRST THREE YEARS.
ONE THING THE CITY DID WAS WE ISSUED THE BUDGET FOR THESE BONDS ON FY 24, UH, 25 AND 24, MEANING THE CAPITAL PRO PROJECT BUDGETS ARE THERE, THEY CAN BEGIN THEM, BUT WE DID NOT ISSUE THAT BOND YET.
THE REASON WE DID THAT IS TO GIVE THEM A HEAD START TO START THE PROJECTS AND SPEND THE CASH BEFORE WE GO ABOUT AND TRY TO ISSUE THAT BOND.
THAT HELPS US MAKE THAT IR S3, UM, THREE YEAR RULE ALONGS WITH SAVES THE MEASURE A PLAN PAYMENTS TO THE BOND THAT IS NOW DELAYED AND PUSHED OUT.
SO THAT WAS A STRATEGY BY THE CITY TO JUST ISSUE START THE WORK NOW ISSUE THE BONDS LATER.
SO THAT WAS THE FIVE YEAR PLAN TO LEVERAGE THE BONDS FROM 23 TO 27.
THOSE WERE ALSO THE YEARS MEASURE A DROPPED FROM 1% TO 0.75%.
UM, RIGHT NOW OUR OUTCAST LOOKS AT IT AS IT WILL RETURN IN FY 28 TO THE 1%.
THAT'S WHERE THERE'S AN UNALLOCATED PLAN.
SO, UM, AT LEAST FOR THE PROPOSED FY 26 THAT WE LOOKED AT EARLIER AND THAT KEEPS GETTING REFERENCED.
AND THAT AMOUNT WAS PRETTY MUCH PLANNED FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.
WE KNEW IN, WHEN WE STARTED THE FY 23 PLAN, WE TRIED TO PLAN FIVE YEARS OUT KNOWING WE'LL TRY TO COMMIT THIS MUCH EACH FISCAL YEAR PLUS BONDS.
SO WE TRY TO HELP HOLD TO THAT PLAN AS WE WENT THROUGH EACH YEAR.
BUT AGAIN, THERE IS NO REASON THAT THE CITY CANNOT ALLOCATE SOME OF OUR CURRENT YEAR DOLLARS AND PUT IT INTO A FUND FOR FUTURE MONEY.
SO YES, YOU HAVE TO SPEND YOUR BOND MONEY, YOU CAN SPEND THAT ALL LIFE, WHATEVER, BUT THEN YOU COULD PUT THE CURRENT MONEY AND PUT IT IN A RESERVE SO THAT IT'S MM-HMM
THE PERCENTAGE IS WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT.
IN MY MIND, THIS IS NOT SUSTAINABLE.
THAT IF WE'RE GOING FROM THOSE PERCENTAGES AND THE LETTER IS JUST HIGHLIGHTING THAT WE ARE NOW IN FISCAL YEAR 27 PER THE 66.7 THAT IS THE OPERATING REVENUE GENERATED FROM MEASURE A.
AND IF WE REFERENCE THAT NUMBER, THOSE TWO NUMBERS RESPECTIVELY, THE QUESTION IS, AND I'M GONNA ASK YOU THIS QUESTION, JUST THE 66.74 OPERATING A CURRENT DOLLARS CURRENT INFRASTRUCTURE BASED ON THOSE TWO AMOUNTS IS 14.7% AND PUBLIC SAFETY IS 77.08%.
SO IS THE QUESTION THE ANSWER YES OR NO? I THINK THE ISSUE THAT WE'RE KIND OF HAVING IS THAT MY CONCERN IS MORE WITH THE SPENDING IN ACTUAL DOLLARS THAT, UM, WE'VE HISTORICALLY, OR AT LEAST THAT I KEEP KIND OF REFERRING TO, WHEREAS THE ISSUE THAT THE AD HOC COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE HAD IS THAT IT'S MORE DEEP BUDGET PROPOSAL.
THE NUMBERS THAT ARE BEING REFERENCED IN THAT, YEAH, WE NEED TO WORRY ABOUT HOW IT'S BEING SPENT NEXT YEAR AND THE YEAR AFTER.
BUT AT IF WE'RE GONNA REFERENCE THE, LIKE THESE PERCENTAGES, THESE NUMBERS IN THE LETTER, I WOULD PREFER THAT REFLECT THE ACTUAL DOLLARS PERCENTAGE RATHER THAN, BUT THAT IS, I'M, I'M SAYING RIGHT, BUT NO, NO, THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE PRESENTING.
THAT'S WHAT, BUT RIGHT, THAT'S WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED IN NON BOND.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY GONNA END UP SPENDING IN 26.
BUT THE PURPOSE OF A BOND IS THAT BOND MONEY IS BEING BORROWED FROM THE FUTURE KIDS TO PAY FOR TODAY.
SO YOU'RE BRINGING ALL THAT MONEY AND IT'S STILL GONNA BE PAID BACK.
A LARGE PORTION OF THIS, THAT GRAPH THAT WE HAD IN HERE IS GOING TO BE PAYING OFF THOSE BONDS.
[02:05:01]
IT'S GONNA GET INTO THE 20 SOME ODD PERCENT OTHER BECAUSE WE HAVE TO PAY BACK THOSE BONDS FOR 30 SOME ODD YEARS.SO OFF THE BAT, IN THE FUTURE YEARS, THE FIRST 20 SOME ODD MILLION IS GOING BACK TO PAY BONDS OF WHAT WE'RE GETTING BACK IN HERE.
THE, THE PROBLEM IS THE REMAINING ALLOCATION PERCENTAGE OF WHAT REAL MONEY IS AVAILABLE TO US.
IT'S STILL 70 SOME ODD PERCENT HERE.
AND THEN A SMALL, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING DOWN TO BE 10% OF THE OTHER.
SO 77, 10 AND 20 SOME ODD IS GONNA INTEREST.
AND, AND EVEN WITH THE BOND EXPENDITURES, IT DOESN'T COME CLOSE TO SATISFYING THE, THE OUTSTANDING NEEDS.
AND I, THAT, I GET THAT I UNDERSTAND.
WHICH MAKES IT EVEN MORE COMPELLING AND IMPORTANT TO HAVE A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF THE, OF, OF THE REVENUE THAT WE KNOW IS COMING IN EVERY YEAR IN ADDITION TO THE BONDS GOING INTO THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
BECAUSE IF YOU SQUEEZE THAT DOWN TO 10% OR 15% AND YOU'RE, YOU HAVE A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS AND YOU'RE ONLY DEVOTING $15 MILLION OF IT TO INFRASTRUCTURE AFTER THE BONDS ARE ALREADY ISSUED AND SPENT, THEN, THEN THAT AMOUNT OF UNFUNDED, THE DETERIORATION IS JUST GONNA MAKE THAT NUMBER.
EVEN AFTER YOU SUBTRACT OUT WHAT YOU'VE ACCOMPLISHED, THAT NUMBER IS GONNA GROW SO QUICKLY BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU STILL HAVE, I MEAN, YOU HAVE A HUNDRED AND YOU HAVE 200 MILLION BASICALLY NADER AND, UM, ON $3.2 MILLION.
SO YOU STILL HAVE $3 MILLION AND THE ONLY WAY YOU'RE ADDRESSING THAT $3 MILLION IS THROUGH THE, THE MEASURE A MONEY THAT'S COMING IN.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING LEFT AFTER THE BONDS ARE ISSUED.
SO IF YOU'RE ONLY DEVOTING 15 MILLION A YEAR ON 3 MILLION OF OUTSTANDING NEED, YOU'RE NEVER GONNA DIG YOURSELF OUT.
WELL, AND I LIKE IS OR 3 BILLION, NOT 3 MILLION, 3 BILLION, LIKE I SAID, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE NOT SPENDING ENOUGH, I THINK EVEN THE CITY STAFF WOULD AGREE THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE KIND OF DISCUSSED, THAT WE'RE JUST NOT HITTING, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE NEED TO.
BUT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE FAULT OF MEASURE A.
I KNOW, AT LEAST FOR, YOU KNOW, UH, I THINK WE, THEY SAID WE NEED TO SPEND WHAT, 250 MILLION OR 210 MILLION EVERY YEAR TO KIND OF HIT OUR BENCHMARK WHERE WE NEED TO BE SPENDING, UH, OVER 10 YEARS.
AM I CORRECT RECALL? I THINK THAT WAS WHAT THE NUMBER STATED.
THE LAST MEETING, CAN I SAY IT WAS BIG, IT WAS A LARGE NUMBER.
IT WAS MORE THAN OUR, OUR GENERAL FUND.
IT'S AN UNFUNDED LIABILITY THAT THE CITY HAS TO MEET ITS INFRASTRUCTURE GOALS AND PLEASE GIMME A LARGE RANGE.
IT WAS ABOUT 700 MILLION TO A BILLION.
WELL, THEY SHOW ANNUAL IF YOU CAN, UH, I THINK IT'S A SLIDE EXHIBIT.
UH, THEY SHOW THE ANNUAL AND I I SUMMARIZED IT THERE PER YEAR AND THEN TIMES FIVE YEAR.
SO IT WAS A FIVE YEAR PROJECTION.
SO THAT'S EXHIBIT, UH, I THINK IT'S E SO YEAH, SO THEY'RE ASKING, THEY NEED 698 MILLION ANNUAL NEED AND THAT'S HOW THEY'RE COMING UP WITH THE FIVE YEAR, THE 3.4.
AND IT USED TO BE 2.4, SO IT'S, OR 2.1.
SO WHAT'S HAPPENING IS ALL WE'RE JUST TRYING TO SAY IS THAT WE NEED TO BE ON A PATH THAT GIVES MORE OF THIS.
SO RIGHT NOW, IF YOU'RE TALKING THAT 9 MILLION, RIGHT? GOING THERE AND, AND, AND IT CONTINUES BEING THAT IT'S NEVER GONNA ADDRESS THIS.
AND GRANTED THEY ALSO ARE GETTING OTHER MONIES FROM GRANTS AND OTHER KINDS OF THINGS.
SO THE WHOLE CONCEPT IS CAN WE JUST GET THIS NUMBER HIGHER, MORE TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE, MAKE IT MORE SUSTAINABLE.
LET YOU KNOW, YEAH, LET'S SUPPORT PUBLIC SAFETY.
I I'M A HUNDRED PERCENT, BUT THE CITY HAS TO USE GENERAL FUND DOLLARS FOR THAT.
AND THEN MEASURE A CAN SUPPORT THE ADDITIONAL, THE ENHANCEMENTS, THE BIG THINGS AND THEY CAN SUPPORT ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR, 'CAUSE I MEAN WE BOUGHT A NEW RADIO SYSTEM AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.
ALL THAT, YES, THEY NEED THAT MONEY.
THE FIRE STATIONS THAT WE ABSOLUTELY
SHOULD THE RECOMMENDATION THEN BE TO HAVE THE GENERAL FUND ALLOCATE MORE INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING RATHER THAN TO MAKE THAT SHIFT IN MEASURE A? 'CAUSE LIKE I SAID, IT'S NOT THAT, UM, WE'RE NOT SPENDING THE MONEY, WE ARE, PART OF THE ISSUE, I THINK IS THAT WE'RE HAVING A DISCUSSION, UH, THAT WE KEEP KIND OF CIRCLING AROUND IS THAT THIS IS NON BOND MONEY, BUT THIS ISN'T ULTIMATELY WE'RE GONNA, WHAT WE'RE GONNA END UP SPENDING.
AND TO YOUR POINT, THAT, UM, IT'S NOT ENOUGH.
BUT, BUT BOTH, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
I MEAN THE, THE CITY DOES NEED TO SPEND MORE ON, ON INFRASTRUCTURE,
[02:10:01]
BUT I THINK THE CITY SHOULD BE SHIFTING MONIES BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND FOR, FOR TO TO FUND SOME OF THE, THESE POLICE AND FIRE POSITIONS PLUS SPENDING MORE ON INFRASTRUCTURE FROM THE GENERAL FUND.I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WHERE'S THE MONEY GONNA COME FROM? BUT, UM, SO, SO ON THE WHOLE, I, THAT'S WHAT I THINK IT HAS TO BE MADE BIGGER FOR INFRASTRUCTURE BECAUSE THAT IS A CRYING NEED AND PEOPLE WANT THAT.
PEOPLE, NOT ONLY WERE THEY PROMISED, BUT THEY REALLY WANT IT, IT'S REALLY OBVIOUS TO THEM.
SO I JUST THINK THAT THE, THAT THAT THE GENERAL FUND NEEDS TO TAKE BACK SOME OF THOSE POSITIONS AND SUPPORT THEM THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND RATHER THAN THROUGH MEASURE A SO THAT SOME OF THOSE FUNDS CAN GO BACK TO INFRASTRUCTURE PLUS MORE.
MORE NEEDS TO GO TO INFRASTRUCTURE.
IN ADDITION THEN, WOULD IT BE THOUGHT, CAN I JUMP IN AND JUST ADD ONE COMMENT THERE? ONLY BECAUSE THIS IS A, A TIME OF YEAR.
WE'RE PROPOSING THE, THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND ALSO BROUGHT INTO OUR PRESENTATION NUMBER THREE OF THE GENERAL FUND STATUS, WHICH CURRENTLY HAS A THIR, UH, $16.9 MILLION SHORTFALL.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THE CITY IS LOOKING FORWARD TO, TO SOLVING AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.
THE IDEA OF, UH, MEASURE A SUPPORTING, UH, PUBLIC SAFETY IS, IS NECESSARY AT THE POINT WHERE IT'S TO THE POINT WHERE IF YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE DOLLARS OF MEASURE A SUPPORTING PUBLIC SAFETY, THE TRADE OFF BEING WHAT DO YOU REDUCE? WE'RE IN A SITUATION WHERE IT'S NOW A BALANCING ACTION WHERE IT'S NOT, WE COULD SHIFT ANYTHING.
MEASURE A HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO PRESERVE, PRESERVE THOSE POSITIONS.
SO THERE'S MORE, WELL AT LEAST NOW BECAUSE OF THE SHORTFALL, THERE'S A GREATER NEED TO LEAN ON MEASURE A TO CONTINUE SUPPORTING THOSE POSITIONS.
AND THAT'S HOW MEASURE A HAS BEEN UTILIZED IN THE PAST.
THAT MEASURE A HAD TO BE USED TO MAINTAIN THOSE POSITIONS BECAUSE ALTHOUGH THERE'S POSITIONS ENHANCED THE MAINTENANCE BUDGET MADE SURE THAT POSITIONS DIDN'T GO AWAY WHEN WE HAD THOSE BUDGET YEARS THAT NEEDED CUTS.
OTHERWISE A LARGER CUT WOULD BE FACED IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR SPREAD OUT.
HOWEVER, IT COULD BE ACROSS CITY SERVICES.
SO MEASURE A HAS BEEN, UM, A, A CRITICAL NEED FOR THE CITY'S PUBLIC SAFETY TO ACTUALLY MAINTAIN IT.
SO THAT THAT WORD IS VERY KEY, THAT IT IS MAINTAINING THE PUBLIC SAFETY THAT WE HAVE.
UM, REAL QUICK, I JUST WANNA DO A TIME CHECK.
I KNOW AT SOME POINT WE ARE GONNA HAVE TO LEAVE AND I DON'T WANNA KEEP YOU ALL TOO LONG.
YES, I WAS ACTUALLY, I UNDERSTAND HOW IMPORTANT THIS CONVERSATION IS, SO I DON'T WANNA STILT IT, BUT IT IS GOOD TO DO A TIME CHECK.
WE ARE 45 MINUTES RUNNING OVER AND SO I WOULD MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE, UM, ITEM NUMBER SEVEN AND THE ELECTIONS BE HELD OVER TO THE NEXT, JUST IN THE INTEREST OF TIME AND YOU HAVE A BIT OF, YOU KNOW, TIME TO FINISH THE THOUGHT HERE AND MAKE A DETERMINATION, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THERE IS A CHANGE.
SO ITEM SEVEN'S DONE, ITEM, OH, EXCUSE ME, ITEM SIX.
SO WE JUST HAVE THE ELECTIONS.
I, I GUESS MY QUESTION GOES BACK BECAUSE I AGREE WE CAN CHANGE THIS TO REFERENCE THE FISCAL YEAR 26 BUDGET AS IT WAS PRESENTED TODAY AND SHOW THE PERCENTAGES PER THE FISCAL YEAR 26 BUDGET.
EVERYTHING HERE, ALL THE NUMBERS ARE COMING FROM PRESENTATIONS THAT STAFF HAS GIVEN US.
THEY, WE DIDN'T CREATE ANYTHING NEW.
SO THESE NUMBERS ARE ALL REFERENCING THAT.
SO THE BOTTOM LINE IS CAN YOU SUPPORT A RECOMMENDATION? THE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'RE GOING BACK TO STAFF IS WE'RE SAYING WE WANT THEM TO ADOPT A BUDGET AND PROBABLY FOR THE FUTURE WE CAN EVEN SAY OR PROGRESS TOWARDS THAT, THAT UTILIZES MEASURE A TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT WAS SOLD AS.
THE FEAR BY MANY WAS THAT IT WAS JUST GONNA GET SWALLOWED INTO THE GENERAL FUND DOLLARS AND PAID GENERAL OPERATIONS AND WAGES AND THE FEAR THAT, THAT THEY CREATED A COMMITTEE TO BE THE OVERSIGHT.
BUT IF WE CAN AT LEAST BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF COUNCIL AND TO THE MAYOR AND SAY, LOOK GUYS, IT WAS SOLD, LOOK AT ALL YOUR ADVERTISEMENTS.
A, B, C, IT WAS SOLD AS AN INFRASTRUCTURE SALES TAX, RIGHT? EVERYTHING ABOUT IT WAS SAYING INFRASTRUCTURE, SALES TAX.
SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE WAY IT WAS DONE, THEN ALL WE'RE SAYING IS THAT WE NEED TO RETURN BACK TO PRIMARILY SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE.
THAT'S ALL IT SAYS THAT A BUDGET UTILIZES MEASURE A ANNUAL SALES PRIMARILY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE.
OKAY? AND THEN, YOU KNOW, AND THEN THE OTHER THING WE'RE ASKING IS WE WANNA UNDERSTAND IS IT GETTING BETTER ON A REGULAR BASIS? LET'S START DOING SOME ANALYSIS TO COMPARE BUILDING ASSESSMENT TO BUILDING ASSESSMENT.
[02:15:01]
ASSESSMENT TO STREET ASSESSMENT? ARE WE GETTING BETTER? BECAUSE IF WE'RE NOT, THEN THE CITY HAS TO ADDRESS THAT.OTHERWISE WE'RE GONNA HAVE A REVOLT.
I MEAN, PEOPLE ARE GONNA START SAYING, WHY AM I PAYING THIS EXTRA MONEY? I'VE GOT MORE POTHOLES THAN I'VE EVER HAD.
AND THAT'S WHAT I HEAR WHEN I GO DOWN CARSON.
I FEEL THAT
AND THEN I GO DOWN AND, OH, HERE'S LAKEWOOD.
AS THOSE, YOU KNOW, AS, AS WE INVEST LESS, WHICH IS WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
SO THAT'S ALL THIS IS SAYING IS TO THE BONDS PRIMARILY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND WE WANNA DO REGULAR ASSESSMENTS COMPARING FROM ASSESSMENT TO ASSESSMENT.
SO IF WE CHANGE THIS ONE REFERENCE THE, HIS FISCAL YEAR 26 NUMBERS SAYING, AND OUR FISCAL YEAR 26 PROPOSED BUDGET FORECAST IS SHOWING 14.7 AND 77.0% RESPECTIVELY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026, OR THAT'S IT, RESPECTFULLY PERIOD.
COULD YOU SUPPORT THIS LETTER? THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING.
I MEAN, I, I COULD SUPPORT IT.
I DO HAVE OTHER THINGS I HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT.
THAT I KNOW WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE TIME FOR TODAY.
UM, BUT WE WOULD, I WOULD KIND OF WANT TO DISCUSS THOSE MORE BEFORE WE VOTE TO, BUT, BUT BUDGET'S GONNA VOTE IN A COUPLE OF, OF THREE, FOUR WEEKS.
BUT AT LEAST HOW, AT LEAST HOW THIS IS WRITTEN.
AND I DO HAVE AN ISSUE WITH ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT I AT LEAST WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO STAFF ABOUT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
UM, THE LETTER'S JUST NOT IN A, A CONDITION THAT I THINK I WOULD BE ABLE TO SUPPORT IT.
SO WHAT ELSE IS WRONG IN YOUR MIND? I WANTED TO ASK, UM, PUBLIC WORKS SPECIFICALLY, BUT STAFF ABOUT THE FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT.
'CAUSE I KNOW THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.
UM, 'CAUSE I KNOW THE ASK IS FOR EVERY THREE TO FIVE YEARS, BUT I KNOW PUBLIC WORKS HAS MENTIONED THAT THAT'S JUST NOT STANDARD.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO DO ONE IS THAT SOMETHING COUNCIL'S GONNA HAVE TO ALLOCATE? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA COME OUT OF MEASURE A AND THEREBY KIND OF TAKE AWAY FROM INFRASTRUCTURE SPENDING THAT COULD HAVE OTHERWISE GONE TO PROJECTS, THEREBY CREATING A BIT OF A DOOM LOOP.
BUT, UM, I DO HAVE OTHER ISSUES.
SO COULD WE LEAVE IT MORE FREQUENT INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENTS AND ELIMINATE THE ACTUAL TIMEFRAME AND LET THEM SET AND THEN WE CAN TALK WITH THEM AFTERWARDS AND LOOK AT A FREQUENCY THAT THEY FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH.
WE JUST SAY MORE FREQUENT INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENTS.
BECAUSE ACCORDING TO STAFF IN THE LAST FEW MEETINGS, THEY, THEY HAVE NO FUNDING TO DO ASSESSMENTS.
SO THEY HAVE TO DO, LEGALLY THEY HAVE TO DO AN UPDATE TO THE PAVEMENT AND THE SIDEWALK.
BUT THE OTHER ONES, THERE'S NO OTHER, THERE'S NO LEGAL REQUIREMENT.
AND UNTIL THEY GET FUNDED, WE JUST WANNA GIVE THEM THE ABILITY OR TO REQUEST IT, HEY, EVEN THE COMMITTEE'S ASKING FOR REGULAR ASSESSMENT.
SO WE CAN WORK WITH THAT OUT AND WE JUST LEAVE IT ALONE AS SAYING MORE FREQUENT ASSESSMENTS PERIOD.
BUT THEN AGAIN, THAT KIND OF GOES BACK TO MY QUESTION OF, 'CAUSE I BELIEVE IT'S EVERY 10 YEARS THE ASSESSMENTS ARE DONE.
NO, I THINK THIS THING, HE, THEY GAVE US SOME INFORMATION AND I PUT IT HERE IN HIS, IN THAT ONE SLIDE THAT I, I, I WAS TRYING TO SUMMARIZE IT, BUT AGAIN, I COULDN'T ASK STAFF QUESTIONS SO I NEVER COULD GET BACK.
BUT, UM, BUT HERE'S A, TO THE ONE KIND OF, UM, THESE ARE THE ASSESSMENTS THAT THEY SAID AND THEY TOLD US THIS IS THEIR MOST RECENT AND THEN THE PRIOR TIME THAT THEY DID IT, SO THIS IS DIRECTLY OFF THEIR PRESENTATION.
THEY'RE DOING THESE EVERY THREE.
THIS ONE WAS EVERY, THIS WAS 10 AND THEN THIS ONE THEY KEPT ON REFERENCING 2016, BUT THEY NEVER GAVE IT TO US.
BUT THEN THAT WOULD KIND OF BE ONE OF THE THINGS I'D WANT TO ASK IS, IS IT A BUDGET ISSUE? IS IT BECAUSE STAFF JUST NEEDS MORE TIME TO ASSESS THE CONDITION TO GET A MORE ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF THE PROGRESS? OR IS IT BECAUSE, UH, IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THAT FUNDING, I, I CLEARLY ASKED THAT QUESTION AT ONE OF THE MEETINGS AND HE SAID IT'S NOT BEEN BUDGETED.
I WORKED FOR THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AND FOR THE CITY OF CULVER CITY AND IT WAS A PRIORITY FOR THOSE TWO CITIES TO DO REGULAR FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENTS EVERY FIVE YEARS.
SO I UNDERSTAND THAT PIECE HERE.
IT'S NOT, WHAT I UNDERSTOOD IS IT WOULD HAVE TO BE BUDGETED IN ORDER FOR US TO DO ONE.
[02:20:01]
DON'T HAVE ANOTHER ONE BUDGETED, UH, YET.AND IT'S APPROACHING FIVE YEARS.
THAT IS SOMETHING THEN THAT I WOULD TO, I WOULD WANT TO ASK PUBLIC WORKS LIKE IF NOT THREE TO FIVE YEARS, 10 YEARS, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THAT'S BUDGETED, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S BOTH FEASIBLE AND AN EFFECTIVE USE OF THE CITY AND STAFF'S TIME TO DO THAT? UM, AND I DON'T WANT, I'M CLOCK WATCHING.
I DON'T WANT TO HIT FIVE 30 'CAUSE I KNOW OKAY, WE GOTTA GO.
UM, BUT I, I JUST HAVE TOO MANY QUESTIONS OKAY.
SO WE HAVE ONE OF TWO OPTIONS AND IN MY MIND WE EITHER A, I MEAN 'CAUSE WE'RE RUNNING OUTTA TIME AND ABSOLUTELY, AND THIS IS WHY THIS HAS BEEN A PROCESS THAT'S JUST KICKED MY TAIL, BUT WE CAN VOTE ON THIS AND I'M ASSUMING THAT IF WE VOTE ON THIS AND IF THE TWO AD HOC, IT'S ONLY THREE OF US, AND IF IT GOES TWO TO ONE, DOES THIS LETTER GO AND CONTINUE OR DO WE WANNA TRY TO CONTINUE THIS AND MAKE NO CON NOT BRING THIS CONVERSATION UP TO COUNCIL? IN MY MIND, THE, THESE NUMBERS ARE THE NUMBERS THAT STAFF GAVE TO US.
SO THE ONLY QUESTION IS IF YOU CAN AGREE TO THE INFRA THE RECOMMENDATION THEN, AND WE CAN GET RID OF THE THREE TO FIVE.
AND IF YOU CAN AGREE THAT ALL WE'RE SAYING IS PRIMARILY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND WE'RE SAYING DO MORE FREQUENT INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENTS, THAT BECOMES THE RECOMMENDATION AND LET THEM, YOU KNOW, ADDRESS IT AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE IT.
I GUARANTEE YOU, NO MATTER WHAT, THEY'RE NOT GONNA SAY, ALL OF US SAY, OKAY, YEAH, LET'S CHANGE THAT.
WE'RE GONNA FUND ONLY X PERCENTAGE AT THE NEXT BUDGET.
WE KNOW THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
BUT AT LEAST IT BRINGS UP THE CONVERSATION.
IT'S HIGHLIGHTED DURING THE BUDGET HEARINGS.
AND THIS IS WHY I TRIED WHEN I LAST YEAR WE TALKED ABOUT CREATING A SCHEDULE THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO BE PART OF THE BUDGET HEARING PROCESS WHERE WE COULD ACTUALLY SEE IT.
WE NEVER HAD THE PROCESS IN PLACE.
IT WASN'T ENOUGH MEETINGS THAT IN ITSELF IT WAS FRUSTRATING THAT WE GOT HERE AND WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY DO THIS KIND OF THING AND DISCUSS THE BUDGET.
I MEAN WE'RE SEEING THE BUDGET AFTER IT'S ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED IN ALL THE BUDGET HEARINGS.
SO EVERY UH, UH, UH, MEETING HAS GONE ON, BUT WE'VE NOT HAD A CONVERSATION UNTIL BEFORE, TWO WEEKS BEFORE IT ENDS.
IF WE SCRATCH OUT AT LEAST THE THREE TO FIVE YEARS, I CAN BE OKAY WITH THAT.
THE ONLY OTHER ISSUE I HAVE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS IS THE LIMITING THE FUNDS USED FOR ADDITIONAL SWORN IN POLICE POSI OR FIRE IN POLICE POSITIONS JUST BASED ON KIND OF WHAT STAFF WAS TALKING ABOUT.
HOW THERE IS A GREATER RELIANCE ON MEASURE A AND THAT BECAUSE OF THE CITY'S UH, SHORTFALL, THERE IS A GREATER RELIANCE ON THE MEASURE A FUNDS TO KEEP THOSE POSITIONS IN PLACE.
WHAT I DON'T WANT IS COUNSEL TO GET THE IMPRESSION THAT WE WANT 'EM CUT OR THAT WE WANT 'EM KIND OF COUNSEL TO JUST DECIDE, OH WELL, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK IT COMES TO THAT, BUT WE, WE CAN SAY AND TO FIND OTHER FUNDING BEYOND THE ADDITIONAL SWORN FIRED.
I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT TO SAY FIND OTHER FUNDING TO FUND POSITIONS BEYOND THOSE ADDITIONAL SWORN FIRED POLICE POSITIONS.
BECAUSE WE WANT THE MORE I IF IF ALL, IF IF WE WERE USING 70% AND WE HAD ALL THAT MUCH MORE POLICE AND FIRE, I THINK I PROBABLY EVEN WOULD BE AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT MORE.
OKAY, WE REALLY WANT MORE POLICE AND FIRE SO WE GOTTA PAY FOR IT.
CAN CAN I SUGGEST ONE, PERHAPS ONE LITTLE COMPROMISE THAT MIGHT HELP? UM, UM, WHAT IF WE SAID, INSTEAD OF SAYING, UM, UH, ASKING YOU TO RETURN THE USE OF MEASURE A DOLLARS AS INTENDED, WHAT IF WE SAY SOMETHING LIKE, UM, START TO RETURN THE USE OF MEASURE A DOLLARS SO THAT IT'S NOT LIKE WE HAVE TO DO IT ALL NOW, BUT A TRANSITION OR A TRANSITION TO, UM, OR, OR, OR WHAT IF AND DID YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? YEAH, MM-HMM
AND THEN WE JUST, AND JUST LOB OFF THE LOB OFF THIS LAST PART OF THE STATEMENT BECAUSE WE'RE JUST, WE ARE SAYING THIS PIECE OF THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE BUDGET IS BASICALLY SAYING THIS IS NOT SUSTAINABLE.
YOU NEED TO GET BACK TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE IS THE PRIMARY TO BE
[02:25:01]
SUSTAINABLE FOR THE FUTURE.SO THE TWO POINTS THEN BECOME SALES TAX PRIMARILY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND DO REGULAR ASSESSMENTS.
AND THEN WE WILL WORK THESE OUT WITH STAFF AND WE TRY TO CREATE MEETINGS THAT ALLOW US TO ADDRESS THOSE SPECIFIC ISSUES.
YOU KNOW, LIKE THE ASSESSMENTS, WHAT DO YOU NEED, HOW CAN WE PROVIDE THAT BETTER FOR YOU, WHAT COULD WE DO? AND THEN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, IF WE HAVE THE MEETINGS AND CONVERSATIONS BEFORE THEY START THE BUDGETS, WE CAN PROPOSE THOSE NUMBERS IN FEBRUARY, MARCH TO THE CITY MANAGER.
WE BELIEVE WITH STAFF THAT THESE FOLLOWING ASSESSMENTS SHOULD HAPPEN IN FISCAL YEAR 27.
AND THEN THAT WAY IT AT LEAST WE START SUPPORTING THEM.
I WOULD SUPPORT THOSE AMENDMENTS TO THE RECOMMENDA TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
MY ONLY CONCERN NOW THOUGH, NOT TO CONTINUE TO DRAG THIS ALONG.
UM, HOW DOES THAT IMPACT THE REMAINDER OF THE LETTER IF, I MEAN WE'VE GOTTEN AGREEMENT ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS BUT YOU KNOW, I DO STILL HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE REST OF THE LETTER.
SO AS A HOUSEKEEPING MATTER, UM, THE AGENDA STATES THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY JUST A RECEIVE AND FILE.
I WOULD ASK THAT THE CHAIR, DEPENDING ON HOW THIS CONVERSATION LANDS AND I KIND OF SEE THE DIRECTION IN WHICH IT'S GOING.
THE CHAIR WOULD NEED TO MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO ADD, UH, THE FACT THAT THERE WOULD BE A DISCUSSION AMENDMENT IF NECESSARY AND THEN TO BRING THE LETTER TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL AS THAT IS THE INTENTION.
SO THEN I'M GOING TO SAY AGAIN THAT I BELIEVE THAT IS AGAIN, MISCOMMUNICATION.
'CAUSE WE WERE VERY CLEAR IN THE LAST MEETING THAT OUR ATTEMPT TO DRAFT AN AD HOC COMMITTEE TO DELIVER TO COUNCIL AND AND THE MAYOR FOR THIS BUDGET PROCESS.
SO IF YOU'RE TELLING ME WE'RE ONLY RECEIVING AND FILING IT, THE INTENT WAS TO DRAFT THE LETTER, FINALIZE IT HERE AND DELIVER THAT LETTER.
AND I'M SUGGESTING WHAT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO MAKE ON THE RECORD IN ORDER JUST TO CLARIFY THE LANGUAGE OF THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH THAT.
SO, SO WHAT IS THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? SURE.
THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WOULD ADD ON.
SO RIGHT NOW, RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE AD HOC COMMITTEE FY 26, PROPOSED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION LETTER, UM, DISCUSS, AMEND AS NEEDED AND APPROVE THE TRANSMITTAL OF THE LETTER TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.
SO OFFER, UH, REQUESTING THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT AS STATED CAN.
SO I'M SAYING YES THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
AND SO I'M ASKING, OR AM I, DO I HAVE TO ASK THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE TO VOTE ON THAT FIRST THEN? YES, THEY WOULD HAVE TO MOVE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO VOTE ON THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
SO JUST FOR POINT OF ORDER, UH, THE MOTION IS MEMBER OCHOA, SO HE WOULD NEED TO ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY THEN, WHAT WE WOULD BE VOTING ON IS THE APPROVAL AND TRANSMITTAL OF THE ENTIRE LETTER OR IS IT JUST THE RECOMMENDATION? IT WOULD BE THE LETTER AS, AS, AS AMENDED AS YOU ARE AGREEING TO CHANGE RIGHT NOW DURING THIS MEETING, ANY CHANGES WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE RIGHT NOW AND AGREED UPON.
UM, IN ORDER FOR FOR THAT, LIKE IF, YES, YOU WOULD HAVE TO, THE IDEA IS TO AGREE TO ALL THE CHANGES RIGHT NOW.
SO
THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES I HAVE WITH THE LETTER, BUT I DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE KEEPING US HERE.
UM, NOT THAT I'M SURE WE'RE NOT ALL HAVING A, A WONDERFUL TIME WITH THIS DISCUSSION.
UM, BUT THEN THAT KIND OF PROPOSES THE QUESTION OF LIKE, WHAT WOULD THE NEXT STEPS BE THEN IF, OBVIOUSLY WE WANT THIS TO GO TO THE MAYOR IN TIME FOR THE BUDGET AND THE APPROVAL PROCESS.
MAYBE, YOU KNOW, WHAT OUR NEXT STEPS MIGHT BE.
UM, I IS THIS SOMETHING THAT MAYBE WE JUST, UM, I DON'T WANT TO PROPOSE A, A SPECIAL MEETING JUST TO DISCUSS THE LETTER, UM, BUT LOOKING TO, TO YOU FOLKS FOR GUIDANCE, I MEAN ULTIMATELY THE BODY NEEDS TO MAKE A DECISION ON THAT I THINK.
UM, IS THERE, DO WE NEED ADDITIONAL CLARITY AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WAS ACCEPTED? YES.
[02:30:01]
FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.YOU, UM, CHAIR, UH, COMMISSIONER OCHOA AS THE MAKER OF THE MOTION WOULD NEED TO AGREE TO EITHER ACCEPT OR NOT THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
AND THEN I CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
I I ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
SO WE'RE OBVIOUSLY UNDER AN INCREDIBLE, WE'RE OVER
SO THE VOTE REQUIRES A VOTE OF TWO TO PASS.
AND SO YOU CAN CALL, WE CAN GO MOVE TO VOTE AND SEE HOW IT SHAKES OUT.
AND ONE OF THE SCENARIOS WOULD BE THAT YOU'RE OUT VOTED AND THE LETTER GOES, YOU KNOW, WITH THE, WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES THAT ARE ALREADY AGREED UPON.
BUT THAT WOULD LEAVE OUTSTANDING CHANGES TO THE LETTER THAT MAYBE YOU'RE NOT NECESSARILY AGREEING TO.
SO, UM, THE VOTE WOULD BE TO INCORPORATE THE CHANGES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN, UH, LIKE DISCUSSED AND AGREED UPON.
SO THEN I'M GONNA MOVE TO VOTE.
SO CAN WE CALL FOR VOTE? BECAUSE WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING IS WE WOULD NOW BE VOTING ON SUBMITTING THIS LETTER TO COUNSEL WITH THE ADJUSTMENTS OF REFERENCING FISCAL YEAR 26 UNDER THAT THE PARAGRAPH UNDER PRIOR EXPENDITURES STRIKING OUT AND TO LIMIT THE FUNDS USED FOR ADDITIONAL POLICE FIRE POSITIONS STRIKING OUT THE THREE TO FIVE YEARS.
AND THEN WE'RE VOTING ON FOR THIS LETTER AND ATTACHMENTS TO GO TO COUNSEL.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND I WOULD JUST ASK, AS A HOUSEKEEPING MATTER, WE NEED A HARD COPY WITH THOSE EXACT AMENDMENTS SO THAT WE CAN ENSURE THAT STAFF UNDERSTANDS WHAT UM, HAS BEEN MADE.
JUST BECAUSE I THINK THE RECORD HAS BEEN A LITTLE UNCLEAR LIKE TODAY, LIKE RIGHT NOW AT LIKE RIGHT, RIGHT NOW.
NOT THIS SECOND, BUT BEFORE WE LEAVE TODAY.
SO I CAN, I CAN, I CAN SAY THAT THE LAST LETTER IN OR THE, I CAN SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE.
IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT ME TO DO? OR I CAN WRITE IT OUT AFTERWARDS? I THINK YOU GUYS WANT US TO GIVE YOU, I THINK I WOULD LIKE BOTH JUST FOR CLARITY.
SO IF YOU CAN MAKE IT VERY CLEAR ON THE RECORD AS TO WHAT THE EXACT CHANGES ARE AND THEN A HARD COPY THAT ARE JUST REFLECTING WHAT'S BEING CROSSED OUT.
'CAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S MORE OF A REMOVAL.
OKAY, SO WE'RE SAYING THAT ON THE SECOND PAGE, PARAGRAPH, AFTER PRIOR YEAR'S EXPENDITURES, WE ARE STRIKING THAT LAST SENTENCE AND WE'RE CHANGING IT TO SAY THE FISCAL YEAR 26 BUDGET PROPOSAL IS SHOWING 14.7% AND 77.08% RESPECTIVELY.
AND THEN ON THE THIRD LETTER UNDER COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ON THE FIRST SENTENCE, WE ARE STRIKING AND TO LIMIT THE FUNDS USED FOR ADDITIONAL SWORN FIRE IN POLICE POSITIONS.
AND WE'RE STRIKING ON THE THIRD SENTENCE, THE EVERY THREE TO FIVE YEARS AND THE BRACKETS.
SO WITH THAT, CAN I CALL THE VOTE? YOU MAY.
SO CAN I CALL THE VOTE JUST AS A PROCEDURAL, I'M GONNA MAKE SURE WE CALL PUBLIC COMMENT FIRST.
UH, IF THERE'S ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS SIDE END, PLEASE SIGN UP THE PODIUM.
UH, GO AHEAD AND CAST YOUR VOTES.
OKAY WITH THAT, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TIME.
YOU SAY YOU WANNA PUSH OUT TO THE NEXT MEETING.
WHEN'S THE NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING? I BELIEVE IT'S OCTOBER.
WE CAN, UM, JUST CONFIRM THAT STILL WORKS WITH EVERYONE, BUT THE DATE WE HAD AGREED UPON BACK IN MARCH WAS OCTOBER 29TH.
AND AT THAT MEETING WILL WE ALSO, UH, HAVE, UM, OH, WE ARE MISSING SIX.
OH, UH, UH, OH, WE WERE SUPPOSED TO DO TWO ITEMS. WE'RE MISSING OUR AGENDA DOESN'T EVEN INCLUDE THAT OTHER ITEM.
SO WE'RE MISSING ITEM SIX, WHICH IS DISCUSS FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS AND ELECT THE NEW CHAIR POSITIONS.
IT'S NOT WITHIN THE MEETING AGENDA LIST.
SO THOSE ARE THE TWO ITEMS THAT WE WOULD BE CARRYING FORWARD TO THE NEXT ONE? CORRECT.
AND AT THAT MEETING, WOULD WE ALSO BE SEEING A POTENTIAL CALENDAR FOR, UH, THE FOLLOWING YEAR? CORRECT.
AS WE HAD ADOPTED THE COMMITTEE TOPICS BACK IN MARCH, IT WOULD BE A REVIEW OF OUR ADOPTED FISCAL YEAR 2026 BUDGET MEETING DATES FOR 2026, AND THEN AN INFRASTRUCTURE UPDATE IF YOU WOULD.
[02:35:01]
KEEP THOSE.I'D ROLL OVER THE MEETING AGENDA, POTENTIAL AGENDA ITEMS AND THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR ELECTION.
SO THEN AT THIS STAGE IN THE GAME, UH, WE'RE GOT TO, WE'RE GONNA CLOSE OUT, RIGHT? WE'RE DONE TO ADJOURN.
SO CAN I MOVE TO ADJOURN? UH, TECHNICALLY WE NEED A CALL FOR NON-AG AGENDA, PUBLIC COMMENT.
[PUBLIC COMMENT Opportunity to address the Transactions and Use Tax Citizens' Advisory Committee on non-agenda items. Each speaker is limited to three minutes to make their comments unless extended by the Chair.]
ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THEY'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON NON-AG AGENDA, PUBLIC COMMENT.[ADJOURNMENT]
I DECLARE THE MEETING ADJOURNED.THE TIME IS 5 38 AND I'M SORRY YOU DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO.