[00:00:04]
GOOD AFTERNOON,[1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/MOMENT OF SILENCE]
EVERYBODY.WELCOME TO THE CITY OF SEDONA COUNCIL MEETING.
I'M CALLING THE MEETING TO ORDER OFFICIALLY AT 1:00 PM REGARDLESS OF WHAT THAT CLOCK SAYS.
I WANNA REMIND EVERYBODY TO PLEASE SILENCE YOUR PHONES, AND, UH, JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, PLEDGE OF ALL ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO WHICH STANDS, NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVIDUAL WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE, JUSTICE FOR ALL.
THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK, CAN YOU CALL THE ROLL PLEASE? MAYOR PLU.
OKAY, THIS IS A SPECIAL MEETING.
[3.a. AB 3285 Discussion/possible direction regarding the inclusion of projects in the upcoming budget. Preview of decision package categories and total. ]
DISCUSSION POSSIBLE DIRECTION REGARDING THE INCLUSION OF PROJECTS IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET.PREVIEW OF DECISION PACKAGE CATEGORIES AND TOTAL BARBARA STERLING.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR AND COUNSELORS.
UH, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER AND STERLING WEST, OUR BUDGET AND INVESTMENTS MANAGER.
UM, BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK TO THE TWO HANDOUTS THAT YOU HAVE.
THIS ONE WITH THE BLUE LINES ACROSS.
IT HAS THE, THE PROJECTS IN THE CATEGORIES THAT WERE EXISTING.
THIS, THIS ONE WITH THE BIG GREEN SECTION, HAS THE SAME PROJECTS WITH THE NEW PRIORITIZATION METHOD APPLIED.
UM, SO, AND WE WERE ASKED TO HAVE THE HANDOUTS BECAUSE IT WAS REALLY HARD TO READ THIS IN THE PACKET.
UM, I IT'S STILL REALLY SMALL
WE CAN LIKE, YEAH, WE CAN ACTUALLY ZOOM IN A BIT.
SO WITH THAT, I WILL, UH, TURN IT OVER TO STERLING AND WE'LL GET GOING.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
ALRIGHT, SO TO START US OFF TODAY, JUST WANTED TO GO THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF THE TIMELINE AND WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY.
SO TODAY IS, UH, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 11TH, WHICH IS THE DECISION PACKAGE PLANNING AND CIP PROPOSAL PROCESS.
THAT'S PART OF OUR WORK SESSION.
UH, THE GOAL WAS TO GET, UH, DECISION PACKAGES AND CIP IN FRONT OF COUNSEL EARLIER THAN THE APRIL WORK SESSIONS.
UM, AFTER TODAY'S MEETING, WE HAVE A MEETING ON FEBRUARY 25TH THAT IS WITH COUNSEL AND SUSTAINABILITY TO REVIEW THE 2024 MUNICIPAL AND GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORIES AND THE PUBLIC EV CHARGING STATION.
MR. JOHN, COULD YOU BRING YOUR MIC DOWN A LITTLE BIT MORE JUST, YEAH.
AND THEN THE NEXT, UH, BIG PICTURE, PART OF THE PROCESS WITH THE BUDGET CYCLE IS GONNA BE ON APRIL 15TH, ANOTHER WEDNESDAY, WHICH IS WHERE WE'LL PRESENT THE GENERAL PICTURE OF THE BUDGET.
THIS IS A NEW MEETING THAT, UM, WASN'T PART OF THE, THE PRIOR YEAR BUDGET PROCESS, BUT WE FELT THIS WAS A GOOD INTRODUCTION TO COUNCIL BEFORE THE WORK SESSIONS ON, UH, APRIL 22ND THROUGH THE 23RD.
AND ON APRIL 15TH, WE'LL GO THROUGH THE LARGE INCREASES IN DECREASES TO THE BUDGET.
WE'LL REVIEW DECISION PACKAGES AND THEN CI CITIZENS BUDGET WORK GROUP WILL PRESENT.
ALL RIGHT, SO TODAY'S AGENDA IS WE ARE GONNA START BY DOING A REVIEW OF THE CIP BUDGET.
SO COUNCIL HAS SEEN THIS IN THE LAST MEETING THAT I BELIEVE WAS ON JANUARY 14TH.
THERE'S BEEN SOME CHANGES TO THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS.
UM, NOT, NOT LARGE DOLLAR AMOUNTS, JUST A FEW CHANGES WITH STAFF THAT HAVE PRESENTED, UM, SOME CARRYOVER, SOME BUDGET, CIP THAT'S BEEN PUSHED OUT TO LATER YEARS.
UM, BUT I WOULD SAY THE DOLLAR AMOUNT IS VERY CLOSE TO WHAT WAS PRESENTED ON JANUARY 14TH.
THE SECOND, UH, PART OF THE MEETING IS WE'LL REVIEW THE PRIORITY RANKING MATRIX, AND WE DESIGNED THIS POWERPOINT TO BE ABLE TO SKIP TO ANY PROJECT.
SO IF COUNCIL HAS ANY PROJECTS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SPEND TIME TO, WE CAN SKIP AROUND TO THIS POWERPOINT AND THEN GO BACK TO THE MAIN CATEGORIES.
UM, SO WE CAN ALWAYS KEEP TRACK OF WHERE WE AT, WHAT WE'VE REVIEWED.
AND THEN THE THIRD PART OF THE AGENDA IS REVIEWING DECISION PACKAGES.
[00:05:01]
WE WANTED TO KEEP IT AT A HIGH LEVEL REVIEW TODAY AND SPEND THE APRIL 15TH.YEAH, THAT'S APRIL 15TH MEETING.
GOING MORE INTO THE, THE, THE DETAILS OF EACH DECISION PACKAGE.
AND THEN LASTLY, WE WILL, UH, REVIEW THE TIMELINE AND THE NEXT STEPS IN THE BUDGET REVIEW CYCLE.
SO, AS A REVIEW OF HOW THE CITY CA, UH, CATEGORIZES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS IS A CIP PROJECT IS ANYTHING THAT, THAT IS OVER A HUNDRED THOUSAND WITH A THREE PLUS YEAR LIFE.
UM, THERE ARE CERTAIN PROJECTS THAT HAPPEN IN ONE YEAR, SO THAT DOESN'T ALWAYS CONSTITUTE THAT, BUT TYPICALLY IT'S A HUNDRED THOUSAND A THREE PLUS YEAR LIFE.
AND THEN WE HAVE, UH, PRESENTED THE BUDGET WITH OUR NEW SOFTWARE WITH A 10 YEAR PLAN.
ALL RIGHT, SO THIS IS, UM, I WOULD SAY CLOSE TO THE MOST UPDATED.
I DIDN'T WANT TO CHANGE THESE SLIDES TOO MUCH BECAUSE WE, UM, THIS WAS WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL AS PART OF THE PACKET, BUT WE DID HAVE ONE LATE CARRYOVER THAT WAS ADDED TO THIS.
SO YOU WON'T SEE THIS HERE, BUT IT WILL BE IN YOUR PACKET, IT PD O2, WHICH IS THE RADIO INFRASTRUCTURE.
WE HAD JUST SOME LATE CHANGES WITH A CARRYOVER OF THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT.
IT'S GONNA BE HAPPENING AT THE VERY TAIL END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR.
SO, UH, PD WOULD LIKE TO PUT THAT FULL AMOUNT INTO FY 27.
SO THAT'S WHY YOU DON'T SEE THAT ADDITIONAL EXPENSE THAT WAS ADDED HERE.
STERLING, IF I MIGHT, IF IT'S POSSIBLE AND YOU THINK IT'S USEFUL IN FUTURE, WHEN WE DO CHARTS LIKE THIS, COULD WE ALSO HAVE THE PERCENTAGES OF THE TOTAL UP THERE? I DID THE MATH MYSELF TODAY AND I WAS INTRIGUED BY A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I SAW.
SO I, I THINK THAT MIGHT BE USEFUL.
AND WE CAN INCLUDE A, A, A, LIKE A PIE CHART COUNSELOR, UM, AS AN ADDITIONAL SLIDE THAT SHOWS KIND OF VISUALLY WHAT PERCENTAGE THESE CATEGORIES MAKE OF THE TOTAL.
SO JUST REVIEW, WE HAVE ARTS AND CULTURE WITH A BUDGET OF 25,000.
WE HAVE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, THAT'S THE ERP REPLACEMENT.
MUNICIPAL COURT HAS UPGRADES, UH, OTHER PUBLIC WORKS, 2.6 MILLION PARKS AND WRECKS, 2.5 MILLION POLICE HAS, UH, FOUR PROJECTS TOTALING 1.7 MILLION.
AGAIN, THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF THE CARRYOVER FOR PD O2.
AND WE HAVE PUBLIC TRANSIT AT 2.6 MILLION SEDONA IN MOTION AT 10.3 STORM DRAINAGE, 1.1 MILLION STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION AT 250,000.
AND THE REMAINING WAS SUSTAINABILITY AT A MILLION IN WASTEWATER AT 8.8 MILLION.
SO THE TOTAL HERE IS 32.78, BUT AGAIN, ACCORDING TO THIS PACKET, YOU'LL SEE AN INCREASE TO IT NOW BEING AT 33.9 MILLION WITH THE CARRYOVER OF PO TWO.
STERLING, BEFORE YOU GO ON, UM, SO THESE NUMBERS THAT WE LOOK AT, UM, DO THEY INCLUDE, LIKE WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT GRANTS IN THE APPLYING FOR GRANTS.
DO THESE INCLUDE THE FACT THAT WE MAY GET THE GRANTS OR DOES THIS INCLUDE THE RAW NUMBER ON THE ASSUMPTION WE MAY NOT GET THE GRANTS FOR THE CIP PROJECTS? YEAH, IT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
SO WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE IS THE TALLY OF THE EXPENDITURE LINE ITEM.
SO THIS INCLUDES WHAT WE'LL RECEIVE WITH GRANT THAT IS A PASS THROUGH TO THE CITY.
IF IT'S NOT A PASS THROUGH TO THE CITY, IT'S NOT GONNA BE REFLECTED HERE.
MEANING IF IT'S PAID OUTSIDE OF FUNDS THAT THE CITY NEVER TOUCHES, IT WOULDN'T BE REPRESENTED HERE.
BUT IF YOU GO ON, ON THIS PACKET HERE, IF YOU GO TO THE LAST PAGE, UM, IT'S DEFINED BY WHAT IS THE FUNDING SOURCE SUMMARY.
SO HERE YOU CAN SEE HOW THE EXPENSES ARE ACTUALLY BROKEN OUT BY HOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE FUNDED.
AND YOU CAN SEE IF YOU GO DOWN ABOUT HALFWAY THROUGH, WE HAVE GRANT FUNDED LISTED 3.2 MILLION AS A FUNDING SOURCE FOR THESE PROJECTS.
IF WE'RE CARRYING OVER $33 MILLION, THAT'S JUST ABOUT WHAT THE BUDGET IS.
UM, THAT'S ACTUALLY THE, THE CARRYOVER TOTAL IS LESS THAN THAT.
IT, THE CARRYOVER FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT JUST INCREASED IT FROM 32.8 TO 33.9.
NO, BUT THE TOTAL THERE IS 32 7 AND STERLING SAID IT'S REALLY 33 SOMETHING.
SO, UM, MAYOR PLU, IF YOU GO TO THE LAST PAGE IN THE HANDOUT, AGAIN, THIS IS GONNA BE THE ONE WITH THE BLUE BARS.
THERE'S ANOTHER BREAKOUT OF PROJECT FUNDING STATUS SUMMARY.
SO THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF CARRYOVER IS ACTUALLY 27 MILLION, 27.1.
AND THE NEW APPROPRIATION THIS YEAR IS 6.6 MILLION.
SO WHY IS THE CARRY OVER LESS THAN WHAT YOU'RE SHOWING HERE? I THINK IT'S JUST A TERMINOLOGY, UM, THAT I NEED TO UPDATE IN THIS SLIDE.
IT SHOULDN'T SAY CARRY, IT REALLY SHOULD JUST SAY TOTAL
[00:10:01]
APPROPRIATION.I THINK WE REUSED AN EXCEL FILE THERE.
SO THIS IS FISCAL 26 CARRYING OVER TO 27.
SO EFFECTIVELY WE COULD HAVE HAD A $70 MILLION BUDGET TO CIP IF I FOLLOW YOU CORRECTLY.
WELL, OUR TOTAL BUDGET FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR WAS LIKE 102 MILLION, RIGHT? YEAH.
AND IF WE'RE GONNA CARRY OVER 32 OF IT FROM THIS YEAR TO NEXT YEAR, THEN TECHNICALLY OUR BUDGET COULD HAVE BEEN 70 MILLION THIS YEAR.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING THIS YEAR WITH THE ZERO BASE IS LOOKING AT EACH OF THE PROJECTS MORE CRITICALLY TO SAY, OKAY, WHAT REALISTICALLY DO WE NEED DURING THIS FISCAL YEAR SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, A 70% EXECUTION RATE WHERE WE'RE ONLY SPENDING 70% MM-HMM
BECAUSE WE ARE SEEING THAT AS A TREND, UM, BOTH IN OPERATIONS AND CIP AND WE WOULD LIKE TO TIGHTEN THOSE UP.
UM, THAT'S PART OF WHY, UM, I WROTE IN SUPPORT OF THAT, UH, SENATE BILL, THE AMENDED BUDGET WILL ALLOW BILL BUDGET AMENDMENTS, BECAUSE THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO SORT OF BUDGET AHEAD OF TIME FOR ANY POSSIBILITY, RATHER, RATHER THAN BUDGETING WHAT WE THINK WE'LL SPEND, WHICH IS WHAT I WOULD PREFER TO DO BECAUSE I THINK IT'S MORE TRANSPARENT.
AND THEN IF A PROJECT GOES FASTER THAN YOU ANTICIPATE, YOU'RE TRANSPARENTLY IN A MEETING SAYING, HEY, WE'RE GONNA NEED MORE MONEY FOR THIS PROJECT THIS YEAR.
WE THOUGHT WE'D NEED IT NEXT YEAR.
BUT, YOU KNOW, HERE'S THE DEAL.
AND COUNCIL CAN SAY, YEAH, WE WANNA, OKAY, THANK YOU.
UM, CAN YOU JUST CLARIFY THOUGH, I, I THOUGHT I HEARD SOMETHING A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
SO THE GRAND TOTAL ON THE SLIDE UP ON THE SCREEN IS CARRYOVER PLUS NEW APPROPRIATION.
AND SO THAT IS NOT, THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAID.
WHAT BRIAN WAS JUST, OR COUNCILOR FOLTZ WAS JUST ASKING YOU, HE ASKED YOU, DOES THIS SLIDE MEAN THAT OUR CURRENT YEAR BUDGET COULD HAVE BEEN THIS MUCH LOWER IF THIS IS HOW MUCH WE'RE CARRYING OVER? SO I THINK, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE FOR THE PUBLIC AND EVERYTHING, WE'RE CLEAR THAT OF THE GRAND TOTAL ON THE SLIDE, HOW MUCH IS THE CARRY OVER? IT'S LIKE 20 SOMETHING.
SO MAYBE THE BUDGET COULD HAVE BEEN 20 SOMETHING LESS, RIGHT? YES.
IT'S NOT THE FULL 32 THAT SHOWN THE BUDGET COULD HAVE BEEN 27.1 MILLION LESS IF, IF THAT FULL CARRYOVER IS, IS NEEDED.
AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS SPEAKING TO THAT, YOU KNOW, THE EXECUTION RATE.
AND IT, I THINK THE, THE TITLE ON THE COLUMN ON HERE IS NOT CORRECT.
AND SO, SO CAN, CAN I ASK A QUESTION THEN ON, ON THE CARRYOVER? SO WE'RE NOT DONE WITH THIS FISCAL YEAR YET, SO ARE YOU MAKING THE ASSUMPTION THAT THAT 27.1, IF I REMEMBER THAT CORRECTLY, MILLION WILL BE CARRIED OVER? OR YOU'RE THAT'S BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE SPENT TO DATE? YEAH, THE GOOD QUESTION, AND A WAY TO CLARIFY THIS AS WELL IS THAT 27.1 ISN'T NECESSARILY CARRY OVER OF PROJECTS NOT COMPLETED IN FY 26, BUT ALSO PROJECTS THAT WERE APPROVED WITH A, A GREATER THAN ONE YEAR LIFESPAN.
SO THERE ARE SEVERAL PROJECTS THAT HAVE THE TITLE OF CARRYOVER THAT SPAN 2, 3, 4 YEARS.
AND THOSE PROJECTS ARE LISTED AS CARRYOVER BECAUSE THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY COUNCIL.
SO THE WAY WE DELINEATE OR DIFFERENTIATE CARRYOVER FROM NEW APPROPRIATION IS NEW APPROPRIATION WOULD BE ANYTHING INTRODUCED NEW TO COUNCIL THIS YEAR THAT WASN'T PREVIOUSLY APPROVED OR SEEN BY COUNCIL IN PRIOR YEARS.
SO THAT 27.1 MILLION DOESN'T REFLECT THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF NOT COMPLETED PROJECTS.
SOME OF THAT DOES, UM, BUT THE MAJORITY OF THAT IS OUR PROJECTS THAT HAVE A, A GREATER THAN ONE YEAR LIFESPAN THAT HAVE BEEN CARRIED OVER FOR THE, THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT LIFETIME.
IT'S LIKE AN ATTENTIONAL CARRY OVER.
AND WE, AND WE PROBABLY SHOULD SAY GREATER THAN ONE YEAR CONSTRUCTION TIME AS OPPOSED TO LIFE, BECAUSE LIFE USUALLY IS THE LIFE OF THE ASSET.
AND I, I WANNA MAKE SURE WE DON'T INFLATE THIS TO YOU.
UM, WANTED TO LIST AGAIN FOR COUNSEL.
THIS WAS REVIEWED IN JANUARY 14TH, BUT WANTED TO UPDATE COUNSEL AGAIN OF THE LARGEST AND MOST SIGNIFICANT PROJECTS FOR FY 27.
YOU'LL SEE AGAIN, THESE ARE PROJECTS THAT HAVE CARRYOVER BUT ARE GREATER THAN ONE YEAR.
SO THEY'RE PART OF THAT BROADER CONCEPT OF THE PROJECT LIFELINE LIFETIME.
SO THE LARGEST PROJECT FOR FY 27 IS A THREE AND A HALF MILLION DOLLAR PROJECT.
IT'S, UH, WW NINE, WHICH IS THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESS
[00:15:01]
UPGRADES.THE NEXT PROJECT IN TERMS OF, UH, SIZE OF PROJECT IN FY 27 IS 2.34 MILLION.
AGAIN, A WASTEWATER PROJECT FOR DRYING BEDS.
AND I, I WON'T READ THESE ALL, BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THESE.
THE, UH, I DO HAVE A QUESTION.
WHAT, WHAT IS THE POLICE STATION REMODEL? PHASE TWO, THERE SHE IS,
THE REMODEL PART TWO IS FOR OUR DISPATCH AREA AND THE OTHER, UM, WE'LL SAY THIRD OF THE REST OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT DID NOT GO THROUGH THE REMODEL TWO YEARS AGO.
SO TWO THIRDS OF THE PD WENT THROUGH IT AND WE STILL HAVE LEFT OUR RECORD SECTION DISPATCH.
SO NEXT TO LAST ITEM, FOREST RANGER INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS.
IS THAT, I MEAN, THAT'S NOT THE ROUNDABOUT.
THAT DOESN'T PAY FOR THE ROUNDABOUT.
WHAT IS THAT? IT'S THE SEVEN FIVE E AT THE BOTTOM, IT'S 900,000.
LIKE HOW ARE YOU HANDLING THE TWO ROUNDABOUTS, RIGHT? LIKE ARE THEY, LIKE, WE'RE APPLYING FOR GRANTS, WE DON'T HAVE HIGH CONFIDENCE IN GETTING THOSE.
SO ARE YOU ALL PROPOSING BUDGET TO COVER THOSE SO THAT WE CAN MOVE THEM FORWARD IF THAT'S WHERE WE WANNA GO? AND ANDY, IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE WHAT, 927,027 AND THEN 3.7 THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
SO I'LL HOLD THAT FOR, MAYBE JUMP IN, BUT I WOULD START BY SAYING THIS APPEARS TO BE OUR PORTION OF 27 OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND THE REMAINDER OF THE PROJECT WOULD OCCUR THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
SO PART OF THAT NOW IS TO MEET THE MATCH HAS BEEN DIRECTED, AND IF WE DON'T, THEN IT'S, WE WANT IT IN THE BUDGET IN CASE YOU GUYS SAID, OKAY, WE'VE TRIED AND TRIED, WE HAVEN'T, WE NEED TO GET THIS GOING, MOVE FORWARD WITH CONSTRUCTION.
SO IT'S REALLY, UM, THAT PROCESS.
WE'RE TRYING TO, ON THAT CUSP OF E IF THEN ELSE WE HAVE OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
SO WHAT'S THE TOTAL DOLLAR VALUE ON THE FIVE E THERE BETWEEN THE TWO YEARS? OKAY, SO THE FIVE E IS THE RANGER, UH, EXTENSION AND, UH, FOREST ROAD EXTENSION, THE ROUNDABOUT THAT'S UNDER THE REGIONAL PROJECT PRIORITIES LIST FOR FOUR YEARS, WE'VE BEEN IMPLY THAT'S ABOUT A, UH, SIX, $7 MILLION PROJECT.
AND THEN IT'S 10 MILLION IF WE ADD THE RANGER EXTENSION, WHICH IS THE 3 MILLION WHICH WE DID ON PURPOSE.
SO WHERE I'M GOING ON THIS QUESTION IS, WE JUST FINISHED TALKING ABOUT CARRYOVER AND HOW SOME OF THE CARRYOVER IS MULTI-YEAR.
SO THEN WHY ISN'T ALL OF FIVE E SHOWING UP HERE? ARE WE SORT OF CHANGING THE WAY WE'RE DOING THAT NOW? NO, WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING.
THE MATCH THAT YOU'RE SEEING NOW IS OUR LOCAL MATCH.
SO FOR 2027, WE'RE STILL GOING FOR OUR REGIONAL PROJECT PRIORITIES LIST AND THAT WE'RE HOLDING THAT FOR OUR LOCAL MATCH.
SO YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, WE DON'T GET THE GRANT, WE DON'T SPEND IT OR WE BL FROM THAT.
IF WE NEED TO BUDGET LINE, I TRANSFER IF WE'RE SHORT ON ANOTHER BUDGET.
I, I THINK WHAT COUNCILOR FOLTZ IS ASKING IS IF WE HAD A LARGE PORTION BUDGETED IN 26, IF WE CARRIED THAT FORWARD TO 27, WOULDN'T WE HAVE CARRIED FORWARD THAT SAME AMOUNT? AND I THINK THE ANSWER IS THAT WE, UH, INTENTIONALLY BUMPED THAT OUT IN TIMING, WHICH REDUCED THE AMOUNT CARRIED OVER.
SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY A CHANGE IN METHODOLOGY FROM WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING.
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT METHODOLOGY.
MORE OF A REFRESH LOOK AT WHAT IS A PRACTICAL TIMING OF THIS PROJECT.
NOT, NOT JUST A BLIND, LET'S CARRY OVER THE FULL THING MM-HMM
BUT LET'S LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, IN REALITY HOW COULD THIS PROJECT ACTUALLY BE CARRIED OUT? OKAY.
AND COUNCILOR FULTZ, UH, TO YOUR QUESTION FOR THIS PROJECT SIM O FIVE E, THE TOTAL PROJECT BUDGETED CURRENTLY IS 4.6 MILLION.
YEAH, THAT, THAT'S NOT REALLY THE POINT.
IT'S, IT'S JUST HOW WE'RE SHOWING THIS IS REALLY WHAT I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS SLIDE? ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE?
[00:20:02]
THE PREVIOUS FROM HERE? NO.I PROBABLY JUST JUMP FORWARD ONE.
YEAH, I, I DO HAVE QUESTIONS ON THIS SIDE.
ON THE NEXT SLIDE? NO, ONE MORE
UM, MAY OR MAY I ASK MY QUESTIONS? YES.
SO I HAVE, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON, ON THIS SIDE AS I RECALL THE RETREAT, UM, COMMUNITY HOUSING, MOBILITY, ET CETERA, UH, AND IN CONTENTION, ECONOMIC DIVERSITY WERE THE FOUR CONS PRIORITIES, NOT WASTEWATER, NOT HEALTH AND SAFETY AND NOT OTHER WHICH ARE LABELED AS COUNCIL PRIORITIES FIVE, SIX, AND SEVEN.
SO IT FEELS TO ME LIKE THESE SHOULD BELONG INSIDE OF ONE OF THE OTHERS.
LIKE HEALTH AND SAFETY IS CERTAINLY ABOUT THE COMMUNITY.
I WOULD SAY WASTEWATER IS ABOUT HEALTH AND SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE AND, AND MAYBE IN UNDER COMMUNITY, AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE REAL ESTATE LAND ACQUISITION, BUT ERP WE KEEP HAVE TO KEEP THE CITY RUNNING IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY.
SO IT JUST FELT TO ME LIKE IF I RECALL OUR PRIORITIES, THAT THAT'S THE ORDER OF THE PRIORITIES WE HAD.
AND WE DON'T HAVE A FIVE, SIX, AND SEVEN AND WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE A WAY OF SHOWING THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY PART OF AN, ONE OF OUR OTHER PRIORITIES.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THE REST OF THE COUNCIL FEELS WHY I KEEP LOOKING AT YOU GUYS.
THAT APPEALS TO MY SENSE OF CONSISTENCY AGAIN, AND A LACK OF CONFUSION.
YEAH, WE ARE, WE ARE HAPPY TO ORGANIZE THAT HOWEVER YOU WOULD LIKE.
WE JUST DIDN'T WANNA MAKE THAT KIND OF DECISION FOR YOU AND, YOU KNOW, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE HAPPY TO INCLUDE THOSE WITHIN COMMUNITY.
WE CAN HAVE THAT UPDATED FOR THE NEXT WORK SESSIONS THAT THESE WILL ALL BE INCORPORATED TO THE, THE FOUR PRIORITIES.
AND, AND THANK YOU COUNSEL FOR CONSIDERATION.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANTED TO TOUCH ON HOUSING.
ARE THERE, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS HERE? I KNOW YOU'VE ACTUALLY SEEN THIS BEFORE AND IT'S JUST KIND OF A REVIEW.
THIS IS, UH, THE HISTORICAL CAPITAL, UM, THE, THE HISTORICAL EXPENDITURES FOR CIP.
SO JUST WANTED TO GIVE COUNSEL AN UPDATE.
THIS WILL BE UPDATED AS WE GET OUR FY 26 ESTIMATES RIGHT NOW.
IT'S STILL A LITTLE BIT TOO SOON TO HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT OUR FY 26 CIP SPEND WILL BE.
UM, BUT YOU CAN SEE HERE, UH, FY 25, THE BUDGET WAS 48.3 MILLION.
ACTUAL SPEND WAS 33.9 OR 71% OF THE TOTAL BUDGET.
AND THEN IN FY 26, THE BUDGET WAS BROUGHT DOWN TO 42.3.
AND THE FY 27 PROPOSED AGAIN AS OF TODAY WOULD BE 30 33 0.9, 3.9.
ALL RIGHT, SO NEXT WE'RE GETTING INTO THE PRIORITY RANKING AND HOW STAFF CAME TOGETHER, UM, TO PROVIDE JUSTIFICATION TO COUNCIL ON HOW EACH PROJECT IS RANKED.
SO WE CAME UP WITH A PRIORITY RANKING MATRIX.
AND THIS REALLY COMES FROM THE EXISTING PRIORITY RANKING THAT WE USED, WHICH HIS, UH, PREVIOUSLY WAS PRIORITY ONE THROUGH FOUR, IF YOU REMEMBER.
WE ORIGINALLY HAD A SHOULD DO, COULD DO, WOULD DO.
UM, WE'VE REMOVED THOSE AND GOING FORWARD, WE'LL WE'LL HAVE THOSE REMOVED AND IT'LL ONLY JUST BE PRIORITY ONE TO THREE FOUR.
WITHIN THOSE PRIORITY RANKING RANKINGS WAS CONTEXT THAT WE USED TO BUILD THIS SCORING MATRIX.
SO TO REVIEW THIS WITH COUNSEL, UH, THE FOUR CRITERIA THAT STAFF USED WERE ONE, RISK AND SAFETY.
AND TO GIVE COUNSEL AN IDEA OF WHAT A SCORE OF ONE WOULD BE IN RISK AND SAFETY.
A ONE WOULD BE NO SAFETY, REGULATORY OR FAILURE RISK.
AND A HIGH SCORING RISK AND SAFETY PROJECT WOULD BE IMMEDIATE LIFE SAFETY RISK, REGULATORY MANDATE, OR HIGH LIKELIHOOD OF FAILURE.
THE SECOND CORE PRIORITY, UM, THE SECOND PRIORITY RANKING WAS CORE PRIORITY.
SO ONE BEING NO ALIGNMENT WITH COUNCIL PRIORITIES AND A FIVE BEING DIRECTLY ADVANCES ONE OR MORE COUNCIL PRIORITIES.
THE THIRD CRITERIA WAS READINESS.
SO A ONE SCORE MEANT CONCEPTUAL AND THERE ARE MAJOR UNKNOWNS THAT REMAIN.
A SCORE OF FIVE MEANS READY TO PROCEED, SCOPE AND COST ARE WELL-DEFINED.
AND THEN LASTLY, THE LAST CRITERIA, CRITERIA IS OUTSIDE FUNDING.
SO A SCORE OF ONE IS NO EXTERNAL FUNDING AVAILABLE AND A SCORE OF FIVE IS FUNDING AWARDED OR HIGHLY CERTAIN.
SO STERLING, I WANTED TO ADD ANOTHER PRIORITY, WHICH IS IT'S BEEN ON THE LIST SO LONG, WE BETTER DO IT OR TAKE IT OFF THE LIST.
[00:25:02]
SO, SO AGAIN, THIS MIGHT BE MORE FOR COUNCIL THAN IT IS REALLY DIRECTED AT YOU, BUT PART OF OUR DISCUSSION AT THE RETREAT WAS THAT IF EVERY PRIORITY IS THE SAME VALUE, PROBABLY ONE, THERE IS NO PRIORITY.
SO IF OUR PRIORITIES HAVE PRIORITY, WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT COMMUNITY WAS THE FIRST PRIORITY AND THE SECOND WAS HOUSING AND THE THIRD WAS MOBILITY, ET CETERA.
UM, AND THEN ECONOMIC DIVERSITY WAS NUMBER FOUR.
IT SEEMS LIKE CORE PRIORITY HERE DOESN'T WAIT FOR THAT.
SO, UM, SOME OF THE ITEMS YOU'RE REFERRING TO IN YOUR COMMENT, UM, BECAUSE THEY'RE PARKS AND REC, UM, THAT'S COMMUNITY.
IT MIGHT GET A HIGHER WEIGHTING THAN THE ROUNDABOUT FOR BREWER AND RANGER ROAD, UM, WHICH IS THE MOBILITY.
UH, AND AND AT ALL
AND I'M NOT, I'M JUST ASKING FIRST WHETHER COUNCIL THINKS THAT WE SHOULD TASK, UM, STERLING WITH FIGURING OUT A WAITING MECHANISM FOR OUR PRIORITIES BECAUSE I THINK IT WILL CHANGE THE FINAL PRIORITY FOR SOME OF THESE PROJECTS.
SO I'M REALLY, I GUESS ASKING US, WELL EXACTLY, BECAUSE PARKS AND REC IS A GOOD EXAMPLE, MAY NOT FIT INTO SAFETY, YOU KNOW, UM, IMMEDIATE LIFE AND SAFETY RISK OR, UM, AND IT ALWAYS GETS A LOW PRIORITY BECAUSE IT DOES, IT'S NOT A ABSOLUTE MANDATE EXCEPT THAT THEY EVENTUALLY HAVE TO GET DONE.
WE CAN'T JUST KEEP PUTTING THEM OFF YEAR AFTER YEAR.
AND SO TO ME, THAT, THAT BECAUSE IT IS COMMUNITY, IT DOES GET A HIGHER SCORE THAN WHAT'S HERE.
AND THERE MAY BE OTHERS OUTSIDE OF PARKS AND REC, BUT I'M MOST FAMILIAR WITH PARKS AND REC, IF I MAY AS WELL.
I I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND I, I THINK WHEN WE DID THE SUP PRIORITY RANKING SYSTEM, THERE WAS A WAITING AMONGST THE FACTORS THAT WE'RE NOT SEEING HERE.
SO THAT IT'S A REAL DISCUSSION TO HAVE.
BUT THEN LINKING IT BACK TO WHAT YOU SAID EARLIER, IF WE THROW PUBLIC SAFETY IN THE COMMUNITY, THEN YOU SORT OF DAMPEN SOME OF THE THINGS.
ALTHOUGH WE DIDN'T SAY PUBLIC SAFETY WAS A CORE PRIORITY IN OUR RETREAT, OF COURSE PUBLIC SAFETY IS A CORE PRIORITY FOR ALL THIS, RIGHT? OF COURSE.
IT JUST HAPPENS TO BE WELL MANAGED AND WELL BUDGETED AND WE UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON.
BUT YOU KNOW, IT WOULD IN MY MIND HAVE SORT OF DIFFERENT SCORES AND RANKINGS OF SOMETHING THAT COMES UP THAN MAYBE A, A DIFFERENT KIND OF PARKS AND REC COMMUNITY SERVING THING VERSUS PUBLIC SAFETY.
SO IT'S JUST A COMPLICATION I'M JUST RAISING.
AND THEN OF FURTHER THAN I'D ADD TO THIS, THAT WHEN I THINK ABOUT THESE JUSTIFICATIONS AND THE PRESENCE OF OUTSIDE FUNDING, I THINK IS A DISTORTING ELEMENT.
OUTSIDE FUNDING IS IMPORTANT AND WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT IT, BUT IT REALLY FEEDS INTO THE FEASIBILITY OF FUNDING IT IN A GIVEN YEAR.
IT DOESN'T CHANGE ITS PRIORITY RANKING.
IF SOMETHING'S GOT A RANKING FOR PRIORITY BECAUSE IT SHOULD BE DONE OR IT NEED TO BE DONE OR IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE DONE OR WHATEVER.
AND WHETHER WE HAVE OUTSIDE FUNDING FOR IT OR NOT, IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE PRIORITY, IT JUST CHANGES THE FEASIBILITY OF SOMETHING IN ANY GIVEN YEAR.
SO THAT'S ANOTHER WRINKLE THAT I THINK OF WHEN I LOOK AT THIS PAGE THAT I'M, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH KATHY.
I I HEAR YOU ON THAT AND I AGREE IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE PRIORITY, BUT YOU HAVE TO, BUT WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO FACTOR IT IN.
'CAUSE LIKE FOR SOMETHING LIKE A SHARED USE PATH, OBVIOUSLY IF WE'RE GONNA GET SOME FUNDING FOR SOMETHING, UH, IT MOVES THAT UP THE CHANNEL.
UM, SO HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU NOT FACTOR IT IN BUT FACTOR IT IN? YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY I, I MENTIONED THE WORD LIKE FEASIBILITY OF FUNDING RATHER THAN WHETHER WHAT ITS CORE PRIORITY MIGHT BE.
AND IF I MAY Y'ALL, UM, COUNCILOR FURMAN, WHEN YOU SAID FEASIBILITY VERSUS PRIORITY, THAT MADE ME CONSIDER THAT YOUR PRIORITIES ARE SOMETHING THAT DRIVES THIS RANKING FOR US, RIGHT? AND I WONDER IF RATHER THAN CALLING OURS PRIORITY 1, 2, 3, AND FOUR, IT SHOULD BE FEASIBILITY 1, 2, 3, AND FOUR OR ALIGNMENT 1, 2, 3, AND FOUR, BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT USING PRIORITY IN, IN STAFF'S CONTEXT WHEN THE PRIORITIES THAT YOU SET ARE THE OVERARCHING POLICY DIRECTION PRIORITIES.
I FEEL LIKE WE'RE KIND OF CONFUSING THE TWO BECAUSE OURS ARE LIKE, IS THERE A RISK? DOES IT ALIGN WITH YOUR PRIORITIES? IS IT READY TO GO AND
[00:30:01]
DO WE HAVE THE MONEY? AND WE CAN ALWAYS ADD OTHER THINGS TO THAT.BUT THE REALITY IS THAT DOESN'T DEFINE THE PRIORITY.
IT REALLY DEFINES WHETHER WE'RE READY TO DO THE PROJECT AND MONEY'S AVAILABLE AND GIVES YOU SOME CONTEXT FOR WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
BUT YOUR PRIORITY IS THE DRIVING FORCE.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF, IF IT MIGHT BE BETTER IF WE CHANGED OUR RANKINGS TO NOT BE CALLED PRIORITY.
DEREK, I'M PROBABLY GONNA BUTCHER THIS THOUGHT 'CAUSE I'M JUST KIND OF THINKING THIS THROUGH IN MY HEAD, BUT, YOU KNOW, IF WE RUN EVERYTHING THROUGH THE RISK AND SAFETY CRITERIA, THEN, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN THINGS ARE ALWAYS GONNA GET DISCOUNTED.
SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, SHOULD CERTAIN, YOU KNOW, CORE PRIORITY READINESS OUTSIDE FUNDING TO ME WOULD APPLY TO ANYTHING, BUT SHOULD THERE BE AN ALTERNATE CATEGORY FOR PARKS FOR CERTAIN THINGS? SO INSTEAD OF RUNNING IT THROUGH RISK AND SAFETY, IT'S RUN THROUGH A, AN ALTERNATIVE SCALING SO THAT WE DON'T JUST ALWAYS BACK BURNER, YOU KNOW, A PARK PROJECT BECAUSE THE REALITY IS THE PARK PROJECT'S PROBABLY NOT GONNA BE HEALTH SAFETY MATTER.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MAKES THINGS, WHAT I, BASICALLY, WHAT I WOULD BE PROPOSING IS JUST SOMETHING, UH, A DIFFERENT CRITERIA THAT WOULD APPLY TO CERTAIN TYPES OF PROJECTS AND THEN WE OTHER PROJECTS WOULD STILL GO THROUGH THE RISK AND SAFETY ANALYSIS.
SO FIRST TO ADDRESS PETE, UM, I WOULD HOPE THAT POLICE FOR RISK AND SAFETY NEVER GET A ONE, RIGHT? IT SHOULD NEVER BE A ONE.
IT SHOULD BE ALWAYS ABOUT PREVENTATIVE NEED IN THE COMMUNITY.
SO IN MY MIND, THEY SHOULD NEVER GET A ONE.
PARKS AND REC MIGHT SAY, UM, IF I DON'T FIX THE EQUIPMENT OVER AT SUNSET PARK, THE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT, KIDS ARE GONNA GET HURT, RIGHT? SO THERE IS RISK AND PREVENTATIVE NEED.
SO THERE'S RISK TO THE CITY, THERE'S RISK TO THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY.
SO DEPENDS ON HOW YOU DEFINE RISK AND SAFETY, RIGHT? UM, CORE PRIORITY, I, I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, HOWEVER, TO SAY THERE'S NO ALIGNMENT WITH COUNCIL PRIORITIES THEN SHOULD WE BE DOING IT AT ALL? UM, REGARDLESS OF ALL THE OTHER ANSWERS.
UM, AND I STILL WOULD ARGUE THAT COUNCIL PRIORITIES ARE NOT A FLAT THING TO JUST SAY IT'S PARTIAL OR INDIRECT ALIGNMENT.
IF IT'S, IF IT'S PARTIAL OR INDIRECT ALIGNMENT TO COMMUNITY AND THAT'S OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY, THEN SHOULDN'T IT GET WEIGHTED DIFFERENTLY THAN IF IT'S TO ECONOMIC DIVERSITY OR, YOU KNOW, UM, I THINK OUR THIRD ONE IS THE, THE MOBILE ET ALL.
SO IT JUST FEELS LIKE THAT STILL NEEDS A WEIGHTING OF SOME KIND AS TO WHERE IT ALIGNS.
BECAUSE IF WE THINK THAT THE COMMUNITY IS OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY, THEN WE NEED TO THINK IN TERMS OF WHETHER OR NOT THAT ACTIVITY HELPS THE COMMUNITY.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE BASICALLY.
AND THAT THAT IS THE ROLE OF, OF THE CITY AND, AND COUNCIL.
AND UM, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE OTHERS ARE THE OTHERS.
I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE, THE ACCOUNTING TYPES ON ON THIS COUNCIL APPARENTLY DO.
WELL, YOU KNOW, EXCUSE ME FOR A SEC, UH, IF THAT'S A GOOD POINT ON COMMUNITY, LET'S SAY THE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT IS FALLING APART AND THERE'S A RISK FOR SAFETY.
ON THE OTHER HAND, LET'S JUST SAY IT'S OLD AND IT NEEDS REPLACEMENT, NOT A SAFETY FACTOR, BUT MORE PEOPLE WOULD USE THE PARK IF THE EQUIPMENT WAS BETTER.
UH, I'M JUST MENTIONING THIS TO CLARIFY FOR THEM, KATHY, THESE ARE ALL EXCELLENT POINTS.
I JUST WORRY THAT WE'RE CREATING, UM, EVER MOVING TARGET FOR STAFF WHEN IT'S OUR JOB UP HERE TO TRY AND GIVE SO CLEAR DIRECTION THAT THEN THEY CAN GO AND FILL IN THE BLANKS.
AND I THINK THAT WE, AND I SAID ALL GOOD POINTS, I, YOU KNOW, AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID, BUT I THINK WE'RE MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT TO ACTUALLY PROVIDE WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR WHEN WE KEEP EXPANDING THAT.
SO SOME INPUT FROM STAFF ON THAT WE ACT, ACTUALLY, I REALLY UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM ON LIKE OLDER EQUIPMENT BECAUSE WE COULD, WE COULD HAVE A CATEGORY CALLED OBSOLESCENCE OR, AND REPLACEMENT, LIKE IS IS LIKE THE ERP SYSTEM.
IT'S REALLY EASY TO PUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT OFF BECAUSE IT'S LIKE, UH, SOFTWARE AND IT'S JUST EXPENSIVE.
IT'S INTANGIBLE, RIGHT? BUT THEN SUDDENLY IT'S LIKE, OH MY GOSH, THIS IS OBSOLETE AND WE'RE REALLY IN TROUBLE.
UM, THAT'S A COMMON THING THAT HAPPENS THAT COULD HAPPEN WITH PARK EQUIPMENT
[00:35:01]
ALSO VERY EASILY WHERE IT'S JUST OLD AND NOT THAT GREAT, LIKE THE BATHROOMS AND PAI GROUND EXACTLY WHERE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE STILL FUNCTIONAL, BUT NOBODY REALLY WANTS TO USE THOSE FUNCTIONAL RESTROOMS. SO MAYBE IT'S ANOTHER CATEGORY THAT WE ADD THAT IS OBSOLESCENCE NECESSITY, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES AND AND WE COULD FLUSH THAT OUT.WELL THE CONCESSIONS IN POSSE GROUNDS HAVE BEEN ON THE LIST PROBABLY FOR 10 YEARS.
AND I AM NOT KIDDING BECAUSE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL FOR SIX YEARS, FIVE YEARS AND IT WAS ON THE LIST BEFORE WHEN I WAS DOING THE CITIZEN WORK GROUP, RIGHT.
FOR EVERY YEAR THAT I WAS ON THAT FOR FIVE YEARS.
I KNOW THERE'RE SCARY BATHROOMS AT POSSY GROUNDS.
I DIDN'T KNOW WE EVEN HAD CONCESSIONS AND I LIVE RIGHT OVER THERE, SO WE DON'T ANYMORE DO WE? IT'S JUST THE OLD CONCESS JUST OLD BUILDING.
UM, YEAH, IT THE CON I'VE NEVER SEEN THE CONCESSIONS AND USED THERE, BUT BACK IN THE DAY THERE USED TO BE, AND IF YOU GO IN WHAT WE USE AS A STORAGE ROOM, THERE'S STILL A BIG OLD COKE FREEZER AND SOME OF THOSE FROM WHAT USED TO BE, BUT NO CONCESSION STANDS ANYMORE.
WHEN I COACHED LITTLE LEAGUE, UH, BASEBALL, THEY WERE OPERATING THEN, BUT THAT WAS A LONG TIME AGO.
BUT YOU'VE BEEN, BUT YOU'VE BEEN HERE OPEN THAT REFRIGERATOR BUT STILL THERE.
YOU'VE BEEN HERE FOR A HUNDRED YEARS.
THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING OBSOLESCENCE COULD BE THAT IT'S BEEN ON THE LIST TOO LONG AS WELL AS THE EQUIPMENT IS TOO OLD.
YEAH, WE COULD INCLUDE THAT AS HOW MANY YEARS HAS THIS BEEN ON THE LIST THAT WE HAVEN'T CONSIDERED? ONE THING THOUGH, IF IT'S BEEN ON THE LIST, AND I DON'T MEAN THIS ABOUT THE CONCESSION STANDS, I WE'RE NOT PICKING ON THOSE.
I ACTUALLY THINK THERE'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD DO.
IT'S SOME, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY, BUT IF IT'S, IF IT STARTS TO BE, IT'S BEEN ON THE LIST FOR SO LONG, MAYBE IT SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE LIST, RIGHT? SOME OF THESE THINGS AS OPPOSED DONE OR REMOVED.
RIGHT? BUT SO, BUT IF YOU'RE, YOU'RE AT TWO OPPOSITE ENDS OF THE SPECTRUM.
SO HOW DO YOU SCORE SOMETHING LIKE THAT? AND MAYBE WE DON'T IN THAT SENSE.
MAYBE THOSE PROJECTS ARE THINGS THAT WE CALL OUT SEPARATELY TO COUNCIL AND WE SAY, HERE ARE THE THINGS THAT YOU AS COUNSEL, WHETHER INDIVIDUALS ARE AS A COLLECTIVELY HAVE SEEN AT LEAST FIVE TIMES.
DO YOU WANT US TO CONTINUE BRINGING IT FORWARD? DO YOU WANT TO DO IT OR DO YOU JUST WANNA SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE'RE NOT GONNA DO THAT JUST, JUST TO ADDRESS THE IDEA THAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S COMPLICATED.
LIKE LOOK AT THE YEARS, WHATEVER THIS YEAR, OR I SHOULD SAY THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR'S COUNCIL PRIORITIES ARE AND TRY TO DO SOME WAITING.
OR ALTERNATIVELY WE CAN WAIT UNTIL ALL THE ITEMS COME IN FRONT OF US ON BUDGET AND WE CAN ARGUE ABOUT THOSE ITEMS AND THEIR PRIORITIES WHEN THEY COME TO BUDGET.
SO ANY WAY YOU LOOK AT IT, I THINK THAT PROJECTS ARE JUST GONNA SHOW UP AND WE'RE GONNA ARGUE ABOUT THEM AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE A MUST DO VERSUS A SHOULD DO OR A PRY ONE VERSUS A PRY TWO.
SO I, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT, I WAS TRYING TO MAKE IT SO ALL I WAS TRYING TO REALLY DO IS GET IT TO A CORE PRIORITIES.
IT WAS UNDERSTOOD THAT FROM THE COUNCIL'S PERSPECTIVE, WE'RE NOT WAITING THEM ALL THE SAME.
AND WHEN A PROJECT COMES TO US IN MY HEAD, I'M GOING TO BE USING THAT METRIC OF WHAT PRIORITY WE DECIDED LEVEL IT WAS TO TRY AND MAKE A DETERMINATION ON WHETHER OR NOT THAT PROJECT IS TOO LOWLY SET FOR THAT.
AND WHETHER YOU CALL IT OBSOLESCENCE OR NOT, UM, I'M SORRY, I LIVE BY POSSE GROUND AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT I THINK THAT THERE IS A SAFETY RISK IN THOSE BATHROOMS AND THERE MIGHT BE A HEALTH RISK IN THOSE BATHROOMS. UM, AND SO WHEN YOU SAY WE'RE NOT GONNA USE RISK AND SAFETY FOR THINGS LIKE PARKS AND REC, I THINK THERE IS RISK AND SAFETY WITH PARKS AND RECS JUST LIKE ANYTHING ELSE TO, TO THE COMMUNITY AND, AND THEREFORE TO, TO THE CITY AS A WHOLE.
SO, UM, I, I'M NOT SURE THAT TAKING SOMETHING THAT SEEMS BENIGN LIKE PARKS AND REC AND PULLING IT OUT BECAUSE IT SHOULD BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY, I'M NOT SURE IT DOES JUSTICE TO THE USE THAT HAPPENS TO THE FACILITIES IN PARKS AND REC.
SEE, I'M TRYING TO DO THE OPPOSITE.
I'M TRYING TO CALL IT OUT SO THAT IT GETS DONE.
IF I MAY, WE ACTUALLY, WHEN WE DID THIS PROCESS, WE ENDED UP RANKING THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT HIGHER BECAUSE WE CONSIDERED IT A HEALTH AND AND SAFETY SAFETY RISK.
THAT WAS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY TOO, IS LOOKING AT IT, I ACTUALLY PUT A FOUR FOR THE RISK AND SAFETY FOR THAT BECAUSE YES, IT'S NOT COMPARING WITH POLICE RISK AND SAFETY, IT'S A DIFFERENT TYPE OF RISK AND SAFETY, BUT THERE IS A RISK, HEALTH RISK IN SOME OF THOSE RESTROOMS IF THEY'RE NOT DONE EVENTUALLY.
SO IT WAS A FOUR OUT OF FIVE FOR ME ON THAT ONE.
[00:40:04]
I HAVE A SO HAVE WE COMPLETELY CONFUSED YOU? YES, THANK YOU SIR.SO JUST A QUICK THOUGHT,
SO IF WE HAD TWO CATEGORIES HERE THAT ALLOWED FOR A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT PRIORITIES AND MAYBE ONE OF THEM BECOMES, THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO FOR A LONG TIME, WHATEVER WE CALL THAT NOW IT'S TIME WE GET IT DONE AND IT PUTS IT IN AS A ANOTHER CORE PRIORITY, BUT DIFFERENT LABEL TO THAT, THEN YOU CAN GET TWO OF THESE CATEGORIES TO OVERLAP EACH OTHER AND GIVE ADDITIONAL WEIGHTING TO THAT.
SO I, I'M HAPPY TO GO OFFLINE AND, AND WORK WITH STERLING ON THAT IF YOU'D LIKE.
THIS NEXT SLIDE, I THINK WE COULD HAVE INCORPORATED IN THE FIRST ONE, WHICH REALLY IS TO SAY THIS IS A WORK IN PROGRESS, UH, THIS PRIORITY RANKING, SO WEIGHING IN IS WHAT WE WANTED TO HEAR.
SO YOU'RE DEFINITELY NOT CONFUSING US.
WE WANTED TO GET INPUT ABOUT HOW YOU WANTED THIS BUILT AND DESIGNED.
AND THEN AGAIN, A REMINDER, THIS SLIDE DECK IS, UH, INTERACTIVE SO WE CAN SKIP TO PROJECTS, UH, TO REALLY SHOW COUNCIL HOW STAFF RANKED, UM, AND TO HAVE COUNCIL WEIGH IN.
AND THEN LASTLY, THE SUP MATRIX WILL BE PRESENTED DURING THE APRIL WORK SESSIONS.
ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE NOW ENTERING THE KIND OF INTERACTIVE PORTION OF THE PRESENTATION TODAY.
AND WE STARTED OFF WITH CATEGORIES JUST BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY GROUPINGS.
WE TRIED TO DEVI, UH, DIVIDE THEM BY GROUPS AND PUT THEM INTO ONE SLIDE.
UM, THIS IS DONE ALPHABETICALLY.
THERE'S REALLY NO REASON WHY WE GROUP THESE TOGETHER OTHER THAN JUST ALPHABETICALLY.
AND IF IT'S EASIER FOR COUNCIL, WE CAN GO THROUGH ONE JUST TO GIVE YOU A SAMPLE OF HOW IT WAS, UH, RATED AND THEN ALLOW COUNCIL TO KIND OF REVIEW THESE, UH, TAKE A MOMENT AND THEN WE CAN SKIP TO THEM.
UH, BUT IF THAT'S OKAY, I CAN JUST JUMP REAL QUICKLY TO IT.
THE CITYWIDE BUSINESS SOFTWARE TO KIND OF SHOW COUNCIL HOW THIS WORKED.
SO THIS WOULD BE THE BOTTOM PROJECT.
SO WE PUT, WE TRIED TO PUT TWO PROJECTS ON ONE PAGE JUST TO SLAVE, UH, SAVE THE AMOUNT OF SLIDES THAT WERE GIVEN TO COUNCIL.
SO FOR THE ERP REPLACEMENT, THE CURRENT CURRENT PRIORITY RANKING THAT IS IN OUR BUDGET SOFTWARE IS A PRIORITY ONE.
AND WHAT STAFF PUT IN WAS FOR RISK AND SAFETY WAS A FIVE.
SO GOING BACK TO WHAT IS RISK AND SAFETY.
SO THIS WOULD BE PART OF THAT OBSOLESCENCE OR FAILURE RISK DUE TO AGE.
SO THAT WAS GIVEN A HIGH FAILURE RISK.
CORE PRIORITY WAS GIVEN A FOUR READINESS BEING A FIVE AND OUTSIDE FUNDING AT A ONE.
SO THE TOTAL SCORE AMOUNTED TO A 15, WHICH THEN ALLOWED IT TO BE A PRIORITY ONE RANKING.
SO IF COUNCIL'S OKAY WITH THAT, WE CAN, YEAH, IF I COULD, UM, ALSO IF YOU'LL LOOK AT THE COMMUNITY ART PROJECTS THAT WENT UP FROM WHAT WAS A PRIORITY FOUR, THE LOWEST TO A PRIORITY THREE BECAUSE OF THE READINESS AND ITS ALIGNMENT WITH CORE PRIORITIES.
AND IT COULD POSSIBLY GO HIGHER THAN THAT BECAUSE IT IS CLOSELY ALIGNED WITH COUNCIL'S COMMUNITY PRIORITY.
SO THAT'S THE KIND OF THING THAT WE WANNA POINT OUT THAT AS WE CHANGE THOSE NUMBERS AND IF YOU SEE THESE AND YOU SAY, WELL THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, THAT'S MORE ALIGNED OR THAT'S LESS ALIGNED, UM, THE, THE MATRIX THAT WE HAVE, THOSE WILL, THOSE WILL GO UP AND DOWN BASED ON ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
AND IF COUNSEL WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS MATRIX IN USE, WE CAN ACTUALLY PULL DOWN THE, THE POWERPOINT AND PULL UP THE MATRIX SO COUNSEL CAN SEE US CHANGING THE SCORES AND HOW IT WORKS.
SO I'M JUST TAKING US BACK TO THIS CATEGORY.
ARE THERE ANY PROJECTS HERE THAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW IN TERMS OF PRIORITY RANKING? ALRIGHT, LET'S GO.
OKAY, CAN I, CAN I JUST ASK A REAL QUICK QUESTION? SO FOR INSTANCE, THE CITY HALL WINDOW AND REPLACEMENT YOU SHOW AS A PRIORITY THREE.
BECAUSE, AND I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT 'CAUSE ALL THOSE PRIORITIES CHANGE AS YOU GO THROUGH THE REST OF THIS.
'CAUSE THAT CHANGE TO UM, WHERE'D IT GO TO A PRIORITY ONE RIGHT? UNDER THE NEW SYSTEM.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYONE WAS CLEAR, INCLUDING THE AUDIENCE THAT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW IS THE OLD PRIORITY SETTING,
[00:45:01]
NOT WHAT THE NEW SUGGESTIONS ARE.AND THE PRIORITIES PREVIOUSLY WERE MORE SUBJECTIVE.
THIS IS USING MORE OF A MATHEMATICAL APPROACH.
SO THAT CHANGE IS NOT REFLECTED ON THE OTHER PAGE, RIGHT? CORRECT.
JUST REFLECTED IN THIS, CORRECT.
WE MANAGED TO MAKE IT AS COMPLICATED AS WE COULD FOR THE PRESENTATION.
IF NO QUESTIONS, WE'LL GO TO THE NEXT GROUPING, WHICH WOULD BE PARKS AND RECREATION.
AND I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT THE CONCESSION STAND RESTROOM BUILDING JUST BECAUSE THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, YEAH, THAT WOULD BE THE BOTTOM GROUPING HERE ON THIS PAGE.
AND THAT ONE I GUESS STAYED THE SAME, ADDED A TWO, SORRY, THAT ONE STAYED THE SAME AT A TWO.
I THINK SINCE OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY IS COMMUNITY SHOULD BE THESE GUYS, RIGHT? EVERYTHING ON THAT LIST SHOULD BE, SHOULD BE RATED AS A FIVE AND WELL, LET'S, WE'LL PULL THAT UP.
ASSUMING THAT YOU CAN LOOK AT THOSE.
YEAH, I THINK, I THINK THOUGH YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT READINESS IS A FACTOR.
'CAUSE THEN IT WON'T BE IN 27, IT'LL BE A CARRYOVER AND WE DON'T WANT TO INTENTIONALLY DO THAT.
YES, JOSH, WE'RE PUTTING PRESSURE ON YOU
SO, UH, MAYOR, IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, YOU WOULD LIKE FOR ALL OF THE PARKS AND REC PROJECTS TO BE RANKED AS A FIVE.
NOW WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THEY HAVE TO BE READY ALSO SO THAT WHAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT IS FY 27 TO START IF THEY'RE MULTI-YEAR.
BUT MOST OF HIS JOSH'S PROJECTS ARE DONE WITHIN A YEAR.
AND THE ONLY REASON THE READINESS IS THERE FOR THE CONCESSION STAND ONE ON THIS AS A THREE IS BECAUSE OUR, WE'RE DOING THE DESIGN FOR THE CONCESSION STAND RESTROOMS THIS YEAR.
SO THAT WE WILL BE AT A FIVE BY JULY 1ST, I GUESS IS REALLY AN ANSWER.
WELL, AND SO WHY DON'T WE CHANGE THAT TO A FIVE IN HERE AND CHANGE THE ALIGNMENT OF THE OTHERS TO A FIVE AND LET'S SEE WHAT THAT DOES TO THE RANKING.
YEAH, SO IF I CHANGE READINESS TO A FIVE, IT STILL STAYS AT A PRIORITY TWO.
BUT IF WE CHANGE CORE PRIORITY TO A FIVE AND THEN THE RISK AND SAFETY, THAT DOES BUMP IT UP TO A PRIORITY ONE.
AND, AND THEN IF WE CHANGE THESE OTHERS, OKAY.
SO CHANGING ALL OF THE PARKS PROJECTS TO A CORE PRIORITY FIVE DID MAKE SOME SHIFTS OF BUMPING THOSE PRIORITY RANKINGS.
SO THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE HOPE TO GET FROM YOU ALL WAS THAT SORT OF DIRECTION ON WHAT DO YOU FEEL LIKE ALIGNS, WHAT DO YOU WANT TO SEE? SO THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER PROJECTS, UH, IN PARKS AND RECS THAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW? THERE IS A NEW PROJECT PR 14.
SO I KNOW COUNCIL DID MENTION NO NEW PROJECTS THIS YEAR.
THIS ONE WAS ONE OF THE FEW THAT WERE ADDED AS A NEW PROJECT.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THIS IS A, A NEW ONE THAT COUNCIL HASN'T SEEN IN PRIOR YEARS.
CAN I JUST ASK A QUESTION? IT'S REALLY DIRECTED AT YOU JOSH, WITH THE BUILD OUT OF RANGER STATION PARK AND THE IMPROVEMENTS AT RANGER STATION INTERIOR.
ARE WE PRETTY MUCH DONE THEN WITH RANGER STATION? IS IT WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE? YES.
ONCE THOSE TWO PROJECTS ARE COMPLETED.
SO ONE WOULD BE DOING THE RESTROOMS AT RANGER STATION PARK AND THE OTHER WOULD BE LIKE THE INTERIOR OF THE HOUSE AND BARN THEN.
'CAUSE WE'LL HAVE THE SHADE STRUCTURE DONE THIS YEAR IN THE NEXT COUPLE MONTHS OVER THE PLAYGROUND AREA.
AND THEN ONCE THOSE BUILDINGS AND RESTROOMS ARE DONE, I THINK RANGER STATION, PARK, WE CAN FINALLY CHECK THAT ONE OFF THE LIST.
HOW ARE WE STANDING WITH THE POOL? IS, IS THE, DOES THE POOL NEED ANYTHING SPECIAL? I KNOW WE TEND TO DO A LOT OF MAINTENANCE ON THE POOL THAT WE RENT FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
YEAH, IT'S NOTHING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT.
WISE'S IN NEED OF A FEW LITTLE THINGS.
LIKE WE DID HAVE A DIVER DO LIKE A CRACK SEAL ON THE, UM, PLASTER ON THE INSIDE AND A FEW PROJECTS LIKE THAT.
WE'VE ALWAYS NEEDED SOME NEW FILTERS AND HEATERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT AS THEY COME UP.
BUT NOTHING ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT SIDE.
SO NOTHING'S GOING ON SPECIFICALLY SAY IN THE LOCKER ROOMS OR RESTROOM AREA.
[00:50:01]
WE WOULD LOVE TO DO A LOCKER ROOM RENOVATION THERE.THEY'RE YEAH, BUT IT'S COMPLICATED AND I UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE IT IS A RENTAL THAT WE HAVE FROM, IT WOULD BE PAYING TO UPDATE THE FACILITY FROM THE SCHOOL FACILITY AND THEY SHOULD BE PARTICIPATING IN THIS AS WELL.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IN SOME, IN SOME WAY THAT THE COMMUNITY'S AWARE THAT WE'RE AWARE OF THE POOL AND WE KNOW THAT IT'S HIGHLY USED, UM, BOTH BY THE, THE MASTER SWIM GROUP AND BY, UM, KIDS IN THE SUMMER AND IT, IT IS PART AND PARCEL IMPORTANT INTO OUR COMMUNITY.
SO I JUST WANTED TO SORT OF MAKE SURE THAT IT GETS MENTIONED 'CAUSE IT DOESN'T SHOW UP HERE.
AND ANNETTE, WHEN WE MEET WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT TOPIC TO TALK ABOUT.
SO CAN WE MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT, UH, HOUSING? SURE.
I'M MEETING WITH THE SUPERINTENDENT NEXT WEDNESDAY TO WORK ON THE AGENDA FOR THAT JOINT WORK SESSION.
SO I'LL MAKE A NOTE OF, UH, WE COULD CALL IT SHARED FACILITIES OR LEASE FACILITIES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE MULTIPLE, YEAH.
UM, COUNCILLOR MELISSA, THE KURT HARRIS PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR.
I JUST WANNA LET YOU KNOW, A BIG PART OF WHAT WE'RE NOT A BIG CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FOR THE POOL IS WE HAVE SET ASIDE, UH, PLENTY OF, UH, OPERATING BUDGET IN OUR MAINTENANCE.
SO WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH AND REMOVING AND REPLACING HEATERS BEFORE THEY FAIL PUMPS BEFORE THEY FAIL.
WE'VE BEEN BUYING REPLACEMENT PARTS.
SO WE REALLY HAVE AN ACTIVE PROACTIVE PREM MAINTENANCE PROGRAM THANKS TO OUR GREAT MAINTENANCE STAFF WHO SEES THINGS IN ADVANCE, THE CHLORINATOR AND SO ON.
SO WE'RE STAYING ON TOP OF THAT.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN A ONE OF THOSE THINGS CAN FALL OUT AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE HAVE, UH, HUNDREDS OF THOUSAND DOLLAR COSTS WITH THE POOL.
SHOULD PROBABLY GIVE US A LIST OF THOSE.
HAVE THEY BEEN PAYING 50% ACCORDING TO OUR CONTRACT? OH, FOR THE MATCH BETWEEN THE SCHOOL? YEAH.
UM, UH, YEAH, THEY'VE BEEN PAYING, BUT IT'S, YES, IT'S, IT'S NOT EASY, BUT THEY'VE BEEN PAYING, THEY'VE BEEN CONTRIBUTING.
JOSH CAN PROBABLY ANSWER MORE DETAIL TO THAT.
I THINK WE'RE GONNA NEED, I THINK WE'RE GONNA NEED TO SEE A BREAKDOWN OF THAT, YOU KNOW, PRIOR TO THE MEETING THAT WE HAVE WITH THE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THE REMAINING PARKS AND REC PROJECTS? IF NOT, WE CAN SKIP TO POLICE AND TRANSIT.
HEY JUDGE, THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY.
ANY, ANYTHING YOU DON'T HAVE ON THIS LIST?
SHOULD I ASK FOR A WHOLE NEW POOL AND GO THAT DIRECTION?
OBVIOUSLY THE CONCESSION STAND AND SOME OF THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN ON THERE FOR A WHILE AND FINISHING UP SOME OF THESE OTHER PROJECTS THROUGH THERE WITH THE DOG PARK BEING THE ONLY NEW ONE.
AND THAT ONE, AS YOU CAN SEE ON YOURS IS SPLIT 50, OR NOT 50.
YEAH, 50,000 OVER THREE YEARS.
SO 150,000 TOTAL AND MAKING SOME IMPROVEMENTS, ESPECIALLY TO THAT SMALL DOG AREA, WHICH IS KIND OF SLOPED AND OVERGROWN AND MAKING THAT A NICE COMMUNITY AREA TOO.
WE CAN DISCUSS THIS WHEN WE HAVE A MEETING WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, BUT I THINK THEY WOULD BE HAPPY TO SELL THE POOL TO THE CITY.
WE HAVE, WE DID BRING THAT UP WITH THEM.
AND IT COULD GO BACK ON THE LIST.
BUT YEAH, I THINK THEY, I MEAN THESE BILLS WHEN WHEN THEY GET A, JUST WHEN THEY GET A BILL FROM US FOR THEIR 50% OR WHATEVER, IT'S, IT'S HARD.
AND IT MEANS THAT, OKAY, SO THAT'S MONEY THEY'RE SPENDING ON THE POOL THAT THEY'RE NOT SPENDING TO DO MAINTENANCE ON SOMETHING ELSE.
SO I MEAN, I JUST, I WANT US TO BE MINDFUL OF THE FACT THAT THEY ARE IN A MUCH TIGHTER BUDGET THAN WE ARE.
SO THIS IS POLICE AND PUBLIC TRANSIT.
MAYOR, MAY I ASK, UM, WHAT DO WE MEAN BY BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTS? GO AHEAD.
SO THE BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTS ARE, ORIGINALLY IT WAS LINED TO BE STATE ROUTE 89, UM, THROUGH, UH, THE HIGHEST NEEDS IS WE'RE LOOKING AT A BUS STOP IMPROVEMENT OUT ON, UH, DRY CREEK ROAD AT THE, UH, CITY PROPERTY LIMITS RIGHT NOW.
SO WE PUT MONEY INTO DESIGN THIS FISCAL YEAR, AND THAT WAS ONE OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS
[00:55:01]
OF US PARTNERING WITH TRANSIT, UM, TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF PARKING ALONG DRY CREEK ROAD AND ALSO MAKE A SAFETY FEATURE.CURRENTLY CHUCK WAGON TRAIL CROSSES, UM, THERE, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT PUTTING A SPEED BUMP THAT'S CURRENTLY IN DESIGN RIGHT NOW AND WE HOPE TO GO TO CONSTRUCTION NEXT YEAR.
SO I'M, I'M, I'M THINK I'M ASKING THIS ACTUALLY ON BEHALF OF BRIAN.
SO WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THESE, UM, BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTS, ARE YOU LOOKING ANYWHERE AROUND THE CHAPEL AREA? SO THE, THE, THE PROJECT STARTED, WHAT CAME ORIGINALLY WAS ALL THE BUS STOPS, IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE STATE ROUTE 89 A CORRIDOR.
THE REASON THAT THERE ARE SOME SAFETY ONES THAT ARE AFTER ON, UM, AFTER TRAFFIC LIGHTS, BEFORE TRAFFIC LIGHTS GETTING, UH, DEPARTURE LANE AND UM, EMERGING LANE.
AND THOSE WERE THEN PUSHED THIS YEAR.
SO YOU'RE SEEING THAT AS AN ONGOING CIP PROJECT, AS THE PRIORITIES AND, AND NEEDS AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS.
DEMAND DIDN'T ACTUALLY ANSWER MY QUESTION.
IT'S VERY NEW AND OUR, I GUESS, EXPANSION OF THAT SERVICE.
SO AS WE LOOK TO MAKE THAT POTENTIALLY PERMANENT, IT WOULD INCLUDE LOOKING AT THINGS LIKE BUS STOPS AND OTHER AMENITIES THAT WOULD COME ALONG WITH THAT.
KATHY, KURT, WHEN YOU WENT THROUGH THAT LAUNDRY LIST OF THE TYPE OF THINGS THAT QUALIFIES AN IMPROVEMENT, I DON'T THINK I HEARD OR DID I MISS IT? THE SHELTERS, BUS SHELTERS, WOULD THAT BE PART OF THIS AS WELL? BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE, WE HAVE SOME STOPS THAT PEOPLE ARE LITERALLY SITTING ON THE GROUND IN THE SUN AND YOU KNOW, AND IT'S SOMETHING, I'VE BEEN BEATING THE DRUM ON THAT FOR A LONG TIME NOW ABOUT TRYING TO GET SOME BUS SHELTERS AND SOME SORT OF A COORDINATED STREET FURNITURE PROGRAM TO, TO MAKE THEM RECOGNIZABLE.
UM, YEAH, THOSE STOPS YOU'VE IDENTIFIED.
WE DON'T WANT THE TRANSIT BUS TO STOP ON THE NUMBER TWO LANE, THE RIGHT HAND LANE.
WE WANT TO BUILD A PULL OUT FOR 'EM.
SO WE DON'T WANT TO JUST BUILD A SHELTER AND HAVE MORE PEOPLE USE IT WHEN WE FEEL IT'S AN UNSAFE USE AS IT IS.
SO, UH, PART OF THIS IS OUR ONGOING, UH, PULLOUTS, BUT THEN THERE'S ALSO DISCOVERABLES, WHEN WE WERE DOING THE STATE ROUTE 1 79 PARK AND RIDE EIGHT OS FEEDBACK ON THE, THE EXISTING BUS PULLOUTS ON 1 79 CORRIDOR.
THEY WOULD LIKE US TO MAKE 'EM LONGER AND, UH, DEEPER IN PULLOUTS.
SO AS YOU CAN, BUT THAT'S STILL NOT ADDRESSING A PROBLEM THAT I SEE OUT THERE THAT EXISTS, WHICH IS PEOPLE WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE, USE OF TRANSIT GENERALLY, WHETHER IT'S THE, YOU KNOW, THE REGIONAL ONE OR OURS.
AND WE ARE NOT GIVING PEOPLE A PLACE TO DO THAT.
SO, AND, AND IT KEEP, IT, IT GETS, IT'S BEEN ANOTHER ITEM, LIKE A CONCESSION STAND THAT GETS KICKED DOWN THE ROAD AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO GET THAT.
SO COUNSELOR, ARE YOU ASKING IF THE $400,000 FOR BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDES THINGS LIKE BENCHES AND SHADE AND ALL OF THAT? I'M ASKING WHY THAT, WHY THAT ISN'T IN HERE? THAT NUMBER OBVIOUSLY WOULD BE INSUFFICIENT, BUT WHERE, WHERE SHOULD THIS BE? IT SHOULD BE ON THERE.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN THE PAST AND I DON'T SEE IT REPRESENTED TRYING TO GET BUS SHELTERS, UH, BENCHES FOR PEOPLE WAITING.
I MEAN WE'VE, I'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LOT.
EVERYBODY'S HANGING THEIR HEADS SICK OF HEARING IT FROM ME, BUT NO, NOT SICK OF HEARING
I'M HEARING A LOT OF SUPPORT UP HERE.
SO, AND I BELIEVE THAT IS THE INTENT OF THE BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTS, RIGHT? CORRECT.
YEAH, BUT I'VE HEARD THAT FOR YEARS.
SO WHERE, WHERE IS IT ON THE LIST IS THE QUESTION? OH, IN THE PROCESS? WELL, IF IT'S NOT IN THAT CIP THE $400,000, SHE'S ASKING WHERE ELSE IS IT? OR DO WE NEED TO FIX THAT ESTIMATE OF THE 400,000 UPWARDS TO INCORPORATE? IT'D BE, IT WOULD BE A HIGHER UP.
SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING AFTER RISK AND HAZARDS.
SO YES, WE WOULD LOVE TO ADDRESS THAT, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP OUR HIGH PRIORITIES, WHICH IS RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS RISK TO THE USERS, TO THE TRAVELING MOTORS PUBLIC.
I THINK I'M HEARING A STRONG COUNSEL PREFERENCE THAT WE ADJUST THAT ESTIMATE TO INCLUDE OTHER AMENITIES WHEN YOU DO THE IMPROVEMENT IS WHAT I THINK I'M HEARING.
I'M SORRY, DID YOU WANT NO, WE'RE JUST LISTENING TO AMBER.
SO YEAH, I JUST WANNA ADD IN, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT RISK, THERE'S MORE THAN BEING HIT BY A CAR IN THE SUMMER HERE.
[01:00:01]
OUT THERE WAITING FOR ONE OF THE BUSES OR ONE OF THE SHUTTLES, WE'RE INCREASING THE RISK THAT THESE PEOPLE COULD SUFFER SOME KIND OF HEAT STROKE OR WHATEVER.UM, IT'S NOT A WINTER PROBLEM, BUT IT IS CERTAINLY A SUMMER PROBLEM.
SO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE USING OUR TRANSIT SYSTEM, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TAKING CARE OF THE HEALTH PART, NOT JUST THE SAFETY PART.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE KATHY IS TRYING TO GO.
AND COUNSELOR, IF I CAN ADD, UM, IN THE JANUARY 14TH MEETING, IT WAS DISCUSSED, UM, CREATING LIKE A SHARED USE PATH AMENITIES PROJECT.
SO STAFF DID ADD, AND I I HAVE UP HERE, WE DID CREATE A NEW PROJECT SIM 1111.
IT HAS A GENERIC TITLE, WHICH IS SUP AMENITIES, BUT IT IS TO START ADDING BUDGET WITH COUNCIL DISCRETION TO IMPROVE, TO INCREASE THAT AMOUNT.
BUT WE PUT A PLACEHOLDER OF 150,000 FOR FY 27 TO ADD THINGS LIKE BENCHES AND SHADE STRUCTURES.
WHAT DOES THAT BUY? 150,001 SLAT OF ONE BENCH
SO THIS WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF OUR PROJECTS THAT ARE IN DESIGN RIGHT NOW.
RIGHT? BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING TO INCORPORATE THIS IN THOSE PROJECTS ALREADY.
SO THIS IS GOING BACK TO RETROFIT THUNDER AND STRATEGIES PATH AND SOME, SOME, UH, PATHS LIKE THAT, THAT ARE ALREADY BUILT, BUT IT'S MULTIPLE LOCATIONS IS IS WHAT I ENVISIONED FOR THAT.
SO DO YOU SEE THIS INCREASING? YEAH.
I MEAN, AS YOU CAN SEE, WE'VE PUT IN PLACE HOLDERS FOR MULTIPLE YEARS THERE.
SO, UM, EVENTUALLY LIKELY YOU WOULD SEE MORE IN THE PROJECT VERSUS IN A SEPARATE PROJECT LIKE THIS.
BUT IT'S GONNA DEPEND ON THE SPECIFIC SITUATION.
'CAUSE SOME OF OUR PROJECTS WE'RE LOOKING AT, WE'RE FINDING THERE ARE LOCATIONS FOR THESE THINGS THAT JUST MAKE SENSE.
AND FOR OTHERS IT JUST, THERE'S NOT A OBVIOUS LOCATION FOR IT.
SO IT MAY, IT MAY MEAN THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT DO WE BUILD THE PATH AND BRING BACK AMENITIES LATER OR NOT.
SO, UM, UM, YOU USED THE WORD RETROFIT, BUT I THOUGHT WHEN WE, WE'VE, AGAIN, WE'VE BEEN ON HERE A WHILE NOW AND BEEN HEARING IT, IT WAS ALWAYS SAID, YES, THAT'S PLANNED AND IT'S GONNA COME WHEN THIS STRUCTURAL PART IS FINISHED, THESE THINGS COME.
AND IT HAS TO BE RETROFIT TO PUT THEM INAND.
I'M SAYING THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT DO HAVE TO BE RETROFIT BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY BUILT.
AND I DON'T, WE OKAY, NEVERMIND.
I ALSO DON'T WANT TO DISCOUNT THE IDEA THAT WE MAY FIND A PROJECT THAT THERE'S NO OBVIOUS PLACE FOR THE AMENITIES UPFRONT AND WE HAVE TO RETROFIT IT LATER.
OF COURSE, THAT CAN BE A COUNCIL DECISION TO MAKE, BUT THIS, THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT MAY NEED TO, UM, BE ACCOUNTED FOR INTO THE FUTURE, BASICALLY.
SO WHEN YOU DO YOUR SUP UPDATE, THE NEXT ONE, CAN YOU CALL THIS OUT? SURE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR POLICE AND PUBLIC TRANSIT? AND PUBLIC TRANSIT? GOOD.
OUR NEXT GROUPING IN, IN THE LARGEST IS SEDONA IN MOTION.
SO WE DID TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SIM 1111, BUT IF THERE ARE ANY IN HERE THAT COUNSEL WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT, WE CAN CLICK TO THAT.
IF I COULD, UH, ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS HERE.
CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND? PROBABLY, ONCE AGAIN, I, I NEVER UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS, IT'S HALF MORE THAN HALF DOWN.
ON THE, ON THE LIST THERE, IT SAYS RODEO ROAD TO DRY CREEK SHARED USE PATH.
WHAT IS THAT? IT SOUNDS LIKE THUNDER MOUNTAIN, THAT'S ALREADY DONE.
IT'S NOT ALL THE WAY DONE, BUT YEAH.
SO, AND I'M LOOKING IN THE, IT'S, I'M TRYING TO CATCH UP TO YOU.
YEAH, IT'S NOT ON THAT SCREEN.
IS IT SIM 11 A? UH, ASSUME WHY NOT.
SO THAT WAS IN FACT THE VERY FIRST, UH, SIM 11 SUBPROJECT THAT WE CREATED.
AND IT'S A PARALLEL PATHWAY THAT RUNS FROM RODEO TO DRY CREEK.
A PORTION OF THAT ACTUALLY GOES THROUGH THE, UH, PROJECT THAT'S
[01:05:01]
UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW AT, UH, NAVAJO, NAVAJO LOFTS.SO, UH, LET'S SEE, JUST TO THE EAST OF THE FIRE STATION ONE.
THERE'S AGIS PATH ALREADY BUILT.
SO THAT DEVELOPMENT COMPLETED A SMALL PART OF THAT ALIGNMENT.
AND THE REASON YOU DON'T SEE IT ON THIS SLIDE IS THAT IT'S NOT BECAUSE IT WASN'T THIS NEXT YEAR.
SO, I, I KNOW THAT WE'RE GONNA TAKE, YOU SAID WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH THIS SUP MATRIX A LITTLE BIT MORE AT A FUTURE MEETING, IS THAT CORRECT? AS WE GO THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS? YEAH, WE WILL NEED TO DO THAT, YES.
MELISSA, PETER, ARE YOU DONE? I, I, YES, I THINK SO.
SO, UM, NOT TALKING ABOUT SUVS FOR A SECOND, BUT ABOUT ROADS LAST NIGHT WE TALKED ABOUT BREWER, OR SORRY, BENNETT ROAD BEING EXTENDED, HOWEVER THAT MIGHT BE, UM, OVER TOWARDS CONTRACTORS ROAD OR ROW THROUGH IT TO GET OVER TO THE COFFEE POT.
UM, I'M ASSUMING THAT COUNCIL WOULD WANT TO SEE SOMETHING AROUND THAT POTENTIALLY, UH, IN THE BUDGET, UM, IF NOT FOR NEXT YEAR, FOR THE YEAR AFTER TRYING TO ALIGN IT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT ITSELF.
I GET THAT, BUT IF IT JUST FEELS LIKE THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO SEE, WHAT THAT MIGHT, WHAT THAT MIGHT BE.
IN THE BUDGET, ANNETTE AND I MADE A NOTE LAST NIGHT THAT THAT'LL NEED TO BE ADDED.
I THINK IT ALIGNS WITH THE PRIORITIES AROUND SIM FIVE VERY WELL.
THOSE ARE MAJOR ROADWAY CONNECTORS LIKE FOREST ROAD EXTENSION AND PROJECTS LIKE THAT.
UM, SO THAT'S WHERE IT MAKES SENSE TO ME TO FIT THAT IN.
YOU KNOW, I WANTED TO ASK YOU LAST NIGHT, ARE WE ONE OF THE OWNERS OF CONTRACTORS ROAD? IT'S A PRIVATE ROAD PORTION OF IT, YES.
THE, SO THE, THE PORTION OF CONTRACTORS ROAD THAT IS ADJACENT TO THE CITY PROPERTY IS, IS PART OF THE CITY PROPERTY, SO OWNED BY THE CITY.
BUT IT, IT, THAT SITUATION THERE IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAD WITH SHELBY DRIVE, WHERE IT WAS PRIVATE AND SAID HE ENDED UP TAKING IT OVER.
YOU KNOW, IF THIS IS SIM FIVE, WHATEVER Z WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL IT,
I THINK WHEN WE HAVE THE AGENDA ITEM FOR THE COUNTY, FORMERLY COUNTY OWNED NOW CITY OWNED RIGHT.
MIGHT FIND THAT THERE'S ANY NUMBER OF STREETS THAT DESERVE ATTENTION.
SO, UH, KURT AND HIS STAFF, JOHN EBERS, UH, AND KURT ARE GEARING UP TO BRING THAT TO COUNCIL IN APRIL.
UM, WE'RE ALREADY TALKING ABOUT WHAT THAT WILL LOOK LIKE.
AND I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT THAT THERE ARE GONNA BE SEVERAL STREETS THAT WILL BE ON THAT LIST, BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT, RIGHT? 'CAUSE THAT'S ACTUALLY GOOD ROW IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THERE IS ACTUALLY GOOD ROW LANE OR WHATEVER.
THAT'S WHY I AM
I'M, I'M LIKE, YEAH, BUT WE WEREN'T REALLY TALKING.
I WAS, I JUST WANTED TO SEPARATE THAT CONVERSATION FROM THE EXTENSION OF, OF BENNETT THROUGH TO CONTRACTORS ROAD OVER TOWARDS, UM, COFFEE POT, UM, AS A SEPARATE CONVERSATION, RIGHT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON SIM PROJECTS? UH, YES.
THE OTHER QUESTION I WAS TRYING TO FORMULATE, YOU KNOW, I I WILL ADMIT, I'M HAVING DIFFICULTY LOOKING AT THE PAGES THAT YOU'RE PUTTING UP HERE VERSUS THE PAGE WERE GOT HANDED OUT AND I'M, AND THEN THE NOTES I MADE FROM THE COUNCIL PACKET.
SO
OH, I GUESS ZANE GRAY IS A PRIORITY THREE THAT DOES HAVE
[01:10:01]
FUNDING IN THIS FISCAL YEAR AND IN THE FUTURE YEARS.BUT IT'S A LOWER PRIORITY THAN LIKE RODEO.
SO IS IT THAT WE ALREADY DID, IS THE 2027 PROJECT FOR ZANE GRAY A PLANNING EFFORT THAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE FOR RODEO? AND THAT'S WHY WE DON'T, I THINK PART OF IT, UH, STERLING, AM I REMEMBERING CORRECTLY THAT THAT PREVIOUS SLIDE IS THE OLD PRIORITY RANKING? OR IS THAT THE UPDATED CORRECT.
THIS, THIS WAS THE EXISTING PRIORITY.
AND THEN THE PAGE I'M LOOKING AT IS THIS PAGE, IS THIS THE OLDER, THE NEW ONE? THE NEW ONE HAS THE BIG GREEN.
WELL, I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THAT'S THE OLD ONE.
YEAH, THE NEW ONE HAS BOTH PRIORITIES ON IT AND THE COLORS ARE THE NEW RANKING AND RIGHT NEXT TO IT IS THE OLD RANKING AND THE GREEN BAR IS WHERE THE RANKINGS, UH, COME FROM.
UM, I NEED MORE TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT BEFORE I ASK MY QUESTION.
UM, SO AM I READING THESE CORRECTLY NOW THAT ON THE SUMMARY OF CAPITAL PROJECTS HANDOUT THIS ONE RIGHT? THE, A LITTLE MORE THAN HALFWAY DOWN THE, THE SUP AMENITIES, I'M GONNA FOCUS ON THAT JUST 'CAUSE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT WAS A PRIORITY THREE COULD DO, BUT WHEN I GO OVER HERE, IT GOT MOVED UP TO A PRIORITY TWO.
AND WHAT WAS IT THAT MOVED THAT UP? I, I'M JUST TRYING TO, JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, 'CAUSE THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE SINCE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, OF UNDERSTANDING HOW THIS WORKS.
THIS, THIS WAS A NEW PROJECT THAT WAS ADDED AND INITIALLY, UM, AGAIN, THERE WASN'T IT, IT WAS MORE OF A, UM, THERE WASN'T AN ANECDOTAL MATHEMATICAL EQUATION.
AND THEN AFTER GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, IT THEN CHANGED TO A PRIORITY TWO.
BUT THIS PRIORITY THREE WAS JUST SET, I WOULD SAY JUST A FEW WEEKS AGO.
AND THEN AFTER GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF SCORING, IT CHANGED TO A PRIORITY TWO.
MM-HMM
SHADE STRUCTURES AND THE ON THE PADS AND BENCHES.
WHERE, WHERE MY MIND GOES WITH THAT IS NOW WE'VE GOT A CIP PRIORITY MATRIX AND WE'VE GOT A SUP PRIORITY MATRIX.
TO ME, THE AMENITIES DON'T GET SCORED AMONGST THE, THE SUP PROJECTS THAT GETS SCORED AMONG GENERAL PROJECTS.
IN OTHER WORDS, THE AMENITIES SHOOT TO THE TOP ALREADY.
THAT, THAT, THAT ANSWERED A LOT OF QUESTIONS FOR ME.
WHAT YOU JUST SAID ABOUT WHY, MY CONCERN ABOUT IT BEING SORT OF BACKBURNERED, RIGHT? BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ALIGNED AND THEY'RE NOT CONSIDERED THE SAME.
BUT I THINK I WOULD MAKE THE CASE, AND WE'VE SAID IT BEFORE, THAT THEY'RE ALL ONE PROJECT, SO THEY SHOULD BE PART OF THE SUP MATRIX AS WELL SOMEHOW.
WELL, OUR, OUR FIRST ATTEMPT WILL BE TO MAKE THEM A PART OF THE PROJECT ITSELF AND THEN IT'S NOT A SEPARATE CONSIDERATION.
BUT I GUESS ONE WAY TO LOOK AT THIS IS BECAUSE IT'S PART OF OUR PRIORITY ONE, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL PRIORITY, IT PULLS, IF IT'S A SEPARATE CONSIDERATION OUTSIDE OF JUST ALL THE SHARED USE PATH PROJECTS, THEN IT'S A HIGHER PRIORITY THAN THOSE INDIVIDUALLY.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YES AND NO.
UM, YES, BUT IT GOES BACK TO WHAT BARBARA WAS SAYING BEFORE AND WHAT COUNCILOR DUNN WAS, WAS SAYING AND ADDRESS WAS WE'VE GOT, WE'VE GOT COUNCIL PRIORITIES AND THEN WE'VE GOT SUP PRIORITIES AND THEN WE'VE GOT THE MATRIX FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE CIP OF THE SUP AND THEN OF THE, OF THE AMENITIES TO ACCOMPANY THE CIP OF THE SUP.
YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? IT'S LIKE WE WE'RE, WE'RE CONTRADICTING OURSELVES IN VARIOUS PLACES.
'CAUSE WE DON'T LOOK AT THE OVERALL PROJECT LIKE, BUT THERE REALLY ARE ONLY TWO PRIORITY CONSIDERATIONS HERE.
THERE'S THE OVERALL CIP AND THEN THERE'S S SUVS.
SO THE SUP MATRIX RANKS THOSE SUP PROJECTS AS JUST THAT CAT CATEGORY.
IT DOESN'T CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, PARKS PROJECTS FOR INSTANCE IN RELATION TO A, A SHARED USE PATH PROJECT.
SO THEY'RE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
UM, SO, SO I, I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR,
[01:15:01]
'CAUSE I HEARD ONE THING, BUT MY BRAIN IS TELLING ME THAT'S NOT QUITE RIGHT.SO WHAT I HEARD WAS THAT THESE PRIORITIES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ARE THE OLD STYLE PRIORITIES WERE MORE OR LESS BEST GUESSES ON BEHALF ON THE PART OF WHICHEVER DEPARTMENT IT WAS.
UM, BUT FOR THE SUVS WE HAVE A MATRIX THAT WE USE THAT SHOULD BE SETTING THE PRIORITIES.
SO THOSE, THOSE PRIORITIES, IT'S A, YOU, YOU, I'M ASSUMING THOSE ARE GETTING RUN THROUGH AND THEY'RE, THAT PRIORITY IS BEING SET BY THAT MATRIX.
NOW ON TOP OF THAT, WE'RE TAKING THAT MATRIX NUMBER THAT YOU SET AND WE'RE GONNA APPLY THIS MATRIX ON TOP OF THAT.
IS THAT CORRECT? BECAUSE NOW IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING.
LIKE, AM I MAKING ANY SENSE? YEAH, I, I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE INTENT THOUGH.
UM, I GUESS JUST THINKING ABOUT IT FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, UM, WE CAN CERTAINLY RANK THE SGIS PATHS, BUT IT'D BE KIND OF HARD TO DO TWO PRIORITIES OVERLAPPING EACH OTHER LIKE THAT.
SO I'M ASSUMING THAT YOUR PRIORITIES WOULD STILL BE BASED ON THE MATRIX THAT YOU'RE RUNNING AGAINST SUVS.
AND THEN THE DECISION HAS TO BE, BE, BE MADE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE BELIEVE SUP PROJECTS RIGHT.
SHOULD BE RAISED HIGHER OVER OTHER YEAH.
UH, CIP PROJECTS BASED ON THIS OTHER RANKING SYSTEM.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL CLEAR HOW THESE TWO RANKING SYSTEMS ARE WORKING TOGETHER.
WE MAY RANK SIX SUP PROJECTS, BUT COUNCIL MAY DECIDE WE ONLY WANT TO DO THREE AS AN EXAMPLE.
BUT NOW THAT I'M LOOKING AT THE RIGHT PAGE,
SO NOW I SEE RODEO SHARED USE, AND I'M NOT PICKING ON EITHER ONE OF THESE PROJECTS.
RODEO SHARED USE PATH GOT DOWNGRADED FROM A PRIORITY TWO TO A THREE.
AND GUN FURY IS THE SAME NOW AT A PRIORITY TWO.
AND WHEN I THINK ABOUT THOSE PROJECTS, WE HAVE RODEO, WHICH IS A SIDEWALK THAT ENDS ON A AND GOES NOWHERE.
THE TOP END OF RODEO AS IT GETS TO THUNDER MOUNTAIN.
IT'S A BUSY ROAD, PEOPLE WALKING ON A BUSY ROAD.
AND I SEE ITS PRIORITY DROP WHEN THEN I THINK A GUN FURY, WHICH IS NOT A VERY BUSY ROAD, A VERY WIDE ROAD, NOT VERY POPULAR TO WALK.
I MEAN WE WANT THESE TO BE POPULAR WALK ON, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A HEALTH AND SAFETY RISK AS HIGH AS RODEO WOULD.
SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE PRIORITIES SHIFTED THE WAY THEY DID.
AND WHEN WE MIGHT GET INTO UNDERSTANDING, I SEE A CHANGE.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE CHANGE.
AND ACTUALLY IN OUR COUNCIL CHAMPION MEETING, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS.
SO PART OF WHAT'S GOING ON THERE IS YOU MIGHT SAY, OKAY, THE CONFLICT THAT YOU HAVE IS BETWEEN A CERTAIN VOLUME OF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC VERSUS A CERTAIN VOLUME OF MULTIMODAL.
RIGHT? TODAY YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT CORRIDOR AND SAY, BOTH VOLUMES ARE RELATIVELY LOW EVEN THOUGH I TALKED TO CERTAIN BIKE FOLKS.
AND THEY WOULD ARGUE THAT THE MULTIMODAL VOLUME IS PRETTY HIGH.
ACTUALLY, OUR INTENT WITH THE PROJECT IS THAT WE FORMALIZE THAT ALIGNMENT AND NOW YOUR VOLUME OF MULTIMODAL TRAFFIC IS HIGH ENOUGH THAT YOU NEED THESE SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS TO SEPARATE THE VEHICULAR FROM THE MULTIMODAL TRAFFIC.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE THOUGHT PROCESS.
BUT THE DETAILS OF THAT PRIORITY MATRIX, UH, I WASN'T PREPARED TO GO THROUGH TODAY.
SO BELIEVE THAT WE CAN DEFINITELY, AS A CHAMPION, DIVE INTO THAT DEEPER.
CAN I ADD MAYOR, CAN I ADD TO THAT? SURE.
UM, SO THE CATEGORIES THAT THE NEW PRIORITY IS BASED ON SUCH DIFFERENT, UM, ITEMS. SO IT DOESN'T INCLUDE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE INCLUDED IN THE MATRIX WHEN WE SCORED IT.
SO THAT'S A BIG PART OF WHY THESE TWO SCORES ARE SO DIFFERENT.
'CAUSE READINESS IS SOMETHING THAT I SCORED LOW ON RODEO JUST BECAUSE IT'S NOT READY TO GO AND BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY A SIDEWALK ON RODEO.
SO THAT'S WHY IT'S SCORED A LITTLE BIT LOWER.
AND, BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MATRIX, THOSE AREN'T ITEMS THAT WE'RE SCORING IN THE OTHER MATRIX.
SO IT'S KIND OF APPLES AND ORANGES.
BUT I, I HEAR YOU AND I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR IT VERY MUCH SO, BUT THE SECTION THAT'S NOT DONE
[01:20:01]
ON RODEO IS NO SIDEWALK AND IT'S A MUCH HIGHER PED VEHICLE RISK THAN GUN FURY EVER WILL BE JUST BECAUSE IT'S, IT SERVES WAY MORE PEOPLE.THERE'S ALWAYS GONNA BE MORE TRAFFIC ON RODEO THAN THERE IS ON GUN FURY NOW.
I MEAN, VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AT LEAST.
AND I, AND I THINK FOR ME,
FOR ME, THE PRIORITY A HIGH, I GIVE A HIGHER PRIORITY RIGHT NOW TO SEPARATING PS AND VEHICLES THAN I, YOU KNOW, I STILL THINK THERE'S CONNECTIVITY ON GUN FURY.
EVEN IF IT WERE A STRIPE LANE ON THE STREET, I THINK THAT WOULD BE FINE.
THAT WOULD GIVE US, WE DON'T HAVE TO SPEND THAT ADDITIONAL MONEY TO WORK WITH THE RESIDENTS AND WHATEVER TO JUST DO WHAT WE CAN ON GUN FURY.
BUT RODEO IS A DIFFERENT BEAST.
IT MEAN PEOPLE WALK ON RODEO EVERY DAY.
I I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION AT ANOTHER TIME WITH YOU TO GET INTO THE DETAIL OF THAT.
'CAUSE I DON'T WANT TO COMMIT TO SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA UNDERMINE WHAT WE TRY TO DO LATER.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON SIM? IF NOT, WE CAN MOVE TO THE NEXT CATEGORY, WHICH WOULD BE STORM DRAINAGE STREETS AND SUSTAINABILITY, STORM DRAINAGE.
ARE THERE ANY OF THESE STORM DRAINAGE PROJECTS THAT ARE CRITICAL? I MEAN THEY ALL SHOULD DO, BUT ARE THERE ANY THAT ARE REALLY IN BAD SHAPE? THE PORTION ON MYSTIC HILLS IS, UM, IT'S THE ACCESS TO THE LIFT STATION THAT IS A HIGH PRIORITY.
UM, SO, BUT IT'S, WE'VE GOT, UH, BUDGET REQUESTED FOR FY 27 TO TAKE CARE OF THAT.
SEE, THEY'RE ALL PRIORITY TOO.
IT'S NOT A, UH, TO ME IT'S NOT A LIFE AND SAFETY.
IT'S, UM, IT WILL BECOME THAT.
BUT WE'RE TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE BEFORE IT GETS TO THAT POINT.
IT'S ALMOST LIKE I TALKED ABOUT THE POOL PREVENTATIVE.
THE NEXT AND FINAL GROUPING IS WASTEWATER.
PETE, ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON.
SORRY, JUST SKIPPING AHEAD 'CAUSE WE HAD ALL THE INDIVIDUAL SLIDES.
OKAY, SO THIS IS THE SAME CHART THAT COUNCIL SAW EARLIER, BUT PUT IN GRAPH FORM THAT SHOWS BUDGET TO ACTUAL, SO STARTING JUST TO TELL A LITTLE BIT OF THE STORY.
UM, IN 2022 TO 2023, THAT BIG SPIKE WAS THE PURCHASE OF THE WESTERN GATEWAY LAND.
AND THEN THE BUDGET WENT DOWN IN 24 AND THEN WENT BACK UP IN 25 WITH THE ADDITION OF THE PARKING GARAGE.
IF NO QUESTIONS, WE DID SCHEDULE TIME FOR A BREAK BEFORE WE JUMPED IN DECISION PACKAGES.
ALL RIGHT, COUNSEL, I, I, UH, PULLED UP THE TIMELINE AGAIN JUST AS A REMINDER.
SO TODAY IS THE REVIEW OF DECISION PACKAGES AND CIP PROPOSALS.
TOMORROW WE GET TO MEET WITH OUR CITIZENS BUDGET WORK GROUP AND I SAW WE HAVE ED HERE TODAY REPRESENTING THE CITIZENS BUDGET WORK GROUP.
AND WE WILL DO OUR FIRST PASS OF DECISION PACKAGES WITH STAFF AGAIN ON FEBRUARY 25TH IS A REVIEW OF SUSTAINABILITY AND THEN MON YEAH, MONDAY.
[01:25:01]
FIRST WEEK IN MARCH, MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY, WE WILL BEGIN CITY MANAGER REVIEW WITH DEPARTMENTS AND WEIGH IN ON DECISION PACKAGES AS WELL.UM, ON APRIL 15TH IS THE GENERAL PICTURE OF THE BUDGET, WHICH IS INCREASES AND DECREASES OVERALL DECISION PACKAGES.
AND THE CITIZENS BUDGET WORK GROUP WILL, UH, SHARE THEIR FINDINGS AND PRESENTATIONS TO COUNCIL.
AND LASTLY, THE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION APRIL 22ND THROUGH 23RD.
ALRIGHT, UM, WE PUT UP AND WANTED JUST TO REVIEW WITH COUNCIL THE APPROVED FY 26 DECISION PACKAGES.
SO THIS LIST IS ALL APPROVED DECISION PACKAGES FOR FY 26.
IF COUNSEL HAD ANY QUESTIONS OR WANTED TO REVIEW ANY OF THESE, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE PART OF THIS BUDGET CYCLE.
IF I MAY, THE DEAD TREE REMOVAL FOR FIREWISE, WHAT, WHAT'S THAT INTENDED FOR? IS THAT ON PUBLIC PROPERTY? IS THAT OUR OWN? KURT, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT? THIS IS THE DECISION PACKAGE FROM THIS FISCAL YEAR.
I THINK IT'S COULD BE STEVE, SO THIS YEAH, I I CAN SPEAK TO IT.
THIS $35,000 WAS AN ADDITION TO THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR PUBLIC WORKS WITH TREES ON, UM, CITY MAINTAINED.
PUBLIC STREETS THAT WERE DEAD AND NEEDED TO BE REMOVED FOR FIRE EFFORTS.
THAT WAS SEPARATE FROM THE OPERATING BUDGET REQUESTS THAT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HAD, WHICH WAS TO DEVELOP A FIREWISE PROGRAM FOR THE COMMUNITY.
YEAH, THAT'S WITHIN OUR RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THEN MY NEXT QUESTION WAS ON THE LDC UPDATE.
IS THAT A GENERAL UPDATE? ARE WE FOCUSED ON THE SUSTAINABILITY AND HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STUFF OR EVERYTHING? OR PETE, CAN I INTERRUPT YOU? THIS IS THIS YEAR'S PACKAGE, NOT NEXT YEAR'S PACKAGE.
THESE ARE IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET ALREADY APPROVED.
YEAH, THIS IS JUST THE REVIEW OF WHAT YOU I DID THE SAME THING.
BUT I DID IT IN PUBLIC
I THINK PART OF SHOWING OR REMINDING YOU OF WHAT WAS APPROVED IN LAST YEAR'S BUDGET PROCESS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW WAS TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF, UM, THE DOLLAR AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT THAT THE COUNCIL MADE IN ALL OF THESE PROJECTS FOR THE YEAR WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW.
SO THAT YOU COULD COMPARE THAT WITH WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED FOR NEXT YEAR, UM, WHICH STERLING WILL BE SHOWING YOU JUST SORT OF SOME PRELIMINARY TOTALS.
AND ONE CALL THAT I DID WANNA MAKE IS AT THE VERY BOTTOM IS THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONTINGENCY.
WE DID MAKE THIS AS AN ONGOING CONTINGENCY, BUT IF COUNSEL WOULD EVER LIKE TO CHANGE THIS TO ONE TIME, THAT'S WITH WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW OF, OF HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THAT CONTINGENCY.
BUT WE DID BUILD THIS INTO THE FY 27 BUDGET THAT THERE WOULD BE AN ADDIT, NOT AN ADDITIONAL, BUT AN ONGOING $2 MILLION CONTINGENCY FOR HOUSING PURPOSES.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE'LL WANNA TALK ABOUT WHEN TONY PRESENTS TO US ON OUR HOUSING STRATEGY AND SEE WHETHER THAT'S NECESSARY OR NOT.
SO THIS AGAIN IS A HIGH LEVEL, UH, REVIEW OF PROPOSED DECISION PACKAGES THAT STAFF HAVE BROUGHT AND WE CREATED, UH, GROUPINGS JUST TO MAKE THIS EASIER FOR COUNCIL TO VIEW, UM, HOW WE BUCKETED THESE.
SO ON THIS PAST SLIDE, WE WENT AND LOOKED AT ALL THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF DECISION PACKAGES AND THEN PUT THEM INTO ONE OF FOUR GROUPINGS.
SO I, THERE'S A LOT GOING ON ON THE SLIDE, SO I JUST WANT TO TAKE TIME, UH, TO WALK COUNCIL THROUGH WHAT THIS IS.
SO YOU HAVE DIFFERENT, UM, COLUMN HEADERS.
SO THE FIRST COLUMN HEADER IS THE FY 26 PRIOR YEAR APPROVED, AND THEN THE SECOND IS FY 27 PROPOSED.
AND UNDERNEATH BOTH OF THESE GROUPINGS IS BROKEN OUT WHAT WAS A ONE-TIME EXPENDITURE VERSUS ONGOING.
SO IF WE LOOK AT FY 26, THE TOTAL APPROVED AMOUNT FOR ONE-TIME EXPENSES WAS 4.2 MILLION AND FOR ONGOING WAS 1.7 MILLION.
LOOKING AT FY 27, THE TOTAL ONE-TIME REQUEST AMOUNT OR PROPOSED IS 2.2 MILLION IN ONGOING OF 873,000.
AND THIS IS BEFORE ANY REVIEW BY THE BUDGET WORK GROUP OR MYSELF.
SO I ASSUME THIS WILL GET FURTHER REFINED DOWN.
AND WE DO WANNA LET YOU KNOW, LIKE WE'RE NOT GOING INTO THE INDIVIDUAL PACKAGES AT THIS POINT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT FINISHED WITH ALL THOSE REVIEWS AND REFINEMENTS AND WE DIDN'T WANT TO BRING YOU SORT OF A DRAFT AND THEN BRING YOU ANOTHER,
[01:30:01]
ANOTHER MORE, YOU KNOW, HERE'S WHAT THE CITIZEN BUDGET WORK GROUP WANTS.HERE'S WHAT ANNETTE RECOMMENDS, AND THEN HAVE YOU GOING, WAIT, THIS IS NOTHING LIKE WHAT WE SAW BEFORE, SO THAT'S WHY YOU'RE GETTING JUST MORE OF A 40,000 FOOT OVERVIEW.
SO THE FIRST GROUPING, WE DID BUY EQUIPMENT, VEHICLES AND UPGRADES.
SO IN FY 26 THERE WAS A TOTAL REQUEST OF 367,000 IN ONE-TIME EXPENDITURES.
AND IN FY 27 WE HAVE, UM, PUBLIC WORKS AND POLICE REQUESTING A TOTAL OF 734,000.
AND THIS IS A GROUPING OF EQUIPMENT, VEHICLES AND UPGRADES, WHICH WE WILL GET INTO THOSE, UH, SPECIFICS IN APRIL.
THE NEXT GROUPING IS PERSONNEL.
THE NEXT GROUPING IS PERSONNEL.
SO IN FY 26, UM, THERE WAS A LARGE, UH, REQUEST BY POLICE FOR, I BELIEVE IT WAS 10 AND A HALF FTES.
SO WE HAVE, UM, IN ONE TIME REQUESTS 1.3 MILLION AND THEN AN ONGOING 1.5 MILLION FOR FY 27.
WE HAVE ONE TIME REQUEST OF 37,000, AN ONGOING OF 320,000 ACROSS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY OR IT COURT, UH, PUBLIC WORKS AND A ONE TIME ASK BY SUSTAINABILITY.
SO COULD YOU GO BACK TO THAT PAGE? SO ARE THEY ALL BEING HIRED IN THE, ARE ARE THE TOP TWO, 6.2 AND 6.6 BEING HIRED IN JUNE OF 2028?
I KNOW, BUT THE ONE TIME STILL INCLUDE NO, THE, THE ONE TIME PLUS THE ONGOING IS THE SALARY AND ALL THE ACC MALL IF YOU WILL.
WHAT THE 6,200? THE 6,200 IS LIKE THE IT REQUIREMENTS FOR A POSITION.
WHEREAS THE 86,000 WOULD BE THE ONGOING COST OF THAT HUMAN.
SO THERE'S CONSIDERABLE PEOPLE IN THERE.
THEN I THINK THAT TOTAL REQUESTS IS 2.75 AS OPPOSED TO LAST YEAR'S WAS HOW MANY? I THINK IT WAS 11 AND A HALF THAT I
'CAUSE WE INCREASED ONE POSITION FROM 50% FULL TIME AND THEY KNOW THAT WE'VE BASICALLY SAID ADD ONE MINUS ONE.
THE NEXT GROUPING IS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, STUDIES AND SOFTWARE.
IN FY 26, THE ONE TIME EXPENDITURES WERE 486,500 AND ONGOING COSTS OF 22,800.
UM, THESE LIST CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, BUT THIS WAS, UM, THE ECIS GRANTS MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE.
UH, FOR FY 27, WE HAVE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, STUDIES AND SOFTWARE, A TOTAL ASK OF 520,000 IN ONE TIME EXPENDITURES IN ONGOING OF 33,000.
AND IN THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, THIS LISTS, UM, WELL, I I WON'T GET INTO SPECIFICS, BUT THAT HAS TO DO WITH A, A WEBSITE.
THE NEXT IS PROGRAM AND INITIATIVES.
IN FY 26, WE HAD A TOTAL ONETIME REQUEST OF 2000002.1 MILLION IN ONGOING REQUEST OF 235,000.
WHAT IS THAT FOR FY 27? THE ONETIME REQUEST IS 869,000 IN ONGOING 516,200.
THIS IS WHAT WE HAD PREPARED FOR DECISION BACK.
AND I'M NOT REALLY AS MUCH A QUESTION, BUT AN OBSERVATION.
I'M NOT FINDING THIS USEFUL, WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW.
UM, I APPRECIATE WHOLEHEARTEDLY THAT WE'RE TRYING SOME NEW THINGS AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS.
A HUNDRED PERCENT SUPPORT THAT.
AND SO I'M NOT DISAPPOINTED OR ANYTHING, BUT I JUST DON'T FIND WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW HELPFUL AT ALL BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO GIVE US THE DETAIL OF WHAT'S IN THERE.
SO I, I MEAN, UNLESS JUST THE OVERALL TOTAL NUMBERS JUST LOOKED LIKE SOMETHING INSANELY OUTRAGEOUS IN WHICH WE, YOU KNOW, BARFED ALL OVER IT.
I DON'T KNOW WHY WE'RE DOING THIS.
LIKE I, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT GETTING ANY FEEDBACK FROM US AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS THAT'S IN THERE.
AND, AND I DO LOOK FORWARD TO THE BUDGET WORKING GROUP'S INPUT TO US AS WELL AS THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION.
SO I'M JUST NOT SEEING HOW THIS DOES ANYTHING FOR US.
[01:35:01]
THAT'S MY HONEST OBSERVATION AT THE MOMENT.'CAUSE THAT PART'S ALMOST OVER
WELL, IT'S WHY I, I'VE WAITED TILL NOW TO SAY THAT 'CAUSE WE'RE AT THE END OF THIS, SO YEAH, IT'S, IT'S A GOOD POINT.
WHEN WE PUT TOGETHER THE BUDGET CALENDAR THIS YEAR, WE REALIZED THAT BY, UM, DELIVERING DECISION PACKAGES AT THIS SPECIFIC WORK SESSION, IT WOULD BE BEFORE THE CITIZENS' BUDGET WORK GROUP GOT TO WEIGH IN AND THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE GROUP GOT TO WEIGH IN.
SO THAT'S WHY WE PUT IN THIS HIGH LEVEL AMOUNT.
BUT I THINK FOR NEXT YEAR'S, UH, BUDGET CALENDAR, WE'LL MAKE CHANGES SO THAT THIS COMES AT A TIME AFTER THE GROUPS HAVE REVIEWED.
HOPEFULLY EACH YEAR YOU'LL GET LIKE AN IMPROVED ITERATION OF THE BUDGET PROCESS AND YOU KNOW, AND THEN SOMEDAY IT'LL BE PERFECT.
AGAIN, MY HAT'S OFF TO YOU FOR TRYING SOMETHING NEW.
RIGHT? I JUST DON'T THINK THIS PROVIDES ANY VALUE TO ANY OF US RIGHT NOW.
YOU JUST CREATED SLIDES THAT WERE JUST LIKE, OKAY.
'CAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT ANY OF THE STUFF IS.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT A SNOWPLOW FOR ME TO REACT TO AND GO, WHY THE HECK ARE WE, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT BUYING A SNOWPLOW ON A 60 DEGREE DAY? RIGHT.
IT WAS USEFUL IN, IN THAT YEAR IN WHICH WE HAD A LOT OF SNOW.
IT WAS THAT ONE YEAR, BUT IT WAS REMOVABLE.
AND THEN WHAT DO YOU DO? WELL, THANK YOU COUNSEL.
THIS IS WHAT WE HAD PRESENTED TODAY FOR DECISION PACKAGES.
CAN APOLOGIZE, THERE'S NOT MORE DETAIL, BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THERE WAS, UH, APPROPRIATE WAY IN BEFORE WE BROUGHT YOU THE COMPLETE PICTURE.
AND I'LL JUST LEAVE THIS UP HERE.
UM, CAN TURN ANY TIME TO COUNSEL FOR ANY QUESTIONS THEY'D LIKE OR ANY DIRECTION FOR STAFF.
UH, BUT AGAIN, THIS IS THE CALENDAR FOR THE NEXT, UH, FEW MONTHS.
THE NEXT UPCOMING THAT WILL PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT WEIGH IN WILL BE TOMORROW WITH THE CITIZENS BUDGET WORK GROUP AND THEN THE FIRST WEEK IN MARCH WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE REVIEW.
IF I MIGHT SUMMARIZE, UM, WHAT WE'RE DOING WHEN WITH OUR WORK WITH THE STAFF INTERNALLY IN DEVELOPING ALL OF THIS, INCLUDING AS A ZERO BASED BUDGET, IS AGAIN FOLLOWING OR ADHERING TO, I BELIEVE IS THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION, WHICH IS VERY CONSERVATIVE REVENUE ESTIMATES, NO NEW SERVICES OR PROGRAMS. UM, ONLY CRITICAL THINGS THAT NEED TO BE ADDED IN AS A DECISION PACKAGE.
NO NEW POSITIONS UNLESS, OR IF WE NEED SOMETHING, TRY TO LOOK INTERNALLY TO SEE IF THERE'S A SWAP SOMEWHERE ELSE, UM, TO OFFSET IT.
AND WITH THE GOAL OF HAVING AN OVERALL BUDGET, UM, AT OR UNDER A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS TO THE BEST THAT WE CAN.
UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN GUIDING US THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.
SO THAT'S WHY THE AMOUNT OF DECISION PACKAGES, ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY LOWER THAN LAST YEAR'S AND WE'LL CONTINUE REFINING THEM.
UM, AND THEN THE CAPITAL DISCUSSION WAS REALLY USEFUL TODAY.
I HOPE THAT WAS USEFUL TO YOU.
JUST TRYING TO GET OUR ARMS AROUND HOW BEST TO PRIORITIZE THINGS.
UM, SO IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE THOUGHTS ON THAT, AND THANK YOU STERLING FOR ALL THE WORK YOU'VE PUT IN TO TRY TO DO ALL THE ADJUSTMENTS AND FORMATTING FOR US AND TRYING TO CAPTURE IN THE BUDGET SOFTWARE, THE NEW, UH, PRIORITIES.
SO STERLING, YOU DO A WONDERFUL JOB.
OUR NEXT ITEM IS DISCUSSION, POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING IDEAS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDA ITEMS. ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING? NO.
[5. ADJOURNMENT]
THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.THIS MEETING START AT ONE O'CLOCK.