[00:00:02]
TO GO GET OUR EARS. BUT WE KNEW ABOUT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT MY EXCUSES. SO WELCOME TO THE CITY
[Call to Order and Roll Call ]
COUNCIL WORK SESSION. MONDAY, JULY 27TH, 2026. AND IF OUR CITY CLERK WILL PLEASE CALL THE ROLL TO ESTABLISH A QUORUM. GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRANCIS HERE.COUNCILOR RADFORD PRESENT. COUNCILOR DINGMAN HERE. COUNCILOR FREEMAN HERE, COUNCILOR LARSON HERE. COUNCILOR LEE HERE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. YOU HAVE A QUORUM? OKAY.
[CDS, Library]
THE FIRST ITEM ACTUALLY, I'M GOING TO TURN OVER TO COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCIS TO MAKE A MOTION.AND THEN WE CAN GIVE SOME EXPLANATION ON THAT. OKAY. SO I'M GOING TO MOVE TO REMOVE THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA ON THE BASIS OF WE'RE GOING TO WAIT INDEFINITELY, INDEFINITELY. SO I MOVE COUNCIL TABLE INDEFINITELY. THE AGENDA ITEM REGARDING THE OLD FARRELL'S BUILDING AND THE IDAHO FALLS PUBLIC LIBRARY. I'LL SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE TO GIVE A REASON.
WELL, THE REASON IS I'M JUST GOING TO LET COUNCIL KNOW THAT WHEN WE GOT THE PRESENTATION, IT WAS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE LIBRARY BOARD HAD ALREADY SEEN. AND SO THEY SO THEY'RE GOING TO GO BACK WORK WITH THE LIBRARY BOARD. COUNCIL WILL BE PRESENT. OUR ATTORNEY PRESENT AND LIAISON WILL BE PRESENT IN THAT MEETING SO THAT IT ALL. THEY CAN HAVE A LEGAL. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER TO. LET HIM HAVE SOME WATER. SO THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT. LAND AND THE LEASE AND WHAT ARE THEY REALLY PROPOSING AND. AND WHAT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY OR OBLIGATION IN IT? AND IT'S JUST NOT CLEAR ON WHAT WHAT EXACTLY THEY ARE ASKING. WELL, MAYBE THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE ASKING NOW, BUT THAT'S NOT THE SAME THING. THEY ASKED THE LIBRARY. SO WE WILL WE WILL POSTPONE THAT. SO IF, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND TAKING THE THE VOTE ON THAT MOTION, I THINK. WITHOUT THE ATTORNEY WE CAN BE TRUSTED ON THAT ONE. OKAY. OKAY. LARSON. YES.
DINGMANN. YES. FRANCIS. HI. FREEMAN. YES. LEIGH. YES. AND. RADFORD. AYE. MOTION CARRIES.
[City Council, Mayor]
THANK YOU. WHEN IT COMES TO THEN THE CITYWIDE UPDATES, CONCERNS, QUESTIONS AND REPORTS.JUST A REMINDER THAT ON THE SIXTH THERE IS A COUNCIL MEETING. IT'S START TIME IS AT 7 P.M. THIS IS FOR THE WILLOW PLACE. RECONSIDERATION OF THE RECONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE RECONSIDERATION SHOULD SEVEN SEVEN. OKAY. AND THAT'S THE ONLY ITEM THAT IS THE ONLY ITEM. AND WE WILL BE GETTING THAT. ACTUALLY, DIRECTOR SANDER SAID MIDWEEK, SO THAT WE CAN REVIEW. THAT. IS THAT A QUASI QUASI JUDICIAL. IT IS. AND WE HAVE TO HAVE THE SPECIAL MEETING BECAUSE OF THE TIMING REQUIRED. WE HAVE TO HAVE THE SPECIAL MEETING BECAUSE THE. WE HAVE THE BUDGET HEARING THE NEXT WEEK. AND SO TO TRY AND LUMP ALL THE PEOPLE INTO THE BUDGET HEARING. AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER HEARING THAT ACTUALLY HAS TO HAPPEN BECAUSE OF THEIR TIMING. THAT IS ALSO A PUD. SO TO HAVE ALL OF THAT HAPPEN COMING FORWARD. IN AUGUST, WE'VE TRIED TO PUSH THOSE THE SIXTH AND THE 13TH FOR THE BUDGET HEARING AND THE 27TH. GOT IT. THANK YOU. ONE OTHER THING, COUNCIL, IS THAT FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE ON THE AGENDA ON THURSDAY, THERE IS A SECTION BEFORE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT'LL BE, YOU KNOW, LIKE DIRECTOR'S RESPONSE. I'VE BEEN USING IT INFORMALLY AS HAVING THE DIRECTOR COME UP.
AND FOR EXAMPLE, THE FLOCK CAMERAS, WE KNEW THAT WE WERE DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT. BUT BEFORE THE PUBLIC CAME AND GAVE PUBLIC COMMENT, WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO SAY, OH, WE'RE LOOKING AT CHANGING THE CONTRACT. SO THERE WILL BE A CHANCE FOR DIRECTORS WHO HAVE EITHER PROACTIVELY OR HAVE CREATED SOLUTIONS FOR THINGS THAT THEY HAVE, HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP DURING PUBLIC COMMENT THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ON THE PUBLIC RECORD AS WELL. IT CERTAINLY NOT A TIME FOR A HE SAID, SHE SAID, BUT MORE OF LETTING COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC
[00:05:05]
KNOW THE SOLUTIONS BEING TAKEN TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE COME UP DURING OUR PUBLIC COMMENT, OR ALSO THEN THINGS THAT THEY SEE COMING DOWN THE PIPE THAT THEY MIGHT WANT COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC TO KNOW ABOUT PRIOR TO IT HITTING A WORK SESSION OR COUNCIL MEETING. SO THAT'LL BE THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. AND YOU'LL SEE THAT ON THE AGENDA PRIOR TO[Legal]
PUBLIC DISCUSSION. OTHER THAN THAT, IF WE WANT TO START WITH COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCIS. YES. SO FIRST, BACK TO THE ALCOHOL ORDINANCE. I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE SEPARATE THE SERVER REQUIREMENT, SERVER TRAINING REQUIREMENT AND. THAT WAY IT WOULD GIVE A CHANCE FOR THE POLICE TO DO SEVERAL OF THE NO COST TRAININGS BEFORE THE HOLIDAY SEASON FOR THE VARIOUS BUSINESSES. WE'LL GET THAT PASSED RIGHT AWAY. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET WHAT I NEED.IS THERE A GENERAL NOD OF THE HEAD TO GO AHEAD AND BRING THAT FORWARD AS A WORK SESSION ON THE 10TH TO LOOK AT, AND THEN WE WOULD VOTE ON IT ON AUGUST 27TH. AND THE REASON FOR THE TWO WEEKS OR EVEN MORE, WELL, TWO WEEKS IS THAT THAT WAY, IF THERE'S SOME SPECIFIC ELEMENT OF IT THAT YOU THINK NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED, WE HAVE TIME TO TALK TO THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND THEN WE'RE NOT GOING TO, I DON'T KNOW, TRY TO HEAD OFF WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE. SO ANYWAY, IS IT THAT'LL MAKE THE SEPARATION. THAT'S I DON'T GET TO ASK US. WHAT'S THAT? I DON'T THINK THAT THE ASK US. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS JUST THIS IS JUST THE SERVER TRAINING. YES. THIS WAS NOT A DECISION FOR FOR LICENSE HOLDERS. YEAH. OKAY. AND THEN WE'RE LEAVING THE CONSOLIDATED DRAFT WORK. IT IS. THERE'S A LOT THAT CAN BE DONE AND REORGANIZING AND IMPROVING IT. AND COUNCILOR DINGMAN AND I HAVE STARTED DIGGING INTO THAT.
AND WE'LL BE WORKING WITH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL WEEKS. SO IT'LL BE A WHILE BEFORE WE CAN COME BACK WITH THAT. BUT THE ORDINANCE THAT WE GET IT DONE NOW THAT WHERE WE'RE HEADED, I THINK. OKAY. WE ALSO HAD TALKED BEFORE AND WE HAVEN'T GOT IT YET FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. BUT IS ARE YOU WILLING TO LOOK AT ALLOWING BEER AND WINE BUSINESSES, LOUNGES, WHATEVER WE WANT TO CALL THEM IN LC ZONE? WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE, BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD ANYTHING BROUGHT FORWARD. IT WOULD JUST BE ANOTHER PERMIT THING UNDER THE LC ZONE. RELATING BACK TO THE ONE BUSINESS THAT WANTED TO ADD IT TO THEIR HEALTH SPA. BUSINESS PLAN, AND IT WAS DENIED ON THE BASIS OF ZONING.
AND I WONDERED, IS IT WORTH LOOKING AT? YES. I THOUGHT THAT WAS ODD BECAUSE IT WAS ON BOTH.
IT WAS BORDERED ON LC AND IT BORDERED A NEIGHBORHOOD. YEAH. ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD SIDE. BUT IT COULD HAVE BEEN LOOKED AT. I'M OPEN TO IT ANYWAY. LOOK, IF IT'S OKAY. YEAH, I THINK WE JUST. OKAY. AND THEN THE LAST. THERE ARE TWO OTHER THINGS. QUICK. JUST A REMINDER, PLEASE.
ON JULY 28TH AT THE FRIENDSHIP GARDEN, THERE'S A DEDICATION OF A SIGN ABOUT THE FRIENDSHIP GARDEN AND THE SISTER CITIES. AND MAYOR, MRS. YAMADA, THE WIFE OF THE MAYOR OF TOKAIMURA, WILL BE THERE ESPECIALLY FOR THAT EVENT. IF ANYBODY CAN COMMENT WOULD BE GOOD. AND LASTLY, AUGUST 4TH IS NATIONAL NIGHT OUT FOR THE POLICE. ISN'T IT TOUGHEST, THE TOUGHEST, THE TOUGHEST. AND WE'RE WORKING ON MAYBE THE MAYOR DOING A PROCLAMATION SUPPORTING COMMUNITY POLICING AS A PART OF WHAT WE'RE DOING AT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. I WOULD JUST SAY WE DID THE FARMER'S MARKET AND THAT WENT WELL. I THOUGHT IT WAS MUCH BETTER SITUATED WHERE WE WERE NEXT TO THE FARMER'S MARKET INFORMATION BOOTH, AND WE HAD A TENT AND A TABLE AND PEOPLE DID COME UP FOR IT. AND YOU WILL SEND US, MARGARET, WHICH WEEKENDS, RIGHT? YEAH.
AND WE CAN KIND OF ROTATE THROUGH OR NOT. HAVE WE DID THE, THE MAPS WERE POPULAR FOR THE ACTIVITIES ALONG THE RIVER AND THE PADDLING GUIDE. AND WE RAN OUT OF THOSE TRYING TO PASS OUT THE CONTACT FROM THE CITY CARDS. SOME PEOPLE WERE LIKE, I DON'T, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S ABOUT A 5050 CHANCE THEY'LL COME. SO SOME PEOPLE STILL TOOK THEM EITHER WAY, BECAUSE THEY DO DRIVE AROUND AND WANT THE CONSTRUCTION. BUT WE HAD MORE OF THOSE. THERE WAS PLENTY OF
[00:10:01]
THOSE LEFT. AND THEN THE FARMER'S MARKET CARDS WERE NICE AND THAT WE DID HANDLE THAT.OKAY. WE HAVE A LIMITED NUMBER OF THOSE KAYAKING PADDLE BOARD GUIDES, BUT IT IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. SO I'LL REACH OUT TO SARAH WHEN SHE GETS BACK IN THE OFFICE. AND MAYBE WE CAN EVEN DO A CARD WITH A QR CODE OR SOMETHING THAT TAKES PEOPLE TO IT ELECTRONICALLY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT IT IS A REALLY, REALLY NICE PUBLICATION AND HIGHLIGHTS OUR RIVER. YEAH. BUT ANYTHING LIKE THOSE, I MEAN, ANYTHING WE CAN GIVE OUT. COUNCILMEMBER, I DON'T ANYTHING AT THIS TIME. NOTHING. EVERYTHING. I JUST MENTIONED SOMETHING THAT PJ BROUGHT UP TO ME WHEN I CAME IN THE ROOM ABOUT. WE GOT LIKE DOUBLE THE ATHLETES WITH THE COWBOYS AND COWGIRLS COMING FOR THE RODEO THIS YEAR. AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS A SCHEDULING, JUST THE WAY IT FELL IN, BUT IT'S VERY GOING TO BE VERY WELL ATTENDED. ALSO, JUST A NOTE, I KNOW YOU HEARD ABOUT THIS, BUT THE DRONE STARTED FLYING TODAY. SO IF YOU HEAR ABOUT THAT, I HOPE YOU'RE UP TO SPEED ON IT. WE'RE NOT SPYING ON PEOPLE. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I GOT. I DON'T NEED IT ON THERE. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO THESE. ACTUALLY, I'M PASSING THESE AROUND. I'LL. I'LL GIVE JIM HIS. I THINK I MIGHT HAVE ALREADY GIVEN YOU ONE, BUT I. THESE ACTUALLY CAME FROM OUR CITY CLERK. NOT OUR CITY CLERK. OUR DEPUTY CITY CLERK. SHE WORKED WITH JEFF BRODIN. HE IS THE IDAHO STATE PATROL WHO DOES. HE'S THE ALCOHOL INSPECTOR. AND SO THIS IS THE STATE CODE IN PICTURES, I THINK IS THE BEST WAY TO SAY IT. SO THAT IF THERE IS, IT'S LIKE, WHAT IS WHAT ARE WHAT ARE PEOPLE ALLOWED TO DO? WHAT ARE THEY NOT ALLOWED TO DO? IT'S THE I JUST THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE HANDY. AS WE CONTINUE FIELDING QUESTIONS ABOUT ALCOHOL, YOU KNOW, SPECIFICALLY WHETHER WE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO SHUT DOWN PEOPLE'S PRIVATE RESIDENCES. I KNOW WE HAD AN EMAIL FROM HIM, BUT BUT I REALLY WANT TO THANK HIM. HE IS THE DETECTIVE FROM IDAHO STATE POLICE. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY NEEDS TO SEE HIS BADGE, BUT HERE IT IS. HE DID PUT THAT FORWARD AS IS, YOU KNOW, TO SAY THAT THIS WAS FROM HIM. AND IT IS JUST KIND OF ADDING CLARITY FROM ALL OF THE CONFUSION THAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING AROUND THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION. SO THERE'S THAT. AND I WANTED TO POST THIS SOMEWHERE FOR PEOPLE LIKE FOR THE PUBLIC TO ACCESS, BECAUSE THIS I THINK IS A VERY HELPFUL FLOWCHART. IT'S VERY HELPFUL. IT'S LIKE, YES, NO.
AND THEN YEP. SO I DO THINK THAT THAT IT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT WE WILL PUSH FORWARD. AND THEN AS YOU CONTINUE TO WORK ON IT, WE CAN ALWAYS REFERENCE BACK TO IT. IT'S LIKE THIS IS IN OUR CODE. THIS ISN'T IN OUR CODE. THIS IS HOW THIS IS CONTROLLED BY THE STATE. SO OTHER THAN THAT, WE ARE READY TO MOVE ON TO LEGAL TO TAKE US THROUGH THE DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. AND I PROBABLY I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THIS. SHOULD HAVE LET BROOKS KNOW THAT WE ARE 45 MINUTES AHEAD OF SCHEDULE. WHICH NEVER HAPPENS. THANK YOU MARGARET. I APOLOGIZE FOR MY COUGHING FIT OVER THE WEEKEND. SO. THIS SHOULD BE GOOD. YEAH.
SURE. ALL RIGHT. SO JUST TO JOG YOUR MEMORY, WE DISCUSSED ON MAY 4TH OF THIS YEAR, WE DISCUSSED POTENTIAL CHANGES TO OUR ORDINANCES TO ALLOW BUILDING THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TO ENFORCE CERTAIN PARTS OF THE BUILDING CODE, SPECIFICALLY TO ALLOW OR TO PROHIBIT THE OCCUPYING OF A STRUCTURE OR A BUILDING WITHOUT THAT HAS NOT YET HAD A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. AND THEN SECOND. TO ALLOW THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER OR DO NOT OCCUPY ORDER. IF A PERSON BOTH CONDUCTS CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT A PERMIT AND IN DOING SO, VIOLATES ONE OF THE BUILDING CODES. RIGHT? AND SO WE DISCUSSED THIS BACK IN MAY
[00:15:08]
4TH. AT THAT TIME, I WAS GIVEN INSTRUCTION FROM COUNCIL ABOUT SOME CHANGES TO MAKE. SO I'LL BRIEFLY REVIEW THOSE. BEFORE I GO FURTHER, I APOLOGIZE. I DIDN'T NOTICE UNTIL THIS MORNING THAT THE ORDINANCE WAS NOT ATTACHED TO YOUR PACKET. YOUR WORK SESSION PACKET. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. BUT I DID PRINT OUT A COPY RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU. OKAY. SO BACK ON MAY 4TH, WE HAD WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THE IDEA AND I WAS INSTRUCTED TO ADD THE IDEA THAT PERSON MUST KNOW THAT A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS REQUIRED BEFORE WE CAN CHARGE THEM WITHIN A FRACTION. I ORIGINALLY MADE THAT CHANGE TO ONE OF THE PRIOR DRAFTS, BUT AS WE'LL DISCUSS LATER, I GOT ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK FROM THE MAYOR ABOUT SOME ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT NEEDED TO CHANGE. AND SO I. SO IT'S BEEN REPLACED. THE KNOWLEDGE, THE KNOWLEDGE REQUIREMENT HAS NOW BEEN REPLACED BY A NOTICE REQUIREMENT. THEY HAVE TO HAVE ACTUALLY GOTTEN NOTICE FROM THE BUILDING OFFICIAL THAT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. AND THEN IT'S NOT UNTIL IF THEY CONTINUE OCCUPYING AFTER THAT NOTICE FOR SEVEN DAYS, THEN IT'S AN INFRACTION. THE PRIOR VERSION JUST HAD IT WAS RIGHT OFF THE BAT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY KNEW THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO GET ONE AND THEY WERE OCCUPYING IT, NONETHELESS, IT WAS AN INFRACTION AUTOMATICALLY. SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE REVISED IT TO HAVE A SEVEN DAY GRACE PERIOD, BASICALLY WHERE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL HANDS THEM A NOTICE SAYING, HEY, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE OCCUPYING THIS STRUCTURE. AND IF THE BUILDING'S BUILDING OFFICIAL COMES BACK SEVEN DAYS LATER AND THEY'RE STILL OCCUPYING IT, THEN THEN IT WOULD BE AN INFRACTION. BUT IT'S NOT AN INFRACTION FROM THE GET GO. BUT THAT THAT NOBODY GOT TO GET THEIR OR THEY GO GET THEIR. THAT'S WHY THE SEVEN DAYS. SO THAT THEN OKAY, IT'S LIKE, OH, I'LL GO DOWN TO THE CITY GETTING TIME TO GET IN COMPLIANCE, GET THEM, GIVE THEM A WHILE TO GO GET IT. YEAH, APPLY FOR IT. BUT ESSENTIALLY THE HAVING THE NOTICE THAT PROVIDES THE KNOWING PART, RIGHT? SO WE DIDN'T NEED TO RE-ARTICULATE THE THESPIAN THAT THEY KNEW WHAT WAS REQUIRED. SO THE NOTICE PROVIDES THEM WITH.ANOTHER CHANGE THAT WAS DIRECTED TO MAKE IS THAT THE MR. STANDARD DIRECTOR STANDARD WOULD BE NOTIFIED ANYTIME THE BUILDING OFFICIAL ISSUED A DO NOT OCCUPY OR STOP WORK NOTICE OR OR A NOTICE THAT THEY CAN'T BE OCCUPIED DUE TO LACK OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
ANOTHER CHANGE. WAS THAT. SO FOR CERTAIN. SO WHEN THERE'S A YOU KNOW, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL DISCOVERS A A VIOLATION OF THE BUILDING CODE AND IT WASN'T A PERMIT, A BUILDING PERMIT. THEN TYPICALLY. YOU KNOW, THERE'S A PROCESS THAT'S OUTLINED IN THE ORDINANCE. THEY'VE GOT TO STOP WORK. THEY'VE GOT TO START APPLYING FOR BUILDING PERMITS. BUT IF AFTER RECEIVING THAT NOTICE OF LIKE, HEY, YOU'VE GOT TO STOP WORK, IF THEY CONTINUE TO CONSTRUCT OR ALTER OR REPAIR THE STRUCTURE, THEN TYPICALLY THEN THE FIRST FIRST OFFENSE IS AN INFRACTION. UNLESS THE BUILDING OFFICIAL DEEMS THE VIOLATION THAT, YOU KNOW, HAD BEEN THE WHOLE BASIS FOR WHY THEY DID THE STOP WORK NOTICE IN THE BEGINNING, IF THAT VIOLATION CREATES AN IMMEDIATE FIRE RISK OR LIFE SAFETY HAZARD, THEN IT AUTOMATICALLY BECOMES A MISDEMEANOR FOR THEM TO CONTINUE WORKING ON IT. AND THEN WHAT THE DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL WAS, IS TO ALSO ALLOW THE FIRE MARSHAL TO MAKE THAT DECISION AS WELL. SO IF THE FIRE IF SO, NOW IT'S IF EITHER THE BUILDING OFFICIAL OR THE FIRE MARSHAL SAYS, HEY, THAT THAT THAT VIOLATION WHEN THEY VIOLATED THE BUILDING CODE THAT PRESENTED AN IMMEDIATE FIRE RISK OR LIFE LIFE SAFETY RISK, THEN IT ESCALATES TO A MISDEMEANOR. SO ARE THEY ARE THEY TOLD THAT WHEN IT'S ISSUED? SO WOULD THEY BE TOLD THIS RISES FROM THAT LEVEL? THAT WOULD BE DEFERRED TO IT'S NOT ARTICULATED IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING IT WOULD PROBABLY BE GOOD PRACTICE TO DO BECAUSE I THINK IF IF YOU GIVE THEM THE NOTICE AND DON'T TELL THEM THAT, AND THEN YOU COME BACK A WEEK LATER AND TELL THEM THAT THAT OH, BY THE WAY, IT RISES TO THE LEVEL OF FIRE RISK OR LIFE SAFETY, LIFE SAFETY. BUT WE DIDN'T TELL YOU THAT A WEEK AGO. YEAH, WE WOULD WE WOULD PUT THAT ALL THIS INFORMATION WHEN WE ACTUALLY DO THAT. OKAY. AND THEN ACTUALLY, NOW THAT I THINK ABOUT IT, THAT HAS TO DO WITH ANOTHER CHANGE THAT THE MAYOR HAD REQUESTED IS AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT LATER, THAT IT DO NOT OCCUPY. SO A STOP WORK NOTICE CAN BE ISSUED WHENEVER THERE'S A VIOLATION OF THE BUILDING CODE. AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE A PERMIT. BUT IN ADDITION TO THAT, DO NOT OCCUPY ORDERS CAN BE ISSUED, BUT WE'VE SPECIFIED THAT IT'S ONLY IF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL SAYS IT'S A THAT THE VIOLATION CONSTITUTES AN IMMEDIATE HAZARD TO THE FIRE LIFE, SAFETY, THAT SORT OF THING. SO THAT THAT WOULD ALSO
[00:20:03]
BE A REINFORCEMENT OF. THAT IS IF THEY HAVE A DO NOT OCCUPY ORDER, DO THEY HAVE TO ARTICULATE. THEY HAVE TO ARTICULATE THE HAZARD THAT WOULD BE A PART OF THAT. SO THAT WOULD BE INCIDENTAL. BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD PRACTICE IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT THAT THEY DEEM THERE'S IMMEDIATE HAZARD, BUT THEY DON'T ISSUE A DO NOT OCCUPY ORDER THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY SHOULD STILL ARTICULATE. THAT KIND OF A QUESTION UNDER VIOLATIONS WHERE THEY HAVE LANGUAGE REGARDING THE MISDEMEANOR THAT YOU MENTIONED HERE, THE PUNISHABLE BY A FINE OF $300 OR 90 DAYS OF JAIL. IS THAT JUST STANDARD MISDEMEANOR LANGUAGE FOR STATE? NO. WELL, OKAY, SO UNDER THE CITY. SO IF WE JUST ARE SILENT AS TO PENALTIES. YEAH. THE CITY'S RULES ARE THAT IT'S A DEFAULT $1,000 FINE, UP TO $1,000 FINE AND SIX MONTHS IN JAIL. RIGHT. AND THAT'S HOW IT ORIGINALLY HAD BEEN BACK WHEN WE TALKED ON MAY 4TH. HOWEVER, SINCE THEN, I'VE BECOME AWARE THAT THE STATE CODE, IF YOU WILLFULLY.YOU KNOW, DO SOME SORT OF CONSTRUCTION THAT REQUIRES A PERMIT AND YOU DIDN'T GET A PERMIT AND YOU WILLFULLY FAIL TO GET A PERMIT, IT'S A MISDEMEANOR FROM THE GET GO, RIGHT? AND THAT MISDEMEANOR HAS THOSE SAME PENALTIES THAT I PUT HERE 90 DAYS IN JAIL, $300 FINE MAXIMUMS. SO I FIGURED, AND THAT WAS NOT SOMETHING I WAS DIRECTED TO DO BY ANYBODY. I JUST FIGURED IT WAS A GOOD IDEA FOR OUR MISDEMEANOR MISDEMEANOR PENALTIES TO MATCH MATCH THE STATE MISDEMEANOR PENALTIES FOR THIS SPECIFIC SORT OF ISSUE. THANK YOU. AGAIN, I MEAN, YOU'RE FREE TO BECAUSE THIS IS A DIFFERENT IT'S A DIFFERENT SORT OF VIOLATION. IT'S THE SAME. THERE'S A DIFFERENT SPECIFIC SORT OF VIOLATION. IT'S THE SAME TYPE THOUGH. AS I MENTIONED, I HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE MAYOR ABOUT ADDITIONAL CHANGES ASIDE FROM THE ONES THAT COUNCIL DIRECTED. SO AGAIN, WE DISCUSSED THIS EARLIER FOR FIRST OFFENSE. THIS IS FOR.
FAILURE TO GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. AGAIN, THERE'S THAT BUILT IN GRACE PERIOD OF SEVEN DAYS FOR THE FIRST OFFENSE. IT DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY GO STRAIGHT TO AN INFRACTION.
THERE'S A PERIOD OF SEVEN DAYS WHERE THEY CAN EITHER DISCONTINUE OCCUPANCY OR GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, AFTER WHICH THEN IT WOULD BECOME AN INFRACTION PREVIOUSLY. SO THAT'S FOR THE FIRST OFFENSE, FOR SECOND OFFENSE PREVIOUSLY ESCALATED TO A MISDEMEANOR WITHIN SEVEN DAYS. WE'VE CHANGED THAT TO 14 DAYS. WE OTHERWISE WOULD BE THE SAME AS INFRACTION. SO IT GIVES THEM AN ADDITIONAL WEEK AND THEN IT THEN THEY HAVE TO COMPLY.
THAT'S A MISDEMEANOR. ANOTHER CHANGE THAT WAS MADE THERE WAS A CONCERN THAT, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY AN OWNER IS CONSTRUCTING A BUILDING. THEY'RE REALLY CLOSE TO GETTING THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THEY'RE PLANNING ON LEASING IT. AND THEN THE, THE LEASES GET A LITTLE BIT EXCITED AND THEY MOVE IN WITHOUT THE OWNER'S KNOWLEDGE, RIGHT? AND THEN WE COME AFTER THE OWNER SAYING, HEY, IT'S OCCUPIED. THERE'S NO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. YOU'RE IN TROUBLE.
SO WHAT WE DID IS WE ADDED TO THE LANGUAGE THAT THE OWNER MUST KNOWINGLY PERMIT THE OTHER PERSON TO USE A STRUCTURE. SO IF THE OWNER COMES BACK AND SAYS, WELL, I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T GIVE PERMISSION. I DIDN'T ALWAYS SAY IT WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF THE OF THE CODE.
SO THEN WHAT? WELL, THEN NOW THEY ARE ON NOTICE THAT THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT. THE CLOCK STARTS RIGHT NOW AND THEN IT THEN CODY WOULD BE NO FURTHER BUILDING OFFICIAL WOULD SAY, HEY, WELL, THEY ARE IN OCCUPANCY. AND NOW IF YOU CONTINUE THEM, THEN WE'D HAVE A GOOD CASE THAT THEY'RE CONTINUING TO PERMIT THEM. OKAY. ANOTHER CHANGE. SO PART OF IT IS IF THEY CONTINUE RESIDING IN THE STRUCTURE, OCCUPYING THE STRUCTURE, WHERE THERE'S NO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, WE CHANGED. ORIGINALLY IT WAS THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WAS AUTHORIZED TO SEEK INJUNCTIVE RELIEF. CHANGE THAT TO THE CITY. AS THE CITY ENTITY IS AUTHORIZED TO SEEK INJUNCTIVE RELIEF. WE ALSO CLARIFIED THAT WE COULD ONLY SEEK. CITY CAN ONLY SEEK INJUNCTIVE RELIEF IF THE PERSON'S BEEN THERE 14 DAYS OR LONGER. SO IT'S NOT AN IMMEDIATE PROCESS WE CAN START.
AND THIS IS SOMETHING WE JUST COVERED WITH COUNCIL MEMBER LEE, THAT THE PENALTIES WERE CHANGED TO MATCH THE IDAHO CODE FOR A SIMILAR SORT OF ISSUE. ALL RIGHT. AND AGAIN, I TOUCHED ON THIS A LITTLE EARLIER, PREVIOUSLY, THE WAY THAT IT WAS WORDED MADE IT SOUND LIKE THE ISSUANCE OF A DO NOT OCCUPY ORDER WOULD HAVE BEEN AUTOMATIC IN THE EVENT THAT THERE WAS A BUILDING CODE VIOLATION FOUND AND THERE WAS NO BUILDING PERMIT. AND NOW IT'S BEEN CLARIFIED THAT THAT BUILDING OFFICIAL CAN'T ISSUE A DO NOT OCCUPY ORDER UNLESS THERE'S AN
[00:25:06]
IMMEDIATE HAZARD, FIRE RISK OR LIFE SAFETY ISSUE. AND. AGAIN, THE REASONING BEHIND THAT, IT JUST FOR ME, IT FELT LIKE IF SOMEONE IS LIKE, OH, I CAN DO THIS WORK MYSELF, RIGHT? THEY OPEN THEIR WALL AND THEY FIND LIKE, OH, THIS IS WAY OUT OF MY LEAGUE. THEY DON'T HAVE A PERMIT. WE WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO COME IN, GET THE PERMIT, AND UNLESS AND WHEN THE INSPECTOR COMES OUT, UNLESS THIS IS A MAJOR FIRE HAZARD, THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO RESOLVE IT WITHOUT BEING KICKED OUT OF THEIR HOME. THIS IS JUST KIND OF MORE OF THAT COMMON COMMON SENSE. I THINK THAT WE WOULD. RIGHT? I MEAN, NOT THAT I'M THINKING THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WOULD. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S IN THERE. AND OF COURSE IT WOULD ESCALATE UP TO DIRECTOR STANDARD AS WELL. SO. IT'S THE IDEA TO BE CLEAR. YEAH. IF THERE'S A MINOR VIOLATION, THAT'S NOT AN IMMEDIATE HAZARD THAT WE COULDN'T GET YOU A DO NOT ORDER SO THE PERSON WOULDN'T BE KICKED OUT OF THEIR HOME WHILE THEY'RE WAITING TO GET THE PERMITS. SO THAT'S THE IDEA BEHIND THAT. SO THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE. ANY QUESTIONS OR FURTHER REVISIONS.DIRECTOR. CENTER. THE ONLY THING THE ONLY QUESTION THAT I HAD FOR YOU IS IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, AND THIS COULD BE WRONG, IS THAT THERE WAS A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT JUST STARTED OCCUPYING, WHEN THERE WAS A LOT OF GROWTH HAPPENING YEARS AGO, AND THAT THEY STILL DON'T HAVE CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY. THE INTENT IS NOT TO GO BACK AFTER THEM. THIS IS NEW CONSTRUCTION MOVING FORWARD. NEW. OKAY. YEAH. I GUESS TO GET IT ON THE RECORD. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. YEAH. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? OKAY, THEN. THE ONLY DIRECTION, I GUESS. MAYOR, WHEN WOULD YOU LIKE US TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL FOR A VOTE? I THINK WE WOULD JUST BE IN THE NEXT YOU. I MEAN, SOONER RATHER THAN LATER. YOU WANT A THIRD? SO, YEAH, WE COULD IF WE CAN GET IT ON AS IT IS FOR THURSDAY, WE CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN. OKAY. OKAY. I MEAN, THAT'S GET A MEMO AND GET IT GOING. AND THEN WE COULD LOOK IN AND MAYBE EARLY MID-AUGUST WE COULD IF THAT'S TOO SOON OR GIVE THE 13TH. YEAH.
I MEAN, IF YOU WANT TO GET THIS, WHAT I'M SAYING, IF YOU WANT TO GET A MEMO PUT TOGETHER AND WORK IT UP THE CHAIN TODAY, IT WOULD BE JUST FINE TO GET IT ON THURSDAY IF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. YEAH. IF IF NOT, WE CAN WAIT. BUT I THINK WHILE IT'S FRESH ON COUNCIL'S MIND, I DON'T SEE A REASON FOR THIS ONE NOT TO MOVE. OKAY. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT DISCUSSION IS COMING
[Police]
FROM THE POLICE AND IT IS THE BLOCK SAFETY CONTRACT AMENDMENT. SO I THINK OUR CITY ATTORNEY ACTUALLY NEGOTIATED THAT SOME OF. AWESOME SPEAKING VOICE TODAY. MAYOR, SHOULD WE ANNOUNCE AGAIN WHAT YOU ANNOUNCED THE FIRST OF THE LIBRARY. SO. OH YES. IF YOU ARE IF YOU'RE AND I KNOW MARY, IF YOU'RE HERE FOR THE LIBRARY DISCUSSION, WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE LIBRARY WAS NOT WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO US. AND SO WE HAVE REMOVED THAT FROM THE ITEM. BUT OF COURSE, IF YOU'RE STILL HERE FOR THE BUDGET, I'D LOVE TO HAVE YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO ABOUT A MONTH OR SO AGO, WE RECEIVED SOME EMAILS FROM SOME CONCERNED CITIZENS THAT WERE TOOK ISSUE WITH THE FACT THAT THE OUR CURRENT CONTRACT WITH BLOCK ALLOWS FLOP TO USE THE DATA GATHERED FROM THE CAMERAS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR CITY TO TRAIN ITS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM TO BECOME BETTER AGAIN, WHAT THE FLOCK SYSTEM DOES IS IT TAKES A PICTURE OF CARS AS THEY GO BY. IT TAKES A PICTURE OF THE REAR OF THE CAR TO GET THE LICENSE PLATE. JUST A SINGLE PICTURE. IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT A FULL TIME RECORDING VIDEO. AND THEN THE BLOCK SYSTEM HAS AN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE THAT IF OFFICERS MAKE A QUERY AND AGAIN, THERE HAS TO BE HAS TO BE A LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSE OR SOME SORT OF TRAFFIC STUDY PURPOSE FOR MAKING SUCH A QUERY. THEY CAN'T JUST BE QUERYING WILLY NILLY. ONCE THEY MAKE A QUERY, THEN THE AI CAN LOCATE, SAY IF THEY SAY, I'M LOOKING FOR LICENSE PLATE ONE, EIGHT, THREE,[00:30:03]
TEN K OR WHATEVER, THEN THEY CAN, THE AI CAN GO THROUGH AND IT READS THOSE LICENSE PLATES.AND THEN IT SAYS, HEY, HERE'S, HERE'S SOME MATCHES, RIGHT? AND SO WHAT WE WHAT I NEGOTIATED WITH THE ATTORNEY WITH THE FLOCK TEAM IS TO GET RID OF THAT ABILITY FOR FLOCK TO USE OUR DATA THAT WE'RE COLLECTING FROM OUR CAMERAS TO TRAIN THEIR AI. RIGHT? AND SO IT'S A FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD ADDENDUM. ADDENDUM TO THE AGREEMENT. CLERK. MADAM CLERK, IF WE COULD GO DOWN. PERFECT JUST A LITTLE BIT FURTHER. ALL RIGHT. PERFECT. SO SECTION 4.1. THAT'S THE CURRENT SECTION OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF FLOCK SAFETY THAT CURRENTLY ALLOWS FLOCK TO USE OUR CITY GATHERED DATA TO TRAIN THEIR AI. AND SO WE'VE AMENDED IT TO SAY YOU CAN SEE THE UNDERLYING LANGUAGE THERE, PROVIDED THAT FLOCK MAY NOT USE CUSTOMER DATA. THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE DATA GATHERED FROM OUR CAMERAS TO TRAIN OR IMPROVE ANY MACHINE LEARNING OR AI MODELS. AND THEN WE SPECIFICALLY CALL OUT IN SUBSECTION A THERE THAT THEY WILL NOT USE FOOTAGE FOR FROM OUR CUSTOMER, FROM OUR HARDWARE, MEANING OUR CAMERAS TO TRAIN OR IMPROVE ANY MACHINE LEARNING OR AI MODELS. HOWEVER, THEY DID WANT A CARVE OUT. SO IF THEY, THEY MIGHT NEED TO LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, THEY MIGHT BE LIKE, HEY, OUR CAMERA JUST ISN'T CATCHING SOMETHING. AND SO THEY MIGHT LOOK AT SOME OF OUR PICTURES AND SAY, HEY, MAYBE THAT'S USEFUL FEEDBACK. WE NEED TO CHANGE SOMETHING IN OUR ACTUAL HARDWARE, STUFF LIKE THAT. SO THEY REQUESTED, AND I FELT LIKE THAT WAS FAIR FOR THEM TO REQUEST THAT THEY CAN IMPROVE OTHER PRODUCTS AND SERVICES, JUST NOT SPECIFICALLY THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM. OKAY. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH PRETTY MUCH IT. THAT'S THE GIST OF THE AMENDMENT. ANY QUESTIONS? SO IS YOUR SENSE THAT THIS AMENDMENT RESOLVES SOME CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED? YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. I THINK IT'S A CONCERN THEN THAT BY THE CONCERN THAT'S BEEN ARTICULATED BY SOME OF THE CITIZEN COMPLAINTS, IS THAT BY USING OUR DATA TO TRAIN THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM, THAT FLOCK HAS THAT THAT IS A COMMERCIAL PURPOSE ON THE SIDE OF FLOCK, RIGHT? BECAUSE FLOCK BASICALLY HAS A BETTER AI SYSTEM NOW, AND THEN THEY CAN TURN AROUND. AND WITH THAT ENHANCED VALUE, THEY HAVE A BETTER PRODUCT, WHICH MAKES IT MORE ATTRACTIVE FOR MORE CUSTOMERS. AND SO ACCORDING TO THE COMPLAINTS WE'VE BEEN GETTING, THAT CONSTITUTES A COMMERCIAL PURPOSE. AND SO AND NOW I'M NOT NOT MAKING ANY SORT OF ADMISSION, NOT I'M NOT SAYING I AGREE WITH THAT. RIGHT. BUT THE CITY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A WAY OF BEING RESPONSIVE TO THAT CONCERN BY GETTING RID OF THAT ABILITY FOR FLOCK. DO EITHER OF YOU KNOW, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR PUT YOU ON THE SPOT HERE, BUT THE OTHER COMPETITORS OF LOCKHEED, LIKE HOW DO THEY HOW DO THEY BUILD THEIR AI MODELS? IT'S THE SAME WAY. DO YOU KNOW, I CAN GIVE YOU ANY SPECIFIC DATA ON IT, BUT THEY THEY OPERATE RELATIVELY SIMILAR. WE SHOULD NOT COME BACK TO CITY COUNCIL FOR MORE OF A IN DEPTH ANALYSIS OF THREE SEPARATE LICENSE PLATE COMPANIES. SO HOW MANY ARE THERE OUT THERE ROUGHLY THAT ARE RECOGNIZED AS, YOU KNOW, SUFFICIENT PROVIDERS FOR THAT TYPE OF SERVICE? THERE'S THREE BIG ONES. AXON, MOTOROLA AND FLOCK ARE THE THREE BIGGEST, BUT THERE ARE LOTS OF OTHER ONES. WE WENT ANY FURTHER OR DO YOU FEEL LIKE THIS IS AS FAR AS WE WERE GOING TO GO? I PUSHED THEM ON BECAUSE I ORIGINALLY I SAID NO, I PUSHED THEM ON THE BEING ABLE TO USE IT FOR OTHER PRODUCTS AND SERVICES, BUT IT MADE SENSE ONCE THEY EXPLAINED THAT THEY NEEDED TO BE ABLE TO IMPROVE THEIR HARDWARE, LIKE CAMERAS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. SO THAT'S AS FAR AS I COULD GET THEM. AND I ON THAT PARTICULAR, I PARTICULARLY DO LIKE, I MEAN, I KNOW IT'S STILL IN THERE, BUT AS APPLIED TO CUSTOMER AND CUSTOMER DATA, THE DEFINED TERM PERMITTED PURPOSE IN THE FLOCK SAFETY TERMS AND CONDITIONS IS LIMITED TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES AUTHORIZED BY IDAHO CODE 49-1432. I MEAN, THAT'S IT. NOTHING ELSE OTHER THAN WHAT IS AUTHORIZED. THROUGH IDAHO CODE.
SO THAT'S THAT'S WHEN THEY SIGN THIS. THEY WILL HAVE AGREED TO THAT. WELL, THE PERMITTED
[00:35:05]
PURPOSE OF RESTRICTS US IN UNDER THE CONDITIONS WE. SO WE'RE AGREEING THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE IT FOR ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES PURSUANT TO THAT, I DON'T KNOW. YES. FLOCK ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT AS TO THE CUSTOMER AND CUSTOMER DATA, THAT THEY AREN'T GOING TO BE IN VIOLATION OF IDAHO CODE. OKAY. IS THAT NOT HOW YOU READ THAT? SO THE DEFINED TERM PERMITTED PURPOSE. SO IDAHO CODE INDEPENDENTLY REQUIRES THEM NOT TO VIOLATE THE CODE. CORRECT. PERMITTED PURPOSE UNDER THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.OKAY. IT ALSO. RIGHT, RIGHT. SO IT NOT ONLY LIMITS US. SO WE'RE AGREEING TO ONLY DO IT IN COMPLIANCE WITH IDAHO CODE, BUT WE DO HAVE ONE THING FLOCK ALLOWS YOU TO DO IS HAVE RECIPROCAL ACCESS AGREEMENTS. SO SAY POCATELLO. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE FACT OR NOT.
POCATELLO ALSO SUBSCRIBES TO BLOCK SERVICES. WE CAN AGREE WITH POCATELLO TO SAY, HEY, WE'LL SHARE OUR DATA WITH YOU IF YOU SHARE WITH US. AND SO BY PUTTING THIS IN HERE, THAT PERMITTED PURPOSES MEANS JUST LIMITED LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES. THAT WOULD ALSO APPLY TO THOSE END USERS AS WELL. SO SO IF IT'S SOMEBODY OUT OF STATE, LIKE THE SAME IN IDAHO OR SORRY, UTAH, AND THEY'RE SAYING, HEY, WE'D LIKE TO HAVE A MUTUAL ACCESS AGREEMENT, THEN THEY'D BE AGREEING AS AN END USER, THEY HAVE TO ABIDE BY OUR IDAHO CODE. WE'RE ALSO. SO WHEN WE MAKE THOSE AGREEMENTS THAT THEY HAVE TO ACTUALLY SIGN AN AGREEMENT TO ABIDE BY IDAHO CODE WHEN THEY WHEN THEY ACCESS OUR DATA. AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE HEARING A LOT OF TRAFFIC AS I LISTED THESE. AND WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO USE THESE FOR ANY TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS ACCORDING TO STATE LAW. OH YEAH. NOT WELL. OKAY. IF WE'RE INVESTIGATING A CRIME, BUT NOT FOR TRAVEL. YOU CAN'T CHARGE A SPEEDING TICKET, CORRECT? CORRECT. YEAH. AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO STOP THE RUMORS OF THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE NEED TO PEOPLE SAY THAT WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE GETTING CORRECT INFORMATION. THAT'S NOT IT'S NOT IT'S NOT SAYING IT'S NOT SNAPPING A PICTURE. IF YOU'RE RUNNING A RED LIGHT, IT'S NOT SAYING, HEY, LOOK AT THIS PERSON. THAT'S NOT HOW THIS WORKS. THEY HAVE TO HAVE AN INVESTIGATION IN MIND AND SAY, HEY, I'M LOOKING FOR THIS LICENSE PLATE FOR THIS REASON. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
CORRECT, CORRECT. SO WE AS A DEPARTMENT ARE LEARNING AS WELL. SO THERE'S SPECIFIC REASONS.
THE STATE LAW SAYS YOU CAN MAKE THE QUERY. WE HAD NOT GIVEN SPECIFIC DIRECTION ABOUT HOW TO FILL THAT PARTICULAR BLOCK OUT. AND SO WE'VE HAD TO GO BACK AND ASK THE OFFICERS, WHAT DOES THIS YOU WROTE? AND ONE OF THEM THEY WROTE, WOMAN FLIPPED SOMEONE OFF OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT LEAVES THE IMPRESSION THAT ONE OF THE OFFICERS GOT FLIPPED UP OR SOMETHING. IT WAS ACTUALLY A ROAD RAGE INCIDENT THEY WERE INVESTIGATING. SO WE'RE GIVING FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS TO THE OFFICERS TO TO LINK. AND THEY WERE DOING THEIR BEST. AND THIS IS MY FAULT. I SHOULD HAVE GIVEN MORE SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS ABOUT HOW TO FILL THAT BLOCK OUT. THEY WERE, THEY WERE THERE WAS NO PARAMETERS FOR HOW TO FILL IT OUT. THEY WERE DOING THEIR BEST JUST TO WRITE DOWN WHAT THEY WERE DOING. SO WE'VE GONE BACK AND LOOKED AT EACH ONE TO FIND OUT WHAT, WHAT, WHAT THEY PUT IN THERE ACTUALLY MEANT. BUT IN THE FUTURE IT WILL SAY MISDEMEANOR, FELONY. THE SPECIFIC TIE BACK TO WHAT WHAT THE STATE LAW ALLOWS. SO IT'S VERY CLEAR WHEN YOU LOOK AT THOSE REASONS WHY, WHY THEY'RE RUNNING IT. OKAY. I DO HAVE A QUESTION. IS THIS ADDENDUM IDENTIFIES ALL THE RESTRICTIONS ON THEIR USING OUR CUSTOMER DATA. BECAUSE B SAYS BLOCK WILL USE CUSTOMER DATA SOLELY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ADDENDUM.
THAT MEANS THERE'S NO OTHER SECTION IN THE CONTRACT THAT RELATES TO THEIR USE OF CUSTOMER DATA. YEAH, BECAUSE THIS ADDENDUM HAS TO BE SOLELY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ADDENDUM. SO THIS THIS ADDENDUM IT AGAIN IN A PRIOR PROVISION OF ADDENDUM SAYS IF THERE'S A CONFLICT OR INCONSISTENCY BETWEEN THIS ADDENDUM AND THE OTHER AGREEMENTS, THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENTS. SO THIS ONE GOVERNS. SO YEAH, IF THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE IN THE OTHER CONDITIONS THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN USE CUSTOMER DATA FOR, YOU KNOW, TRAINING AI, IT WOULD BE
[00:40:05]
TRUMPED BY THIS AGREEMENT, THIS ADDENDUM THAT SAYS NO FLOCK WOULD BE TO TELL FLOCK, HEY, KNOCK IT OFF, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO USE IT SOLELY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ADDENDUM. SO THEY CAN'T GO BACK AND SAY SOMEWHERE ELSE IN A CONTRACT THAT SAYS, WE CAN DO THIS. NO, NO, NO, THIS IS IT. RIGHT. AND I DID REVIEW THEIR CONTRACT. THIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT TALKED ABOUT FROM FROM WHAT I COULD FIND, IT'S THE ONLY THING THAT TALKS ABOUT AI. SO CAN YOU KIND OF SPEAK TO MAYBE SOME SORT OF LIKE, HOW ARE WE GOING TO AUDIT OR ENSURE THAT THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN? THAT THEY WON'T USE? IS THERE A ROUTE FOR US TO VERIFY THAT THEY'RE NOT USING IT? I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY THE FLOCK TEAM THAT THEY HAVE A PROBABLY IT'S PROBABLY NOT A BUTTON, BUT THEY HAVE A MECHANISM ON THEIR SIDE FOR. MAKING SURE THAT OUR DATA IS NOT INCLUDED IN THEIR AI TRAINING. SO WHAT I COULD DO IS ASK THEM TO VERIFY ONCE WE KIND OF LIKE YOU DID WITH THE TWO FACTOR, SO THAT WE CAN KNOW WHEN THAT'S TURNED ON OR NOT TURNED ON. SO I COULD, I COULD ASK THEM TO VERIFY THAT THEY'VE ACTUALLY FOLLOWED THROUGH WITH THAT. I'LL MAKE A NOTE OF THAT.THANK YOU. OKAY. THIS IS COMING ON THURSDAY. WE'RE GOING TO GET THIS SIGNED AND AND IT'LL COME BEFORE YOU ON THURSDAY FOR A VOTE. OKAY. IF I COULD MAKE JUST MAYBE A SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THIS, WHICH IS HELPFUL. LIKE IF WE HAVE SOMETHING ABOUT LIKE, WHAT DOES THE FLOCK CAMERA ACTUALLY DO? LIKE THERE'S SO MUCH INFORMATION OUT THERE. LIKE IT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD POINT PEOPLE TO, TO SAY, YEAH, THAT'S NOT RIGHT. THIS IS, I THINK, THE MOST TELLING THING, COUNCILMEMBER LEE, IS WHEN YOU ACTUALLY LOOK UP EXACTLY WHAT FLOCK SHOWS YOU AS A POLICE OFFICER, I THINK THAT WOULD BLOW THEIR MINDS BECAUSE YOU THINK THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THEIR FACES, CONTINUE TO GET PEOPLE TO THINK THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY TRACKING THEIR MOVEMENTS, THAT THEY ARE LOOKING AT THEIR FACES. I UNDERSTAND THAT, YEAH, BUT IT COULD GO ALONG WITH THAT FLOWCHART. WHAT I'M SAYING, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. WE'RE USING FACIAL RECOGNITION. I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THAT FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS. FOR FOR THE COUNCIL MEETING. YES. OKAY. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.
OKAY. THANKS FOR EVERYBODY WHO CAME EARLY. WE'RE ON TO FINANCE AND A WRAP UP OF OUR 2627
[Finance]
BUDGET DISCUSSIONS. THE AS MENTIONED EARLIER, THE ACTUAL HEARING IS ON THE 13TH. BUT WE DO HAVE A NOT TO EXCEED DEADLINE TO PUBLISH. SO WE TURN. EVERYONE GETS IT. WE WILL. ARE WE READY? WELL, WE'RE GOING TO WAIT. WE'LL TURN THE TIME OVER TO DIRECTOR ALEXANDER TO GIVE US THE DISCUSSION OF THE ROADMAP. AND THEN. DIRECTION. YEAH. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I'M SO SORRY TO KIND OF TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME HERE. SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE AT THE END OF JANUARY, END OF JULY. SO YEAH. SO THE ROADMAP, AS MAYOR MENTIONED, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED BUDGET ON THURSDAY EVENING. AND WE'LL HAVE A NUMBER FOR YOU ON THAT. AND WE WILL ALSO HAVE OUR PUBLISHED NOTICES IN THE NEWSPAPER TWO WEEKS PRIOR. SO THOSE ARE TWO SATURDAYS PRIOR TO OUR PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH IS ON AUGUST 13TH THIS YEAR. AND SO THOSE ARE READY TO PUBLISH AS SOON AS WE GET SOME FINAL APPROVALS AND AUTHORIZATIONS FROM YOU, COUNCIL. AND WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO HAND IT OVER TO BROOKS TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER OR WHAT SHE HAS PUT TOGETHER SINCE THE LAST TIME WE MET. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO FIRST GO OVER JUST AN OVERALL SUMMARY OF OUR BUDGETED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES AS PROPOSED, WHICH INCLUDE ALL OF THE DEPARTMENT REQUESTS THAT GOT FUNDED THIS LAST WEEK. WE WILL GO OVER THE PROPERTY TAX IMPACTS OF ALL OF THOSE AND THE OVERALL SUMMARY OF THE OVERALL LEVY WE'RE PLANNING TO PROPOSE, AS WELL AS THE IMPACT TO EACH OF THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE GETTING THEIR PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TAX ALLOCATION, AND[00:45:04]
THEN ALSO THE UPDATED IMPACTED PROPERTY TAX OWNERS OR PROPERTY OWNERS. THEN WE'LL GO THROUGH THE DETAIL OF THOSE FUNDED PROJECTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE ALIGN WITH WHAT YOU WERE EXPECTING. TOUCH ON FEES IF YOU HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE FEES RESOLUTION TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES OR QUESTIONS, AND THEN I'LL JUST HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT CAME THROUGH THE BUDGET BOOK SINCE THE LAST YOU'VE SEEN IT. OKAY. SO SO FIRST OFF, IT'S JUST A SUMMARY OF OUR TOTAL PROPOSED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES. SO OUR BUDGETED PROPOSED NEW REVENUES FOR THE YEAR IS 325 MILLION. BUDGETED EXPENDITURES IS 393.5 MILLION, WHICH HAS A DEFICIENCY OF 68 MILLION, WHICH IS COMING OUT OF FUND BALANCE. SO WE HAVE AN ESTIMATED BEGINNING FUND BALANCE OUT OF THERE OF 197 MILLION. THAT IS THEN OFFSET BY CERTAIN RESERVES. WE HAVE RESERVES FOR FUTURE CAPITAL, WHICH IS OUR MERC BALANCES AS WELL AS IN OUR ENTERPRISE FUNDS. THERE'S CAPITAL SAVINGS FROM PAST RATES SO THAT WE CAN FUND THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE UPCOMING. WE ALSO HAVE A RATE STABILIZATION FOR POWER, AND THEN WE HAVE A FEW OTHER RESERVES FOR DEBT SERVICE REQUIRED FOR OUR WASTEWATER DEBT AT THE WITH THE DEQ, THAT'S ABOUT 1,000,079. AND WE HAVE ALSO THE HEALTH AND SELF-INSURANCE RESERVES THAT TOTAL A LITTLE OVER 7 MILLION THERE. BROOKS. WOULD THIS INCLUDE THE CARRYOVER? YES. ALL CARRYOVER IS ALSO 393 INCLUDES ALL CARRYOVER. SO ANY PROJECTS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLETED THIS FISCAL YEAR THAT WERE BUDGETED OR EQUIPMENT ORDERED, THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT'S ALSO INCLUDED AS ROLL FORWARD INTO THIS 393 MILLION. SO GOING INTO A LITTLE BIT OF THE DETAIL ON THE REVENUES HERE, THIS IS A THREE YEAR HISTORY. IT'S OUR 2425 ACTUALS, OUR 2526 ADOPTED BUDGET, AND OUR 2627 PROPOSED BUDGET BY TYPE. SO IT'S THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF REVENUES. WE HAVE TAXES AND FRANCHISE FEES. WITH THE UNFUNDED REQUEST LAST WEEK. THIS IS AN UPDATED NUMBER OF OUR TAXES AND FRANCHISES BEING 55 MILLION.INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES HAVEN'T CHANGED. CHARGES FOR SERVICES 162.6 MILLION. AGAIN, WE DON'T LOAD IN ALL OF THE PROPOSED FEE CHANGES INTO THAT NUMBER BECAUSE WE PUT CERTAIN FEES. IT MAY CHANGE BEHAVIOR, BUT FOR A LOT OF OUR FEES, WE WILL PROBABLY HAVE A LITTLE MORE THAN THAT. WITH THE PROPOSED FEE CHANGES, THEN LICENSES AND PERMITS YOU CAN SEE HAS GONE DOWN. THAT'S PRIMARILY DUE TO OUR IMPACT FEES AND OUR DEVELOPMENT FEES DECREASING FROM PRIOR YEARS, WHEN WE'VE HAD LARGE ACTIVITIES DUE TO COMMERCIAL AND MULTIFAMILY, LARGE MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS. OUR CONTRIBUTIONS AND DONATIONS ALSO HAVE BEEN REDUCED. THAT'S PRIMARILY WE ONLY PUT THOSE IN IF WE HAVE A COMMITMENT GENERALLY FOR A CONTRIBUTION OR DONATION. IN PAST YEARS, WE'VE HAD SOME MONEYS IN THERE LOADED FOR THE ZOO ENTRANCE OF ABOUT 2 MILLION. SO THIS YEAR DOES NOT HAVE THAT UNTIL WE HAVE A COMMITMENT TO THAT FUNDING. LOCKED IN INVESTMENT INCOME IS ALSO LOWER, PRIMARILY BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN SPENDING DOWN SOME OF THE CASH, THE ARPA FUNDING, THE PEAKING PLANT PROJECT FINISHED WHERE WE HAD A LOT OF CASH AVAILABLE FOR THAT PROJECT. WE HOPE INVESTMENT REVENUE COMES IN HIGHER, BUT WE DON'T PLAN ON IT BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO BASE OUR OPERATIONS ON SOMETHING THAT'S SO VOLATILE. OUR DEBT PROCEEDS HAVE ALSO DECREASED SIGNIFICANTLY BECAUSE LAST YEAR, ALL WE HAD PLANNED FOR WAS SOME FUNDING FOR THE AIRPORT, WITH SOME GRANT FUNDING THAT HAS COME IN. WE'RE ONLY PLANNING 5 MILLION FOR THE AIRPORT PROJECT. SO ANY QUESTIONS ON OUR REVENUES? ONE THAT JUST STANDS OUT TO ME IS THE CHARGES FOR SERVICES GOING UP. IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A BIG INCREASE. OKAY. 5 MILLION OF THAT INCREASE IS THE COUNTY LANDFILL OR THE COUNTY TIPPING FEE. THE REST IS JUST INCREASED CUSTOMERS AND INCREASED RATES FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE. THE BULK OF THAT IS FROM OUR PUBLIC WORKS, UTILITIES AND POWER. OKAY, NOW A SUMMARY OF OUR EXPENDITURES BY TYPE. AGAIN, WE'VE GOT THE THREE YEAR HISTORY THERE. OUR SALARIES AND WAGES, AS YOU CAN SEE, HAS GONE UP ABOUT 3 MILLION OVERALL FOR THE CITY.
THAT INCLUDES THE NEW EMPLOYEES. IT'S TEN NEW FTES AS WELL AS SEVEN GRADE AND THE 2% COLA FOR OUR EMPLOYEES OUTSIDE OF OUR UNION. THEN. AND THAT ALSO INCLUDES OUR BENEFITS. WE ASSUMED A 5% INCREASE IN HEALTH INSURANCE, WHICH IS THE BIGGEST CHANGE THERE, AS WELL AS JUST ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES. OUR CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES HAS AN INCREASE OF 16 MILLION.
[00:50:03]
GRAND EXPENDITURES ARE GOING DOWN AGAIN, PRIMARILY THE ARPA FUNDING BEING FULLY SPENT. AND SO NOW WE'RE INTO. WE HAVE TAP GRANTS, WE HAVE THE TRANSIT GRANTS AND MORE OF OUR RECURRING ONES AND ALL OF OUR AIRPORT AND OUR ENTERPRISE FUNDS. WE DON'T RECORD THEM IN THE GRANT EXPENDITURES LINE. THEY'RE IN GENERALLY IN THE CAPITAL OUTLAY LINES. WE'RE ESTIMATING CAPITAL OUTLAY OF 117.3 MILLION THIS YEAR, AS WELL AS EXPENDITURES, WHICH IS THOSE REPLACEMENTS OF OUR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT OF 6.5 MILLION. WE HAVE DEBT SERVICE OF 12.6 MILLION, WHICH INCLUDES OUR LEASE PAYMENTS. AND THEN WE'RE ALLOCATING 5.2 MILLION TOWARDS MURTHA FOR FUNDING FUTURE REPLACEMENTS. ANOTHER CHANGE IS, CAN I ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THAT? IS IT CONCERNING TO YOU THAT OUR MURF ALLOCATION IS LESS THAN OUR MURF EXPENDITURE? NOT IN THIS ONE. IT'S AT EACH FUND IS ANALYZED FOR KIND OF WHAT IS INCLUDED THERE. A LOT OF OUR ENTERPRISE FUNDS HAVE BUILT UP SOME FUNDAMENTALS, BUT WE AREN'T. WE AREN'T REQUIRING THEM TO DO MORE FOR THEIR RATES OR SUPPORTING THEIR EXPENDITURES. SO A LOT OF THOSE ARE EXHAUSTING. SOME OF THOSE ENTERPRISE FUNDS AND BALANCES. THANK YOU. ONE ITEM I'LL POINT OUT IS THE CONTINGENCY AT THE BOTTOM. LAST YEAR WE BUDGETED AN EXTRA 30 MILLION IN CONTINGENCY FOR THE AIRPORT TERMINAL EXPANSION SO THAT WE HAD CAPACITY AS THE PROJECT WAS GOING TO MOVE FORWARD. THIS YEAR. WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT BETTER KNOWN EXPECTATIONS THERE ON THAT SIDE. AND THEN THE CONTINGENCY INCLUDES ANY OF THOSE PRIOR YEAR ROLL FORWARDS OF CAPITAL PROJECTS, EQUIPMENT, AS WELL AS SOME OF THE ENCUMBRANCES FOR JUST OPERATIONAL EXPENSES THAT AT YEAR END, WE DO HAVE SOME THINGS THAT ROLL OVER JUST IN THE LAST MONTH AND A HALF OF THE YEAR, OR AFTER THE LAST MONTH OF THE YEAR. OKAY, SO ON TO OUR PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE PROPOSED LEVY. THIS IS THE ESTIMATED TOTAL LEVY OF 54,098,000 846,000. THIS IS FULLY UPDATED. ESTIMATED GROWTH AND ANNEXATION AT A MILLION 114 LAST WEEK WE WERE ESTIMATED AT 1,000,050, SO IT'S ABOUT 64,000 MORE. JUST UPDATED NUMBERS FROM THE COUNTY, GIVING THE TRUE TO A MINUTE TO THE DOLLAR NUMBER WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. THAT ALSO CHANGES OUR FOREGONE AMOUNT AT ABOUT 3000 MORE TO THE FOREGONE AMOUNT. WE PREVIOUSLY HAD 535,000 IN THERE. SO WE'RE ESTIMATING 538 354 AND THEN FOREGONE FOR CAPITAL, WHICH IS THE 350,000. AND WE'LL GO INTO A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON THE DETAILS OF WHAT EACH OF THOSE ITEMS ARE SPENDING. WHO GENERATES THE ESTIMATE FOR GROWTH AND TAXATION. WE GET NUMBERS FROM THE COUNTY THAT ARE NOT IN THE FINAL NUMBERS, BUT THEY GIVE US THEIR ESTIMATES OF WHAT THEY'RE LOCKING DOWN, WHICH WE SHOULD BE GETTING HERE IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS. I THINK IT'S THE CLERK BY STATUTE. COUNTY CLERK HAS TO PREPARE THAT. IDAHO STATUTE. SO NEXT IS THE PROPOSED ALLOCATION. SO THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE ONE YOU SAW LAST WEEK. BUT THIS INCLUDES THOSE FUNDED PROJECTS. SO THE MAIN CHANGES ARE TO THE GENERAL FUND INCREASING FOR THOSE ADDITIONAL STAFFING AND PROJECTS THAT WERE APPROVED. AND THEN ALSO AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT TO THE LIBRARY. THAT'S THE ADDITIONAL 201,000. SO YOU CAN SEE THE PERCENTAGE OF THE LEVY THAT EACH AREA GETS, THE AMOUNT OF THE INCREASE FOR EACH DEPARTMENT, AND THEN THAT PERCENTAGE INCREASE FROM PRIOR YEARS. AND THEN THAT LAST COLUMN WE HAVE INCLUDED IS JUST THE PERSONNEL INCREASE OR DECREASE. WE WANT TO ALWAYS MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO COVER THAT PERSONNEL INCREASE WITH THOSE OTHER DEPARTMENTS OUTSIDE THE GENERAL FUND. SO THAT TOTAL 7% NUMBER, IS THAT THE NUMBER THAT WE COMPARE TO THE 8% STATUTORY EXCLUDING THE.CAPITAL OR BATHROOM. THAT'S RIGHT. YES. SO WE'RE UNDER THE 8% CAP. OKAY. SO THE THIS IS AN UPDATED SCHEDULE FOR THE IMPACT TO OUR PROPERTY OWNERS. SO THIS IS RESIDENTIAL. THE TOP LINE IS OUR CURRENT PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT. AND THEN ADDING IN THE THREE AREAS THAT WE'VE LOADED INTO THE BUDGET, WHICH IS THE 3% STATUTORY GROWTH AND GROWTH, THE FORGONE 1% FOR OPERATIONS, WHICH IS FINDING SOME PUBLIC SAFETY STAFFING, AND THEN THE FORGONE FOR CAPITAL, WHICH WAS AT 350,000. SO THAT'S THE ANNUAL AND MONTHLY IMPACT OF EACH OF THOSE FOR THAT TOTAL ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT FOR EACH TYPE. AND THAT CHANGES FROM THE CURRENT YEAR. SO FOR A HOME AT 450,000, THE INCREASE IS EXPECTED TO BE ABOUT $150 PER YEAR OR $13 PER MONTH. THEN ON THE NEXT SLIDE IS THE COMMERCIAL IMPACT. THAT'S YOUR
[00:55:02]
MONTH. I THINK THAT THIS IS IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOTAL ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT, THE 1580 PER YEAR, 132 PER MONTH. OH, THAT'S NOT A THAT'S NOT AN INCREASE. THAT'S JUST WHAT THAT'S JUST WHAT IT WAS. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE INCREASE, IT'S $10. YEAH. CORRECT. THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE CHANGE FROM CURRENT. YES. OKAY. OH YEAH. I DIDN'T GET TO THE NEXT LINE. I WAS STILL HUNG UP ON THE GRAY LINE THINKING SOMETHING'S NOT RIGHT THERE, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE I DIDN'T WRITE IT DOWN. SO THANK YOU.THANK YOU. AND FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, THIS IS THE ESTIMATES FOR A 500 000 $2 MILLION OR $10 MILLION PROPERTY FOR A $2 MILLION PROPERTY. THAT ESTIMATED CHANGE IS AN ADDITIONAL 784 A YEAR, OR 65 A MONTH, FOR A HALF MILLION DOLLAR PROPERTY, 196 MORE DOLLARS A YEAR, $16 A MONTH. ANY QUESTIONS ON THE RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TAX IMPACT? OKAY. COULD YOU HAVE ONE QUESTION? ARE WE SEEING HOME VALUES LIKE BECAUSE THIS IS ONE THIS IS OUR IMPACT ON HOME VALUES HAVE A HUGE IMPACT. AND THOSE HAVE BEEN STEADYING. RIGHT. LIKE WE SHOULDN'T, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE SEEING SOME OF WHAT WE SAW FOR YEARS. VALUATIONS ARE NOT GOING UP. RIGHT. WELL THEY'RE NOT GOING UP AS QUICKLY. YEAH.
FOR RESIDENTIAL WE ESTIMATED 0.7% OF AN INCREASE FOR THE PROPERTY VALUATION. SO THAT'S WHAT WE THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE ON ZILLOW RIGHT NOW. AND THE MEDIAN HOME PRICE WAS 398 FOR A HOME HERE IN IDAHO FALLS. WE HAVE A LOT OF YEARS IN THE TIME THAT MICHELLE AND I HAVE BEEN ON THE COUNCIL. I THINK WE WENT FROM LIKE 180 TO 400. SO A LOT OF TIMES IT WASN'T US RAISING TAXES, BUT IT APPEARS THAT THERE WAS A MUCH HIGHER TAX. YEAH. OKAY. SO FROM THOSE PROPERTY TAX INCREASES, WE WANTED TO SHOW WHAT THOSE ITEMS THAT WERE FUNDED AND HOW WE GROUPED INTO THOSE. SO JUST AS A REMINDER, WE HAVE FUNDING AVAILABLE. THIS IS THE UPDATED GROWTH AND ANNEXATION OF 314 000 REMAINING. BECAUSE WE'D ALREADY INCLUDED 750,000. THE 680,000 AVAILABLE FROM THE COP EXCESS FUNDING, AND THEN 538,000 FOR 1% FOREGONE, AND THEN 350,000 FOR THE CAPITAL FOREGONE, WHICH IS CAPPED AT 3%. SO IN TOTAL, AVAILABLE 1,000,882. WE'LL GO INTO THE TYPES OF THINGS FUNDED FOR EACH GROUP. SO FOR OUR GROWTH WE INCLUDED THE EXCESS GIFT CONTRIBUTION OF 20,000. THE LIBRARY LEVY FOR 201,000. THE PAY SCALE CHANGE FOR OUR POLICE SWORN OFFICERS. AND THEN A PORTION OF THE POLICE DISPATCHER THAT'S BEEN AROUND THE LAST LITTLE BIT OF THE GROWTH AVAILABLE. SO THE POLICE DISPATCHER YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IN MULTIPLE AREAS BECAUSE IT'S FUNDED BY OUR COUNTY, BY FOREGONE BY GROWTH. AND THEN WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA 10,000 UNFUNDED, WHICH WE CAN MAKE UP WITH MISCELLANEOUS THINGS THAT JUST COME IN FOR BUDGETING. THESE ARE ALL ESTIMATES. SO 10,000. I FEEL CONFIDENT WE CAN COVER IN THIS NEXT YEAR. THE FOREGONE 1% FOR OPERATIONS IS FUNDING THREE PUBLIC SAFETY POSITIONS. THE FIRST IS THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. THE TWO FIRE EMS TRAINING CAPTAINS, AND THEN THE POLICE DISPATCHER, A PORTION OF THAT. SO IT'S 36000 OF THAT FUNDED BY THE TOWN. THEN FOR OUR FOREGONE CAPITAL, THIS IS THE 350,000. WE FUNDED THE FIRE UPGRADE REMODEL TO THE BATHROOMS. THE THREE PROJECTS WERE RECREATION, THE AQUATICS CENTER STARTING BLOCKS, THE MAIN ENTRANCE DOOR CENTER, AND THEN BLEACHERS FOR THE ICE RINK, AND THEN STARTING TO INVEST IN THE FIRE TRAINING FACILITY WITH CONEX CONTAINERS AND THEN STARTING THE INFRASTRUCTURE BUILD OUT. ONCE WE HAVE THAT FEASIBILITY STUDY, 13,560 IS COMING FROM FOREGONE, AND THEN THE REST WILL BE COMING FROM THE COP FUNDING. AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE. FROM THE FOREGONE 24 GUN 13,560 FOR THAT FIRE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE TRAINING FACILITY. AND WE FUNDED 250,000, BUT 135 60 TO JUST FINISH UP THE 350. THEN OUR EXCESS COP MONEY IS GOING TO BE FUNDING THE POLICE RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION, WHICH IS $83,481 THE FIRST YEAR OF THE ANNUAL FEE OF 190 214, AND THEN THE FUTURE YEARS IN A SCHEDULE THAT WILL SHOW IN THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH FUNDS IT OVER MULTIPLE YEARS, SO THAT IT'S AN EASE IN TO THE FULL AMOUNT TO GO BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND.
AND THEN THE LAST ITEM, THE REMAINING OF THAT 250,000 FOR THE FIRE TRAINING FACILITY
[01:00:01]
INFRASTRUCTURE AND BUILD OUT. SO THIS IS A SCHEDULE OF A PROPOSED WAY TO KIND OF EASE INTO THE REMAINDER OF THE ANNUAL COST OF THE RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. SO ESSENTIALLY THE FIRST TWO YEARS FULLY FUNDED BY THE COP FUNDING, BUT IT IS ONE TIME MONEY. SO WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE AN IMPACT OF 192,000 NEXT YEAR OF THAT RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFER. AND AGAIN, THAT RECORDS MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE. THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL 45000 WE HAVE ALREADY BUDGETED BECAUSE WE HAVE THE EXISTING SYSTEM, BUT THE UPGRADED SYSTEM IS MORE EXPENSIVE. SO THIS FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS, IT PHASES IT IN WHERE WE PAY 55% OF IT OUT OF THAT COP MONEY, 105,000, THE REST FROM THE GENERAL FUND. SO IT'D BE AN INCREASE NEXT YEAR OR FOR THE 2728 FISCAL YEAR OF 86,000 TO THE GENERAL FUND THE FOLLOWING YEAR, 76,000 THE FOLLOWING YEAR, 31, AND THEN FULLY PAID FOR BY THE GENERAL FUND BY 2030 31 TO FULLY EXHAUST THOSE MONIES. BUT YOU'RE ASSUMING, ASSUMING THE SOFTWARE WILL CONTINUE TO GROW AT 5%. YEAH, 5% IS WHAT WE'RE ESTIMATING. SO THAT THAT AMOUNT MAY FLUCTUATE A LITTLE BIT, BUT WE WANTED TO ASSUME SOME INCREASES THERE AS WELL. AND ARE WE LOCKED INTO THIS CONTRACT FOR JUST THIS AMOUNT OF YEARS. WE KNOW THE RATE FOR TWO YEARS. AND THEN WE WOULD ASSUME WHAT TEN YEARS WITH THIS SOFTWARE WITH THE COUNTY. YES, IT USUALLY LASTS ABOUT TEN PLUS YEARS. BUT LET'S JUST SAY IF A PRODUCT CAME ONLINE THAT WE LIKED BETTER IN YEAR FIVE, COULD WE MAKE THAT CHANGE? OR ARE WE LOCKED WITH THIS WITH THIS PARTICULAR GROUP, MAYBE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COUNTY BECAUSE. I DON'T THINK THEY'RE LOCKED IN BEYOND TWO. I'LL HAVE TO ASK COUNTY WHAT THEIR TERMS ARE. I ASSUME THEY GO YEAR BY YEAR, THE SAME AS WHAT WE WOULD DO, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T LOCK FUTURE COUNCIL COUNCILS OR COMMISSIONS INTO THE PRACTICAL MATTER IS REALLY HARD AND EXPENSIVE TO SWITCH RECORDS. MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROVIDERS. AND SO GIVEN THAT WE LOOKED AT A CHANGE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO COUNCIL, MY ASSUMPTION IS BASED ON JUST THIS EXCESS COP THAT NEXT YEAR THIS WOULD JUST BE BUILT INTO THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS OF THE BUDGET. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BRING THIS BACK AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT YOU AGREED TO LAST YEAR. WE WOULD JUST MOVE FORWARD KNOWING THAT THIS WAS THE PLAN, TO INCLUDE IT IN THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS BUDGET. WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE THIS TURN THIS INTO A DECISION EVERY FIVE YEARS. IT'S KIND OF HERE'S THE DECISION. AND THAT INCLUDED.YEAH. OKAY. AND I JUST THIS WAS JUST A PROPOSAL. SO IF WE WANT TO CHANGE OR ESCALATE HOW QUICKLY THE GENERAL FUND TAKES IT ON, WE CAN CHANGE THAT OR EXTEND IT AS WELL. IT'S JUST A PLAN FOR BY FIVE YEARS OUT. WE'RE FULLY PAYING FOR IT WITH THE GENERAL FUND. GOOD. OKAY.
ON TO OUR NEW PERSONNEL. JUST TO SUMMARIZE, OUR FTE REQUESTS FOR OUR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS, WE ARE. IT'S THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY FUNDED BY THE FORGONE. THE TWO FIRE EMS TRAINING CAPTAINS FUNDED BY FOREGONE. THE POLICE DETECTIVE, WHICH IS FUNDED BY OPIOID AND NARCOTICS FUNDING. AND THEN THE POLICE DISPATCHER, WHICH IS FUNDED BY EVERYTHING. A LITTLE PIECE OF THE. SO IF I'M READING THIS RIGHT, THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY AND THE TWO FIRE EMS, THAT'S IN PERPETUITY TO 1%, WE'RE GOING TO GET THAT BACK, RIGHT. OPIOID, NARCOTICS. WE THINK THAT MONEY WILL BE AVAILABLE ONGOING AT THAT AMOUNT. SO THAT'S ALSO ONGOING.
THE NARCOTICS WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN PLACE AT LEAST 3 TO 5 YEARS, DEPENDING ON. AND THEN THERE MAY BE MORE. EVERY YEAR, WE OFTEN GET MORE FUNDING. OPIOIDS, WE COULD FUND IT FOR TEN PLUS YEARS. THIS ISN'T JUST THE OPIOID MONEY. IT'S ALSO WHAT WE SELL WHEN WE SEE SEIZURES. AND THEN COUNTY GROWTH. AND EXPLAIN THE LAST ONE THAT. THAT'S RIGHT. SO BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNTS WE HAD, I SPLIT THE POLICE DISPATCHER KIND OF EVERYWHERE. IT WAS A LITTLE AMOUNT OF ALL THE PIECES TO JUST ROUND OUT ALL THE NUMBERS WE HAD AVAILABLE. SO COUNTY IS AN ONGOING SOURCE. GROWTH IS AN ONGOING SOURCE AS WELL AS 1%. THE ONLY THE OTHER WAS THE 10,000 THAT WE HAD. AND WHAT OUR FUNDING AVAILABLE WAS. SO I CAN I'M LISTENING TO YOU. IT SOUNDS LIKE MOST OF THAT COST WILL BE ABSORBED AND HAVE REVENUE ASSOCIATED TO PEOPLE.
IS IT IS THIS A KIND OF A BREAK FROM NORM KEITH, FOR THE COUNTY TO BE PAYING FOR A DISPATCHER? NO, WE. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRANCIS HELPED NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH BONNEVILLE COUNTY FOR THEM TO PAY FOR DISPATCHERS FOUR YEARS AGO. OKAY. 4 OR 5 YEARS AGO. SO THERE'S A FORMULA TO COST SHARE BETWEEN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, FIRE DEPARTMENT, BONNEVILLE COUNTY. WE REALLY LOOK AT IT EVERY TWO YEARS BASED OFF OF CALL VOLUMES FROM EACH AGENCY.
[01:05:04]
I BELIEVE RIGHT NOW THEY'RE PAYING ABOUT 38%. OKAY. OKAY. AND THEN ON THE ENTERPRISE SIDE, WE HAVE A FUNDED WATER SERVICE TECHNICIAN THAT IS OR SORRY, THAT IS ONE THAT WILL BE FUNDED BY RATES, BUT ALSO BY INTERFUND CHARGES FROM POWER. THIS IS THE TO LOCATE LINES RATHER THAN USING AN EXTERNAL PARTY. WE'LL BE BRINGING THAT IN-HOUSE THEN TO WIREMAN AT OR FOR POWER. AND THEN AN APPRENTICE GENERATION MECHANIC FOR POWER, AS WELL AS A COMMUNICATIONS AND SPLICING TECHNICIAN FOR FIBER. AND THESE WILL BE FUNDED BY RATES. SO THIS IS JUST A QUICK SUMMARY OF OUR FTES. FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS, OUR BUDGETED FTE COUNT AND THEN OUR BUDGET AND INCREASE YEAR OVER YEAR AGAINST THAT BUDGETED PERSONNEL COST. AND THEN AT THE BOTTOM, OUR ACTUAL PERSONNEL COSTS. SO YOU CAN SEE KIND OF HOW WE SHAKE OUT EACH YEAR FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS, IN 2324, WE SPENT 95 OR ALMOST 96% OF THAT PERSONNEL BUDGET AND 98% IN 24, 25. THE BUDGET PERSONNEL, THE BUDGETED PERSONNEL COST IS EXPECTED TO INCREASE 6.7% OVER THIS LAST YEAR. THIS. LAST YEAR'S BUDGET. THIS IS MORE JUST FOR INFORMATION. OF THOSE TEN NEW ADDED STAFF INCREASE OF 6.7% ON TOP OF BENEFITS, SEVEN GRADES, ALL OF THOSE COSTS. WHERE DID YOU FIND THE 3%? WHERE WAS IT GOING FOR 95 TO 98? LIKE WHERE DID YOU FIND. BECAUSE ONE YEAR THERE WAS A LITTLE MORE SUBDUED THAN THE OTHER, WHERE YOU'RE FINDING WHEN YOU GET CLOSER TO THE 100%, IT'S USUALLY JUST IN TURNOVER, VACANCY SAVINGS. IS THAT THOSE NUMBERS ARE FAIRLY TYPICAL. I MEAN, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU EXPECT TO SEE, 96, 98% IS PRETTY AND PRETTY STANDARD? I HAVE MORE HISTORY AS WELL. WE'RE VERY CLOSE TO 98% OFTEN. AND THAT VACANCY SAVINGS, WE ALSO HAVE SAVINGS JUST FROM A NEW PERSON COMING ON THERE, USUALLY AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SEVENTH GRADE. SO WE DO HAVE THOSE SAVINGS AS WELL. GENERALLY, ANY BENEFIT WE GET FROM HELPING WITH OVERTIME BY HIRING SOME OF THESE. CORRECT. PLUS, JUST TO ADD, WE HAVE A LOT OF COLLEGIALITY WITH OUR DEPARTMENTS THAT IF YOU HAVE VACANCY SAVINGS, THAT YOU CAN PUT IT BACK IN THE POT FOR EVERYONE AND NOT USE IT FOR ANYTHING ELSE BESIDES WHAT IT WAS INTENDED FOR, WHICH WAS POSITIONS. AND I DIDN'T KNOW. THIS DOES INCLUDE ALL OF THE SEASONALS, ANY OVERTIME COSTS, ANY PART TIME EMPLOYEES, ALL THE SALARY BENEFITS OF OUR PERSONNEL. SO THAT DISCOUNT IS ONLY A PORTION OF THAT. WE DO HAVE A LOT OF SEASONALS. SO I JUST WANTED TO OPEN UP THE DISCUSSION. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ON THE SCHEDULE AND THE PROPOSED FEE CHANGES. I JUST WANT TO VERIFY ON THIS IS BACK ON THE PRIOR PRIORITIZED REQUESTS, FOREGONE CAPITAL. IS THAT ACTUAL HOW DO WE DECIDE THAT WITH CAPITAL FOR THE FIRE TRAINING FACILITY, PHASE ONE, BECAUSE THAT WAS DESIGN WORK. THE. 13 YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE. TWO THE 13,000 AND THE. IT'S ALL ALTOGETHER 250,000. SO THAT WOULD BE GROUNDWORK PRIMARILY FOR THE FOR THE. CONEX CONTAINERS GROUNDWORK. NO, FOR THE FUTURE FACILITY. OKAY.SO WE'RE COMFORTABLE THAT FITS IS CAPITAL. THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. 13,000 OF THE 250 WOULD BE ABLE TO MOVE INTO THAT. OKAY. WOULD YOU MIND GOING TO SLIDE 19 AND 20 ON PAGE TEN? THE I THINK THERE WAS A DUPLICATE OF A SLIDE BECAUSE YOU HAVE BOTH THE ENTERPRISE AND THE GOVERNMENTAL BEING THE SAME SLIDE. WE CHANGED THE DESCRIPTIONS, BUT YEP, YOU'RE CORRECT. IT'S 5000. LET ME SEE. OH OH. YES. SO THE GOVERNMENTAL IS EXPANDING. NINE THE ENTERPRISE. YEAH. I DON'T HAVE THOSE UPDATED NUMBERS. AND IF YOU DON'T MIND. LOOKS THAT UP.
JUST A REMINDER AS I MENTIONED EARLIER. SO WHEN WE PUBLISH OUR FOREGONE FOR THE 1% ONGOING AND THE 3% CAPITAL, WHICH WE'RE NOT TAKING THE FULL 3% THAT IS ALLOWABLE, WE HAVE TO IDENTIFY PER STATE STATUTE IN THE ACTUAL PUBLIC NOTICE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE USING IT FOR. SO AS I
[01:10:03]
MENTIONED EARLIER, IT HAS BEEN DRAFTED BASED ON VERSUS PRESENTATION SLIDES. AND SO THAT WE WERE VERY CLEAR WITH THE PUBLIC WHAT THE INTENTION IS, IS TO USE THOSE FUNDS FOR.AND IT IS, AS I MENTIONED, REQUIRED BY STATE STATUTE. SO THOSE ARE DRAFTED AND READY TO GO, PROVIDED THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY CHANGES THIS AFTERNOON. AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO POST THOSE TOMORROW AFTERNOON BY 2:00 TO THE POST REGISTER. PARDON ME. WEDNESDAY. NOT TOMORROW. TOMORROW, TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON BY 2:00 TO GET INTO THE PAPER FOR THIS SATURDAY AND NEXT SATURDAY. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR CATCHING THAT. SO IT'S TWO SERVICE TECHNICIANS FOR WATER FOR A TOTAL OF 196, 76, 1 OR 2 WIREMAN FOR A TOTAL OF TWO, 218921 GENERATION MECHANIC AT 82 106 AND THEN COMMUNICATIONS AND SPLICING TECHNICIAN AT 77 FOR 42 FOR A TOTAL OF SIX MORE PEOPLE, NOT FIVE SIX PEOPLE. AND THE TOTAL DOLLAR AMOUNT A TOTAL OF 570 TO 118. OKAY. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR FREDERICKSON. THANK YOU. SO THOSE NUMBERS ARE IN THE BUDGET. THEY JUST WEREN'T ON THIS. YEAH. SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO JUST THE BUDGET BOOK AND WHAT CHANGES WERE VOTED INTO THAT. SO THERE IS WE'LL SEND OUT AN UPDATED BUDGET DRAFT. IT'S CURRENTLY RUNNING. I HAVE ONE OUT IN THE FOLDER, BUT IT'S GOT A LOT OF MESSY FORMATTING. I WOULD SAY THAT. SO WE'VE BEEN BATTLING GRAVITY. SO THE NUMBERS AND THE SUBSTANCE ARE THERE, BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK ALL THAT PRETTY IN CERTAIN AREAS BECAUSE OF BULLETS AND FORMATTING ISSUES. WE'LL TRY TO GET THAT CLEANED UP. SO WE'VE ADDED THE NARRATIVES FROM ALL THE DEPARTMENTS, WHICH INCLUDES THEIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE CURRENT YEAR, THEIR PLANS FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR, AND MAJOR CHANGES ON THE AMOUNTS IN THE BUDGET WE'VE ADDED. LIKE I SAID, THE ADDITIONAL GROWTH, THE ADDITIONAL FORGONE PROPERTY TAX THAT WAS ESTIMATED, SMALL ADJUSTMENTS TO PROJECTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE UPDATE A LITTLE BIT ON THE FRANCHISE FEES CORRECTION TO OUR COUNTY, THE FEES THAT WE COLLECT FROM THE COUNTY. ON OUR LEGAL SIDE, THEY'VE BEEN SENDING US TOO MUCH. SO KIND OF UP AND DOWN LITTLE CHANGES, ALL OF THEM IN KIND OF THE TEN AND 20, $30,000 RANGE. WHEN YOU SAY THEY'VE BEEN SITTING, WE KNEW THEY WERE ADDING THEY WERE SENDING US MORE THAN WE THOUGHT. BUT IS IT REALLY TOO MUCH LIKE THEY HAVEN'T THEY'VE COME BACK AND SAID, WE SENT YOU TOO MUCH. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM TO TRY TO UPDATE. WE'VE WE'VE CHANGED OUR FINES. RIGHT? WE'VE TOLD THEM WE'VE CHANGED OUR FINES. THEY HAVEN'T CHANGED THE FINES THAT WE HAVE REALLY UPSET PEOPLE DOWN AT THE COURTHOUSE. WE WILL TELL THEM LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE DISORDERLY CONDUCT A $100 FINE, BUT THEY'RE GETTING CHARGED LIKE OVER $400 AT THE COURTHOUSE, AS IT WERE. HEIDI'S WORKING ON IT. WE'RE TRYING TO GET THE COURTS TO GET IT UPDATED. BUT MEANTIME, THEY'RE STILL COLLECTING FINES THAT ARE WELL AND ABOVE WHAT THEY SHOULD BE COLLECTING. AND WE'VE TOLD THEM THEY SHOULDN'T. OKAY, SO IT SEEMS LIKE WHEN I HAD THAT CONVERSATION WITH I'LL CLEAR IT, BUT THAT THEY WERE ADDING, THEY'RE ADDING THEIR OWN, THEY'RE ADDING COURT COSTS. BUT ALSO, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, I THINK THAT THEY'VE ALSO MISSED OUR FINE. CORRECT. THEY HAVEN'T, FOR WHATEVER REASON, HAVEN'T UPDATED. THEY'RE TREATING IT AS A $300 FINE INSTEAD OF $100 FINE. SO MY, MY CURRENT UNDERSTANDING, AND AGAIN, WE'RE TRYING TO WORK IT OUT. IT'S BEEN REALLY FRUSTRATING. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO IS THAT THAT EXTRA MONEY FLOWING TO THE CITY? YES. THAT'S FINE. WE NEED TO RETURN THE FINE PART, NOT THE COURT COSTS. YEAH, UNTIL WE RETURN IT TO THEM. YEAH. SO WE'LL NEED TO GET THAT REFUNDED.
AND WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH THE COURTS AGAIN. HE'S BEEN WORKING ON THAT. SO THOSE ARE LITTLE AMOUNTS THAT I DIDN'T WANT TO ASSUME GOING INTO THE NEW YEAR OR NOT. WE'RE GOING TO BE RETURNING IT. SO LITTLE TWEAKS AND CHANGES TO THINGS THAT WE'RE SEEING. CURRENT YEAR ACTIVITY. I COULD UPDATE LITTLE BITS AGAIN TO KIND OF FINISH MAKING ALL OF THOSE THINGS OUT.
IT'S LIKE THAT EXTRA 10,000 FOR THE DISPATCHER ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, WE ADDED IN ALL THOSE DEPARTMENT FUNDED REQUESTS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED TO USE THE FORGONE THE COP FUNDING, ADD ALL OF THOSE ITEMS IN, AND THEN ON THE LIST OF ALL THE CAPITAL AND ONE TIME REQUESTS, SOME OF THOSE ITEMS IN A GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS WE DON'T INCLUDE IN THE BUDGET UNTIL WE KIND OF GET THAT BLESSING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEM. SO ADDING ALL OF THOSE ITEMS INTO THE BUDGET SO THAT EVERYTHING'S ACCOUNTED FOR AND COVERED. AND THEN AGAIN, ADDING THAT INDIFFERENCE ROLL OVER THE PRIOR YEAR CAPITAL AND OPERATIONAL CONTINGENCY SO THAT AT THE END OF THE YEAR, THINGS THAT ARE NOT COMPLETED BY SEPTEMBER 30TH, WE STILL HAVE THAT BUDGET CAPACITY TO FINISH IT THROUGH THE YEAR. THEN THE OTHER NEW THING THAT YOU'LL SEE
[01:15:04]
COMPARED TO THE LAST DRAFT YOU SAW IS THE ESTIMATED BEGINNING FUND BALANCES. WE WAIT UNTIL ALL THE NUMBERS ARE FINAL TO SEE WHAT WE ESTIMATE IS GOING TO ACTUALLY ROLL INTO THE NEW YEAR AS THE ESTIMATED BEGINNING FUND BALANCE. AND FURTHER INTO THIS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, WE GET THE BETTER. WE HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT IT WILL ACTUALLY BE LEFT TO START THE NEXT YEAR.AND THEN WE ALSO ADD IN THOSE RESERVES. SO KIND OF UPDATING PROJECTIONS OF OUR BALANCES, THE RATE STABILIZATION, THE CAPITAL FUNDING RESERVES THAT ARE IN THE SYSTEM. AND THEN YOU'LL ALSO SEE AN UPDATED SCHEDULE OF THE MULTI-YEAR AND RECURRING CONTRACTS. THOSE ARE THINGS LIKE OUR LEASES, OUR DEBT SERVICE, OUR POWER AGREEMENTS, TREE TRIMMING, SOME OF THESE MULTI-YEAR CONTRACTS THAT YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED. AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DEPARTMENTS AREN'T HAVING TO COME BACK AND BACK AND BACK EVERY YEAR WHEN IT'S A MULTI-YEAR CONTRACT THAT THEY'VE ADOPTED. THE CHANGES THAT ARE STILL TO BE MADE, LIKE I SAID, ARE SOME OF THE JUST FORMATTING THINGS. AND THEN WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR ERP TEAM ON SOME OF THE CONSOLIDATIONS IN OUR DEPARTMENT. SOME OF OUR DEPARTMENTS HAVE CONSOLIDATED INTO SOME OF THE DIVISIONS WITHIN OUR DEPARTMENTS HAVE BEEN CONSOLIDATED IN THE NEW SYSTEM. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ADOPTING IT IN LINE WITH WHAT THE NEW SYSTEM SAYS. WE HEALTH INSURANCE RESERVE FUND IS ONE THAT I BELIEVE IS ROLLING INTO THE GENERAL FUND RATHER THAN BEING ITS OWN FUND. SO IT'LL STILL BE RESERVED JUST WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND. SO THINGS LIKE THAT WILL BE GETTING CONSOLIDATED SO THAT WE'RE ADOPTING A BUDGET THAT'S IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE NEW SYSTEM'S GENERAL LEDGER STRUCTURE. SO ANY QUESTIONS ON THOSE CHANGES STILL TO BE MADE. OKAY. SO THE NEXT STEPS IS THIS THURSDAY WILL BE COMING FORWARD WITH THE PROPOSED BUDGET NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT, WHICH WAS THE 393,000,483 954. AND THEN THOSE PROPOSED BUDGET NOTICES WILL GO OUT, AS WELL AS THE FOREGONE NOTICES AND THE FEE CHANGES THAT ARE PROPOSED TO THEN COME BACK ON THE 13TH FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS OF ALL THREE OF THOSE ITEMS, OR FOUR OF THOSE ITEMS, SINCE WE'RE DOING THE CAPITAL FOREGONE AND THEN ADOPTION OF THOSE OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET ON AUGUST 27TH. AND THEN IF I COULD ADD. SO SO THURSDAY NIGHT, THERE'S SOME ACTIVITIES GOING ON. SO I BELIEVE THE LAST TIME I CHECKED, I THINK I'M ON DECK FOR THURSDAY NIGHT. AND SO I'LL DO A HYBRID OF THIS PRESENTATION. I'M NOT GOING TO DO THE WHOLE THING ALL OVER AGAIN. AND THEN THE OTHER THING, UNLESS YOU WANT ME TO. AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS, IS ONCE WE GET FRESH BUDGET BOOK FRESH SLIDES, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND PUT THOSE ON THE WEBSITE LIKE WE NORMALLY DO. AND THAT WAY, IF THE PUBLIC ISN'T UNABLE TO PARTICIPATE OR OBSERVE THE EVENING ON THURSDAY, THIS COMING THURSDAY, THEY DO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE DOCUMENTATION PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 13TH OF AUGUST. SO JUST JUST A SIDE NOTE ON THAT. COUNCIL, DOES THIS MEETING YOUR APPROVAL FOR WHAT YOU HAD THOUGHT WE HAD DONE LAST THURSDAY OR TUESDAY? YEAH. MAKING SURE THAT. OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. THE ANNOUNCEMENTS, CALENDAR AND EVENTS, WE DO HAVE WAR BONNET
[Mayor]
AND I KNOW I WILL BE THERE ON FRIDAY NIGHT. YES. YES. FREEMAN. NO FOR YES. THAT'S A YES.THAT'S THAT MEANS TWO OF US. COUNCILMEMBER LEE. SO JUST MAKING SURE I KNOW WHO WILL BE THERE. BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT'S LIKE, OH, WHERE IS SO-AND-SO? ARE THEY COMING? AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE ARE WAITING TO GET IN THE TRUCK. SO YES. AND DO WE HAVE A TRUCK TIME? THAT'S THE OTHER IMPORTANT DETAIL. 620 WHAT DO WE KNOW? I'LL SEND US A DETAILED DETAIL. IT'S USUALLY ABOUT 615 OR SOMETHING WE MEET. OKAY. I THINK ABOUT 630. THEY DRIVE US AROUND. OKAY.
EVERYTHING ELSE IS WE'RE ON WEEK TWO OF THE DIRECTORS SENDING UPDATES, AND THEN THEY SEND THEM ON WEDNESDAY AND WE'RE SENDING THEM OUT TO COUNCIL ON FRIDAY. IS THAT WORKING FOR YOU? THERE'S THE CALENDAR AND THEN THERE'S KIND OF EVERY DEPARTMENT IS TRYING TO HIGHLIGHT SOMETHING. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS WORKING FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS AS WELL, JUST TO KIND OF KEEP EVERYBODY A LITTLE IN THE LOOP. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OTHER THAN THAT, I'M CURIOUS ABOUT MARY. WERE THERE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO MENTION ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE. I KNOW YOU WAITED AROUND. YEAH. JUST. OH, IT WAS NOT WHAT THEY PRESENTED. AND I,
[01:20:05]
YOU KNOW, OKAY, I KNOW YOU TOLD ME THAT, BUT. OKAY, I JUST WANTED TO. SO THERE WERE THERE WAS A PRESENTATION GIVEN AND THEN IT'S THEN IT'S CHANGED. YEAH. AND WE WROTE OUR LETTER BASED ON WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO US. OKAY. AND OKAY. WHAT I UNDERSTAND NOT WHAT THEY SENT TO YOU GUYS, NOT WHAT THEY SAID. AND WE WILL JUST AS FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME IN, ATTORNEY WILL BE AT THE MEETING NEXT TIME WITH YOU SO THAT WHEN WE'RE MAKING SURE THEY I MEAN, COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL BE THERE AS WELL. AND THEN THERE'S JUST THAT CONSISTENCY WITH THE ATTORNEY THERE TO, TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THOSE EXTRA EYES AND T'S ARE ALL THE SAME. WE GOT ATTORNEY THERE, DIDN'T WE? I THOUGHT WE DID. YEAH. BUT JERRY WAS JERRY WAS THERE. OH YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I THINK IT'S PROBABLY JUST GOING TO BE THAT CREATE THAT CONSISTENCY THIS TIME. SO OKAY, JUST ONE MORE NOTE FROM THE POLICE. THERE'S A SWEARING IN PROMOTION CEREMONY ON AUGUST 5TH AT 330. THAT'S ON MY CALENDAR. COUNCIL MEMBER RADFORD. MEMBER LEE. ANY PERSON? NOTHING. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, THEN* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.