Springfield City Council — October 26, 2026

0:04 Uh Good evening, everybody. I'm going to call the Springfield City Council work session to order with roll call. Here. >> Councilor Weber. >> Here. >> Councilor Moe. >> Here. >> Councilor Rodley Councilor Quadros. >> Here. >> Councilor Buck. >> Here. >> And Councilor Stout. >> And I believe we are expecting both Councilor Rodley and Councilor Stout momentarily. We have three items this evening. The first one is the business license code update with Robin Holman. And Jeff.

0:54 >> Good evening, Mayor and councilors. I'm Robin Holman with the business license program. Staff last presented this topic council on June 1st when council directed staff to continue working on updates to our Springfield Municipal Code Chapter 7 business. Tonight's discussion focuses on the continuation of modernizing business licensing, removing outdated requirements, and seeking council's input on establishing a business registry upon request. Springfield currently licenses certain business types rather than requiring licenses for all businesses. Licensing helps coordinate compliance with local zoning, building code, and fire requirements. Staff recommends repealing and rewriting

1:39 Chapter 7 to improve clarity, organization, and consistency. Key updates include moving from a fiscal year licensing to a 12-month term. Currently, renewals occur in July. Changing to a 12-month term will spread business license renewals more evenly throughout the year, improving distribution of workflow, and making the process more manageable for staff. Standardizing terminology and aligning with the Springfield development code. Incorporating short-term rentals to improve tracking and coordination with land use requirements. During the review of our current municipal code, 12 licenses

2:25 12 license types have been identified as no longer necessary, and staff recommends removing those or combining them with an existing license to reduce redundancy as outlined in attachment two. Additionally, eliminating the redundant city background checks for marijuana businesses when the state background checks already occur. Staff also recommends eliminating our garage sale permits due to administrative burdens and the public dissatisfaction. The existing nuisance compliance codes process would remain available to address any applicable violations. Circling back, establishing a business registry upon request. Since June 1st, I've been tracking

3:11 interest requests for formal recognition of our businesses. As of today, we have 43 requests. As we do not have any form of recognition, we're turning these businesses away, which is not good customer service. Therefore, we're proposing to establish a business registry upon request. Unlike a business license, a registry would be optional information resource, not a requirement to operate. We discussed this option with the Springfield Chamber of Commerce, and they support a registry available upon request. In addition, I've also been exploring ways to improve accessibility for our non-English speaking applicants, including online translation

3:57 and application submission options. Thank you. This concludes our updates. >> Uh Council Edwards. >> Thank you. I love that you did that. Um that uh working on that area, I think is really important. Um so, starting with the business licensing, um before you get to the end of this, the ordinance, if you will, um will we be able to get information on, for example, savings for businesses and staff, um implementation and your ongoing costs that you would be dealing with, um and then that proposed fee schedule? Um have you Are you Are you going down that path yet? >> We're still working on that, but yes, it would be available.

4:43 >> And then that the details on that short-term rental requirements? >> Absolutely. >> Fantastic. Um Councilor Rodsley isn't here, so I'm going to keep going. Um question is this, um is there a way to take the proposed or the voluntary business registry and connect that with the licensing, so that maybe there's a box that says, "Yes, I want the registry." and it doesn't have to be two separate processes? And then someone who maybe doesn't require a license could just join the voluntary side of it? Is that a >> Yeah, we could absolutely look into that. >> Yeah, just sort of efficiencies, if you will. >> Mhm. >> Um I like the general general direction

5:29 you're you're going with this. I think that um I think that there is there is some value to having uh the registries accessible and things like that. Um I think that our business community has been very very supportive of of Springfield and um and you know, they they've supported us on a number of things, including payroll tax and and some of those other things. So, I think that what's important to me is making sure that as we're as we're identifying the registries and and and some of these things um and looking at a fee schedule and those

6:14 kind of things that we're equating you know, what the value there is because >> [clears throat] >> um I don't really want to support a fee if we can't say this is what this is the benefit for you. And I believe that there is. I'm not suggesting that that what you're putting out here doesn't have benefit and value. I think that it does. Um I what I'm saying is we just need to make sure that we're illustrating that really clearly so people understand like hey yeah, we're doing this and there is cost associated with it. There is a fee that um to offset that cost, but you get value out of this. This isn't just the city asking for more money. This is contributing [clears throat] to a value-added service. Um I I think that's really what I've heard the business community talking about wanting to see is

7:00 I just want to see where my ROI is. And I think we can deliver on that. So, that's that's my two cents. My Councilwoman. >> Thank you. I just cuz I'm not really sure I remember what we landed on as far as a fee specific to the business registry last time we talked about this. Do we have a are we doing a yes or no? Do we have an amount that we're considering? >> I can take that. Uh Jeff Pasquale, Community Development Director. We have not, Counselor. Um we'll bring that back to the council for consideration when we do the master fees update in the spring. Um one thing to is we're not looking at this as a revenue generator. It's really um we're going to compare to what other agencies

7:46 kind of do and then look at right-sizing that, but then again, the council will have the final say through the master fees process and we'll definitely highlight that when we get there. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> Uh Counselor Moe. >> This is one of those situations where we start out with a business registry eventually become business licensing in the future. It's just that happens with evolution and that's where we're going. That's all. >> Um if this is voluntary or so how are we approaching uh I guess the renewals? Because if people are using them to sort of business start up, are we assuming that everybody who's volunteered to be in that in that uh in the

8:31 acknowledgement the first year is going to want us to send send them the renewal? >> Yeah, so we would just go through that as an automatic. Um one of the things that you'll see too is is if you recall we used to have some penalties for non-renewal. Um one of the things we're going to when we get to that, I don't know if we did in this last master fee update, but we're looking at um removing that all together. We'll send out renewal notices, give folks 90 days or or some time frame, and then if they haven't renewed rather than penalize them when they do come in, which sometimes the penalty was more than the new license is just they'd have to start from beginning cuz sometimes for a renewal it's a little bit less because they're already in the system. Um but

9:17 but we would send out the automatic since it is voluntary. If they didn't register again, then we'll just assume that they don't want to be as part of that registry again. >> Okay. And then how are we going to communicate because if you're in some industries you're going to have a license that is required and then in some industries we are going to certify that you're an active and legal business here uh in general. So how how are we going to plan on navigating that piece to make sure the people who know they need a license have a license and then if it's optional for you, then then you can come in and and get a I guess a stamp for lack of a better word. >> Any business who would continue needing that actual license to operate would reach out to them

10:03 continually, you know, follow up to ensure they do have their license and follow through with code enforcement if necessary, Um but anybody who is opting not to renew their registry upon request, then we would just >> Yeah, okay. So, it's if you're required a lot more a lot high more high touch, and if you're not in the required track, if it falls if you fall out, then we're not going to worry about it. >> Yeah. >> I think that's where the key is is it's upon request. So, we're not you know, we're not enforcing this, so we're not going to send code enforcement out. It's when folks come to the counter requesting some sort of business acknowledgement that they need for whatever reason is part of getting a loan or getting something it is part of

10:48 their business. And so, this just provides them that opportunity and looking at some nominal way of doing that for them. >> Is part of the business acknowledgement a according to mean that the land use is compliant? Or is it kind of a hard question, right? >> I I would have to look into that and see what the types of businesses we're talking about. We do have some of those issues where people open businesses and maybe they open it in a zoning or some area that's different than that kicks over to code enforcement. So, I can't I don't know if I can get into the specific details you're asking. I would have to go look for an example. >> I we need this to be as least amount of complicated as possible. The only way way that I think I would be in favor of

11:34 that is if you looked at it and said if we did you know, if we connected with you, it would be better customer service, right? All right, we want to be this as low touch, low abrasion as possible. >> Correct. >> All right, anybody else? I think you're you're good. Thank you so much. >> Uh the next item is the fiscal year 2026 annual risk management report, which you may have a

12:38 >> Good evening, Mayor, City Council. My name is Jamie Boa. I'm the risk manager for the city and I'm here to talk with you a little bit today about our FY26 risk report. It's the actually the fourth annual risk report that we've done. And this report is I created basically for the entire organization to be able to use it as a reference tool to help the organization understand and manage the risk exposures that we have and how we can reduce the losses. The report is a five-year look back. It's easier to go with a five-year window. We get better information than if we were to go with a shorter window. Um and when I run this report, I run the

13:24 the the reports that and the analysis that I do for the report as of the end of FY26. So the So June 30. So of course some of the information has changed since then, some claims have closed, we've received new claims, but as of the end of FY26 is what this information is based on. Um and I'm excited to let you know I I think um uh City Manager Newton has sent an email, but this report will also help demonstrate um some of the reasons that the city was presented with this excellence and best practices and risk mitigation award for large cities in Oregon. So on that note, make sure I can control this thing.

14:21 >> Can you please >> [laughter] >> I'll just connect like this. Okay, so in your packet you'll have the actual full risk report which contains a lot more information and a lot more detail than actually what I'm going to be going over this evening. I've just picked out a few of the you know overview slides to go over with you. So the first slide up right now is talks about our general liability claims. And general liability claims are those claims for injuries or damage to somebody's property caused by city operations. And as you can see we're starting um a downward trend which is absolutely great news. And then on the right or on the yes, on the right side

15:06 of the slide you'll see the total incurred for each fiscal year. And total incurred basically means what we've paid out on a claim and if the claim is still open what we have reserved or what we have set aside or CIS has set aside to but that we might potentially have to pay on that claim. That's what total incurred is. When a claim closes then we end up with just what's paid on that claim because the reserves would go away as it's been resolved. So as you'll see here you know it kind of it kind of goes up and down. FY24 was incredible kind of a little bit of a fluke there. Um And out of these claims it's sometimes the larger years we can end up with one,

15:51 two, maybe even three claims that account for a majority of the cost and so it can kind of skew those numbers a little bit. For example the biggest year FY25 three of those claims account for 97% of that total incurred. So it's kind of a a normal thing and that number I do expect it to go down based on what I know about the claims that we're experiencing right now. Um, and out of those five fiscal years, we only have four that, um, resulted in litigation. And of those four litigated claims, two have been resolved. So, there are only two open. The next slide is auto liability claims. So, auto liability claims are for

16:37 damages to people or property or injuries to people or damage to property, um, that has been caused by a city vehicle. It can be an auto crash. Um, it can be, uh, you know, uh, a rock chip. We've had one for a rock chip flew up and hit somebody's windshield or a street sweeper hit a, um, basketball hoop. Those kinds of things. So, it, you know, it's kind of a wide variety of things. And we don't tend to really get a lot of claims, um, a lot of auto liability claims. Um, the fluke on this one in FY24, that was the ice storm. Um, and all three of the claims for that year, um, were I were due to the ice storm and account for that whole, uh, 24,000 that we've got

17:22 incurred there. Next slide, auto physical damage. Kind of an, um, obvious what the that covers. These are claims for damage to a city vehicle. It can be our own employees, the the crash can be our own employees' fault, or it can be somebody else, um, running into one of the the city vehicles. And so, on the left side, I'm showing not only how many claims we had, but how many of those were at fault. Just so you can kind of see that, you know, there there's FY26 was a little bit higher than usual, um, as far as at fault. But, not all of these claims are at fault is what I I definitely wanted to point out. Um, we

18:07 have a $1,000 deductible that we pay for each of these claims. And CIS, our insurance pool, pays the remaining balance. They are also good about, um, recovering against people if there's auto insurance, they will settle with the auto insurance company or subrogate against them. We can also uh work closely with the prosecutor's office or the DA's office for restitution when it's been a result of a crime. And CIS is really they've got a good record of recovery for us. So, um and then of course on the right hand side is the total amount incurred uh for the claims. Um in FY 26, four claims incurred over 50,000, but

18:53 only one of those was at fault. So, um there was a total uh loss and then some significant damage to a couple of fire apparatus. So, workers' compensation claims, these are claims that are filed with Safe Corporation, who is our workers' compensation insurance carrier. And these are for claims um for injuries to city employees. Again, the numbers are going down, and this is part of the reason that we received the um award um is we've had a a reduction in claims over the last 3 years, um which is demonstrated on the graph there. Um in FY 24 and FY 25, there are only two claims still open from uh each of those

19:39 years. And then for FY 26, of course, it's a uh more recent year. We've got six claims open, um but I expect most of those are going to be closed here pretty soon. And then on the right side, uh the total amount incurred citywide for claims, again, another fluke like I talked about, you can end up with um one, two, or three claims that are going to make that number look quite a bit higher. And in FY 24, three workers' compensation claims account for 81% of that total 621,000 incurred. Um the most frequently injured body part is I I lump wrist, hand, and fingers together. That's um the most frequently injured body part and of course accounts

20:25 for the most costly um, body part category. Um, the most common causes um, for workers compensation claims involve training and physical fitness injuries for police and fire and then medical calls. Um, and then the most common type is of course sprain and strain which is nationwide that that tends to be the the most common type of injury incurred in workers comp. So this graph um, this demonstrates our experience modifier and the experience modifier is important because this along with our payroll numbers is what dictates our premium for workers compensation coverage. For um, the uh, to kind of give you an understanding of what these numbers

21:10 mean, a a a one means for other entities in the city of comparable size, a one is an average experience. And so anything under one is good. And so you can see our numbers are going down. Um, I do provide an explanation in the risk report on how this is calculated. It's really complicated. Um, they look back at the last four years of our claims history, how many claims we've had and how costly they were, but they exclude the most recent fiscal year. So for example, FY27 would have been based on 22 or 23, 24, and 25. Um, so it is a little bit complicated, but numbers are

21:56 going down. Unfortunately, I'm if not in FY28 then FY29 I expect to see it bump up a little get bit. We've got a couple of uh, claims in FY25 and 26 that are going to um, incur uh, quite a bit of cost. Um, and then the class code also for fire and police is continually going up year after year. And so that's going to increase payroll um, quite a bit and that is what is also um, accounted for in the experience modifier. And I mistitled this this screen. It should say insurance premiums. It does, but says works comp

22:41 claims at the top. Sorry about that. So this graph shows all of the different insurances that we pay, and it kind of gives you an idea over the last I actually include six fiscal years here because I want to stay consistent and provide five, but by the time I'm doing this report, we've already paid the current fiscal year premiums, and so I always include those as well. As you can see, we're having increases in the property premium, which is the yellow line. And most of that is due to we every year our broker will trend our property values just to make sure that the value stays current and we're not holding those values static because of course they're they're going to the value is

23:26 going to increase all the time. And then in FY 25, CIS actually sent in an appraiser to appraise some of our more expensive buildings, and so that is what the reason for the increase in the property premium. The GL premium, the general liability premium, because we've had some favorable experience, the premium actually went down. So that was exciting information. We had a few bad years, FY 20, 21, 22, but things are are starting to come down, and we're we're seeing that in that reduction in premium. Um So and I misspoke, it's the blue line that's property. So the yellow line is actually the workers' compensation, and for the reasons I mentioned on the on the previous slide, that that's going to continue to go up

24:12 because payroll is going to continue to go up, and then those workers' compensation or NCCI codes that dictate what we have to pay based on the risk of of of the the employment. So police and fire are higher. those those continued to go up. Um then everything else is kind of, you know, remaining uh pretty steady. The miscellaneous category, those are going to be things like the bond that we carry for the city manager and the finance director, uh crime coverage, um our pension trust, and then volunteer medical coverage. And there's a a few other little small ones in there. So, um pictures looking pretty good. And that is all I had for you, but I'm

24:58 available if you for any questions you might have. >> Councilor Buck. Um I thought you did a really good job on this first report. Um I I didn't I I thought that it was really really clear. Um it's not necessarily as complicated for me um cuz I I look at these things from time to time as, you know, but uh I really like um a lot of the efforts you guys you guys have done to not only measure where our risk is, categorize it, um but also look at ways to mitigate that. I think that um I think that as we see that inverse trend, um I think we'll continue to see that inverse trend in property and and

25:45 uh property values and and costs, that's going to just continue to go up because that's just what it does. Uh but I think that looking at at the things such as um our property, um our auto. And then I was really glad to see that we're including cyber in there um in in all of that. So, I thought you did a really good job on this first report. I think that it reflects a lot of hard work. Um and I, you know, I was I I would just say good job. >> Thank you. >> Uh Nancy. >> Councilor Buck just said it better than I could have, actually. But I just wanted to recognize Jamie and his team for the excellent work that they've done in risk mitigation across the organization. It's It's of a dry subject, a lot of numbers, but there are

26:31 tangible results to the city and savings in our in our funding and also protecting our employees and that's really important. So, thank you Jamie and everybody over at HR. >> Um I didn't have any questions. I thought the report looked great, but I wanted to acknowledge the substantial amount of work that we put into this area the the last probably 5 years and the efforts that, you know, all all of the city has gone through to make sure we drive down risk in the organization. We see it in the report, but it's also something that's very tangible with with how we interact with the public as well as for our financial stewardship. So, thank you. Thank you. Counselor Stout. >> Thank you. Um

27:17 Two questions. One briefly is, do we have trackers in all of our city vehicles? >> I believe most and Ben Gibson should be here somewhere. He's the one that will have an exact answer to that question. Most, okay. >> Okay, cool. And then um And then you mentioned that the sprain is the most common type of injury, but since we're looking in your comparing that to like what you see nationally, I was curious if there's anything else nationally that you see where they're doing um better than average or or have an opportunity to improve as compared to sort of like a general swath of how cities are performing. Did you see any of that in your work? >> I haven't given I haven't did uh kind of delve into that a lot um because the way I look at it is

28:03 you know, it is important to know what is happening with other other cities, other entities comparable to us, but everybody kind of has their own experiences and their own risks and I'm wanting more to concentrate on what can we do to help ourselves first. And so, I haven't spent a lot of time looking into that. You know, kind of informally just checking a few data points here and there. >> Anybody else? >> I would like to add one more thing real quick. Um it it is probably something that I could have talked about next year, but I also wanted to point out um I recently participated with the police department. They underwent a pretty um intense and thorough risk assessment uh

28:50 with our pool. They looked at HR practices, they looked at operations, and they looked at the jail. And because they have done such an incredible job over there protecting staff, protecting property, protecting the community, um they are scoring very high. We don't have the final report yet. Um so we expect in FY28 that we will be getting a premium reduction due to the great work done at the jail and at the police department. We don't know the number yet. Um it's going to be at least 3%. It could be as much as 5%. But uh and CIS just is implementing that for the first time in FY28. If you do poorly, you can also have an increase in premium. Um but the department has done a great job, and so we do expect to see a reduction in

29:36 our premium. So, wanted to make sure and get that little call out for them there. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Now, let's on to the street operating fund 5-year forecast. >> Thank you, Mayor. Uh Jeff Pascoe, Community Development Director. Um so tonight we're here to talk about the city's street operating fund. Um it's as you can see from the material provided, it's uh been a topic that we've revisited for several decades or had to visit several decades. So, I just wanted to provide everybody kind of that historical context for activities and actions that have been taken by um councils in the past, state

30:22 legislature, all of that other um all those other entities, county, the different things the county's tried. Um and kind of that ebb and flow or um cyclical cycle of um street funding. Um So, but moving ahead, I wanted to talk about the the fiscal. So, when you look at um attachment two, where I provided the charts and tables to kind of give you that forecast and that look ahead, um one thing to note is that in FY26 and FY27, we had already implemented some cuts. Um those cuts total about a uh $550,000 total. Those are staff savings um went by managing vacancies. So, across the community development and operations,

31:08 we've in essence reduced four staff in the street fund already. Um and that's, like I said, by managing vacancies that we had in other utilities and moving folks around. Um Also, if you recall the sweeper program, we moved that. You saw that in SB1. Um moved that from storm wa- or from streets into stormwater. Um and then also managing some of our other materials and services. So, the and those are ongoing cuts. Um Looking ahead, the one thing to note when you look at that five-year forecast in attachment two is that what is obvious is the status quo isn't sustainable. Um right now, we're if you look at that, we can manage it really for one more year, FY28. And then reserves are just not going to keep

31:53 pace. Um and so, what what we're here for tonight is to really look to the council for that guidance on when as we look to prepare FY28's budget, um where um do you see service cuts potentially that um we can look at? What kind of targets do we want to hit? Um And then also looking beyond FY28, what other kind of revenue to try and diversify our revenue stream um can we look at? Um To illustrate the magnitude of um cuts targets, if we were to reduce our FY28 budget by um half a million dollars, so $500,000, that puts our negative um begin- ending

32:38 balance to FY31. A million dollar cut in FY28 pushes that negative ending balance out to FY34. And that's just illustrative. That That staff has not looked at any specific area to cut. That's just looking if we were to reduce expenses um by that amount. Um and so I guess really looking for council's discussion, guidance on um service priority areas, um and that sort of thing. And then again, the long-term kind of solutions. >> Councilor Quadros. >> Thank you. I'm going to need I was hoping that Nathan was here. So, um fiscal year 26 27 are Is that that still your projected? Where are we at in year

33:24 end? >> Oh, year end we've closed um 26. So, I believe looking at talking about those the numbers it says projected, but we closed. So, those are actually the closed numbers in 26. And so, that beginning cash for FY27 would have been what was in a I believe in in supplemental budget one. >> So, that's the discrepancy between the 2.1 uh ending fund balance balance in 26 27 and the 1.2 beginning fund balance cuz I I I'm not finding 837,000. See how ending fund balance fiscal year 26 27 beginning fund balance 27 20 I was just looking for an update on that.

34:09 >> Oh, from 27? >> 26 27 has 1.2 as a starting fund balance. >> So, the beginning fund balance for 26 27, which is current fiscal year. This is the actual number. So, it's the ending balance from last fiscal year. So. >> Right. I'm What I'm What I'm not seeing is the ending fund balance from 2026-2027 at budgeted at 2.1 million. But then a budgeted starting fund

34:56 balance in 2027-2028 of only 1.2 million. So, I I'm missing some We're missing some money. >> Oh, okay. I see what you're saying. Yeah. Um. >> So. >> I have to I have to double-check. Can we double-check on that for you? >> Yeah, absolutely. But I don't know that we're going to be able to make any really solid recommendations because at least with my math, that would put us at a different year with a different outcome. >> Yeah. No, understood. >> Okay. I was hoping there was an answer there, but >> Okay. >> Um I I think Yeah, and Tatiana's going to double-check real quick cuz she she could probably pull it up really quickly when she looks at the numbers and just see what the map is. Um I think regardless of that year, I

35:43 think we're still facing One thing we know is the state did put out I mean, they did a pass a package to increase gas tax that was referred, voted down. The one thing we are hearing is that And I think to use the word, it's 50/50, which I think is really optimistic. I'm not certain that 50/50 is even appropriate number that the state legislature is even going to get in a package to address in this next legislative cycle for transportation. And so, I think regardless what we are facing is we are going to hit a negative number because we are relying more on reserves. We can get that specific like fiscal year when we will, but I think we are still facing

36:28 some tough decisions within the street fund or looking at what do we do with our revenue streams and where do we look to diversify? >> All right, Council Clodfelter, do you have any more questions? I can go to somebody else. Okay. Uh, Council Roddy. >> Thank you. Um, and thank you for this. Um, could you say more about what is in the intergovernmental, you know, that's the that's the biggest one there. So, I'm curious as to like what's in there. >> So, that intergovernmental is what we get from the state. That's our state apportionment. That that big number you see is our state apportionment. Mhm. No. Um, most of our um, federal funds go

37:15 into capital. Um, those would be So, when you look at the charts that I provided, so that is one thing our capital fund looks really good now, but a lot of that fund, if you look our discretionary bucket of money to use on any project that that we may need to do is only is less than half a million dollars. Um, and the other thing to note is we're not able to make transfers to our capital fund right now from the operating side of things or we're not doing that. And so, that that half a million dollars or less is that's going to stay the way it is or go down as we move other projects forward. Um, and the the largest pound of that money you see in the capital fund is bonds, um, which are dedicated to certain streets.

38:00 Um, 42nd Street is another big portion of that and that money is dedicated towards 42nd Street and then other grants that we've received from either FHWA or um, ODOT itself. And so, those are usually dedicated to specific projects. Um, and one thing to think about, we've done a really good job with the bonds of getting our um, road index rating up, especially on our locals and um, our our collectors and arterials. And the one thing we haven't been able to do is really keep up on our local streets. >> [snorts] >> All right, Council Buckham. >> So, um, first of all, uh, just thank you for bringing that up,

38:45 Council Codres. I was wondering where 800,000 was as well. Uh, Um >> [clears throat] >> so thank you. And and I I definitely concur um until I until we can get you know, clarity on that cuz while I understand that we're still working on a deficit, um that that changes the math significantly from, you know, 172 to a whole lot less. Um like maybe yeah, so um so there's that. And then I guess the other thing that I wanted to revisit and and Jeff, I know you've you've you've talked about this before. >> [clears throat] >> I'm trying to get a sense um I'm trying to recall from previous presentations.

39:31 We've talked a little bit in the past about how, you know, one of the contributing factors here is deferred maintenance. We had some deferred maintenance over the course of a number of years and we're getting that caught up. And so I'm wondering um A is is that a contributing factor to increase cost as as we're doing we're getting caught up on work um that, you know, maybe has been deferred over the course of time. And and then also um if that's the case, um how are we looking to to stay ahead of that curve so we're not just continually kind of um behind the behind the curve on that.

40:18 Um and I know those are somewhat hard to answer, but that's kind of like generally I'm I'm kind of hoping to get a sense of where we're at on that. And and and clearly we can't fix, you know, several decades of deferred maintenance in like, you know, just a year or two, but I'm just curious um the impact there. >> Um if I recall and this is when I put the information together for the last bond that I brought in front of the council for approval as we looked at what streets our deferred maintenance was around what I'd estimated and those dollars was around 120 some million dollars. Um, one thing I will say is when I look at the um, road index, we've done a really good

41:03 job as I said on arterials and collectors. Um, and so keeping those maintained where we haven't been able to put a lot of dollars is on local streets and I think um, we all experience drive all those streets, our neighbors drive all those streets and some of those older roads are really um, in disrepair. Um, and some of the streets where we don't have full improvements are really in disrepair and so um, I think we had estimated we needed roughly about and this was about 10 years ago, about 4 and 1/2 million dollars a year to get caught up on local streets. I don't know what that number would be now, but definitely as operations works with our GIS group and we've been bringing that report, that street report back and definitely work with them to

41:49 get clear numbers when we bring every year when we bring that kind of street report back to kind of say where are we at on the um, the road rating and where are we at on our deficit and how is that growing? >> I I got you next. I have a question and and I this is probably going to come off a little grouchy, so forgive me in advance. And I need more sleep. Um, one of the values that I think we've had and we that we've been frustrated to move forward has been um, a preference for some of our local streets that have been disrepair. And that's such a sign and that's that's the political question, right? I'm looking at your um, slide number three on the street operating fund expenditures program

42:35 and I'm just curious how much does a local street require traffic system engineering and maintenance, street and right-of-way management, open spaces and general engineering cuz those are the those are the big ticket items on the operating fund expenditures. And I'm just curious how do those relate to a local street? >> Well, I mean since that's across the system, I would say right now when I look at my capital if I were to break down the capital budget, the majority of that engineering time is spent on moving those capital projects forward. Um and and so I would say if if we had a sudden policy shift where we were going to move more dollars into local street, it would still be that staff time, but we would

43:21 be focusing more of our capital dollars on the local streets. Where right now it's like we're moving bonds forward and those are going to collectors and arterials. Um and the parks and the open space, I mean it would be street trees, that sort of thing. So I I'd have to look to operations and how much time they're spending on local streets versus arterial and collectors with street trees, but that's that open space and and landscaping. >> I love that. Just permit me a follow-up to that. This is this is a great question. I think I'm curious um if we're spending the engineering and management money, let's say, but that's coming out of the operating expenditures, but we're saying that's we're using that to cover what we're expecting to spend in terms of capital or the capital projects, right? We're plan we're using our operating

44:06 expenditures to plan for how we're going to spend the capital dollars. To me that seems to be a little bit backwards. I want to be able to use the capital dollars Do you see what I'm getting? I can you just tell me that? >> so. I I I think I understand. So I think we're talking about a couple different things. So the way we're budgeted is all of our staff are budgeted in the operating side. Capital expenditures are budgeted. So that's like the asphalt, the pavement, all that. And then if we hire consultants to help us with some of those those management. So those are those construction projects. But our staff who manage those, put those contracts together, do the designs, and that sort of thing are all budgeted in 201. And so kind of two different sides. >> That's extremely helpful. So then I can I think I would still come back to my

44:52 original question, which is hey, if we just need to repave some pretty nasty looking streets, how much traffic system engineering and management is required for a simple a simple neighborhood street? >> Mhm. So, I if I were putting estimates together, I'm going to go back to my how we put estimates. So, typically, if we were to say go spend a million dollars on say we wanted to put a million dollars on the road just in local street, whatever that work is, million dollars. Typically, we're at around 20% or so for probably internal engineering. So, a $200,000 is what we would spend putting all of the contracts, everything together, designs. If we what we're experiencing and and

45:38 Stans here, he could probably have better pulse on the numbers, but what we're experiencing like consultant-wise is we're probably upwards in the 30% just because cost increases in in consulting fees. But, so that does I hope that that helps you understand. So, if we were to were to put a million, it's usually around 20% for engineering, um and then other we know whatever other things that we need out of that from operations. >> And I and forgive me just one last thing, is I just got I'm curious the question behind the question is is there any way to sharpen our pencil with respect to that because we're talk we're not talking about interchanges, we're not talking about heavy traffic, we're not talking about heavy weights. We're talking about a neighborhood street. I understand there's a lot more to do with the storm water and that probably is the biggest feat so that we're not flooding

46:23 our local streets, but I'm just curious, is there any way to sharpen our pencil so that we're not looking for outside consultants and bumping that up because if I want to be able to come back to the to the local taxpayer and say, hey, we got this street repaved, which I know I understand like it's very structurally hard to do that, but is there any way to sharpen our pencil on that project? >> I I would answer that with I think we already pretty sharp and lean just with our staffing. I mean, we're still trying to put the same number of projects out that we had previously with two less FTE. And so, I I would say as far as how we're utilizing our staff itself, we're probably one of the leanest organizations for the amount of work we get done. If we if I

47:08 were to look at some of our neighboring um firm or engineering agencies. >> Okay. So, before we go to Council Rodli, I want to ask a follow-up question specifically around that that design and capital question. So, when I think about the road bond, right? Those are specifically you know, capital projects, capital bonds. Are we And the way you just described it is the engineering's kind of being paid out of the operating fund. Now, are we technically allowed, you know, in the future to use the capital dollars to pay for the engineering to go for those projects or is there kind of like a wall in between those two things from from a legal perspective? >> Uh there's not a wall and we do pay for

47:54 our engineering fund out of that. Um one caveat to that is when we bought we sold the bonds or when we approved the bonds to the inflation we're seeing, it's the last thing we're paying for because we want to ensure that the projects get done. >> Okay. So, we're we're effectively um kind of snapping the line on inflation's eating away on the overall bond and we're effectively pulling back the engineering function to make sure that we're still delivering for the public. Correct. >> Our first goal is to get the streets the the projects that we promised in the bond done and then whatever dollars, if there are dollars available to pay back for the staff time that went into putting those projects together, we'll pay that back. >> Okay, great. Council Rodli. >> Thank you. And I think I'm thinking all

48:39 similarly along the same lines. Um so, all of this is really helpful and I think, you know, we've seen such an increase in prices, right? And cost of just doing this work makes it harder. Um and I'm I'm struck on something you said is like we're doing the same amount of projects with less staff. Um and I know we have talked for a while, I'm kind of circling around it, but we've talked for a while up here about, you know, we we prioritize the projects for the bond, but we haven't done any sort of like prior at least not us, prioritizing smaller those smaller neighborhood projects. And so, if I'm looking at this as a as a problem to solve, wondering if a future council folk, um, maybe we can't do as many

49:25 projects, but the impact I just have this hunch that the impacts of those smaller neighborhood projects that we haven't been able to get to say in Ward 4 or Ward 5 or, you know, North Springfield, could be really impactful and perhaps cost less. It'd be interesting to see, you know, how we go through that process of putting together, well, we by we I mean you, >> Mhm. >> the process of putting together the projects for the bond and we all fight about it and say, "I want more than this and this." Um, and every time I drive 21st, I'm like, "Could this be in the next bond?" But, um, maybe there's a way to come come up with a plan of like, "What if we, you know, targeted these specific smaller projects and maybe it's less, which would, you know, maybe cost less, but also the impact could be huge?"

50:10 >> Mhm. Okay. Um, I've got a question specifically about the about the capital dollars. And when I'm thinking again, we're trying to balance two things. We're making I think we're making progress on um, part of the system on our collectors and arterials with with the bond. When I think about the residential streets, so I think about, you know, those times when we, you know, either crack seal or overlay, those are the people that when I see the operations line, that's where the money for those folks are coming from. Is that work that is sort of touching the $500,000 in in capital to spend for it or is that just sort of the people we have in the materials that in supplies that we have on hand, it's all coming out of the the operations and

50:56 maintenance? >> So, if you're referring to say the seal and and poly, yes, those that's a budgeted in operation on the operating side in 201. In 434, that would be like when we do the slurry seal. So, the slurry seal projects that we've done for the last few years, well, since 2018 after House Bill 2017 passed and we re um, ignited that project, those projects were paid for out of that discretionary pot of money, which is targeted at local streets. Um, and one thing if I could circle back to a comment that Counselor Stout made in when we talk about stormwater, we pay for the stormwater out of the stormwater capital fund. So, that's one way to try and bridge that. So, if there's stormwater

51:42 quality items on a project or wastewater items on a project, we try to pay for them out of their discrete budgets. >> I I think what I meant on that one was the slope of the street is an engineering question. It's not going to come out of the stormwater budget, so. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um, I've got if we just think okay, could you go back to the number that we would have to have to move from an operations perspective to move the dial on the residential? It seemed like it was four and a half, like all money's good money in this in this conversation. >> Yeah, four and a half million is what we had estimated about probably 10 years ago. I can't remember what the number I had in 2022 when we started talking

52:27 about renewing the bond. I I remember the overall number, which was around 128 or around that. I just can't remember how much of that was attributed to local streets. Um, but I would say when I look at what if we could start at 5 billion, we right now without staffing up would would that would be like a struggle for us right now, but that would be a good struggle. I would classify that as if we're getting that on the streets for locals. Um, and kind of to touch on what Counselor Ridley said in the next bond, um, if that's the direction the council wants to go in renewing another bond, I think we targeted arterials and collectors purposefully in the first two because of the cost of reconstructing those. I mean, we saw that experience on

53:13 Mill Street. Um and so that's why we target those. And And it's also roads that impact everybody who drives and businesses and um and so I always think about when I have if I had to reconstruct Mohawk Boulevard, I think I brought that up at the time. It's like that length of time you saw it took to do Mill Street and what's that business impact if we're out there impacting those businesses for that long. And so that's why it's kind of beneficial to do those rehab projects. But we're kind of get we're getting to a point where when I look at arterials and collectors, we're really good. So, you know, that could be a conversation for the council it should they choose to look at another bond of targeting um local streets with that bond. >> Go ahead, Councilmember Buck.

54:00 >> Yeah, [clears throat] I think that I think that one of the things that um I'm hearing and and I'm I'm get I'm going to just going to let me hear and it's all all my fellow councilors are hearing is is while it's great that that Mill Street got taken care of and and some of our other streets are getting taken care of, um people are are are really clear about the street in front of their house that's not taken care of and and it's becoming a it's becoming the the topic that people are wanting to talk about. So, I think the community has a lot of value on that. Um so, you know, I think that as we're going to the public and asking for, you know, bond

54:47 dollars and those kind of things, we also have to be be able to to say we're we're delivering what you want. Um I I can't go to I mean, there's there's people here tonight that have have talked to all of us and said, "Hey, I'm going to lose it I'm going to lose a tire and and on in the street in front of my house. I I why can't we get to this? So, it's something we're hearing more and more about, and so I would have a hard time talking about um a road bond without saying, "How are we going to fix the these streets um in our neighborhoods?" Because people see those every single day. >> And Jeff, remind me that the the current road bond that we're on still is got

55:32 goes through like 29, right? >> Yeah, we renewed it in '24. >> All right. So, if we were if we waited to till it expired, right, we would be out at '29 before we'd ask again, or we'd have to ask for a net new bond. Go ahead, Council Weber. >> I just looking ahead and kind of tied to that question, um recently I've had the question come across my radar a couple of times about the material used on mill streets construction, concrete versus some other material. Um and I think my understanding is that that makes it more durable for the long term, but is there as we're looking at these other streets that we're working on, is there a way to minimize the cost with different materials, or is that the direction that

56:18 we we plan to take on the other rehabs? >> Um typically with local we would probably stick with asphalt. Um our engineering group and you know, at the time we always look at a life cycle analysis, and so I think on arterials and collectors, um especially our heavy used collectors, arterials, it concrete makes sense just for a life cycle analysis. I mean, I always use B Street as an example. That was paved in 1997. I mean, you go pressure wash it and it looks brand new. So, when you think about it, what that life cycle analysis, and we haven't had to do really anything on that street, that's that's kind of why we look at those that material. But on a local street, it probably doesn't make sense. Though I can look at streets

57:03 like J Street and I Street that were paved for some reason back in the '60s in concrete, and they are still in great shape, and the repairs we have to do on them are minimal or isolated. >> I just wanted to be able to answer that question cuz it's come up a couple of times recently. I wanted to make sure I had the right >> Yeah. >> right memory on that. Um so I I think I have one other question too. This intergovernmental fund dollars, those are speculative, right? Or >> projected >> projected, yeah. >> and I think what you'll see if you look at the um chart that was included in the memo that just shows our revenues and expenses, I think you can see how that mirrors in like 24 when you could see it going up, our expenses were kind of mirroring that. That was the last two years or two cycles of the two cent

57:49 increase based on House Bill 2017 and then we're projecting, you know, as we look out, what we're experiencing is that our either revenue is staying flat or slightly on a downturn and and that's kind of why I point, you know, our gas tax is not um tied to inflation. So. Um you know, it hits a point, it stays the same, but yet our costs go up. >> Okay, so we're fairly confident in that number. >> I I I would say just based on trends of what we're seeing, yeah. And we're conservative, so if we're wrong, hopefully we're wrong in the positive on the right side, yeah. So I always like to try and take a very conservative look at that when I'm looking at the trend lines just because I had to be here before in front of past council saying we're cutting different projects in the

58:35 middle of the year because we over estimated our revenues in some regard. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> All right. Um Um Council Quadros. >> I just have a couple of pieces of feedback. Um I do talk to a lot of people uh knocking on their doors. Um and I hear, "Please spend less on one and do five." Um so that would be that Mill Street conversation. I hear that a lot. Um the other thing is is I think it would be really important for us to talk about to the community in ways that they understand why they they see $35 million sitting in coffers and they are driving on the streets. We understand it in this room, but I do think it's really important to

59:20 speak to the community in those ways. Um and not that I necessarily want to go way, way back, but the conversation that you have in the report about the 2007 um sort of ending of the million dollars a year from the county. Um that was timber-related funding, but a correct me if I'm wrong. Wasn't that reallocated all the way up to today just with different names on the funding? Since that was small schools. >> Yeah, but it's gone down and it's just it's allocated to different projects. I wouldn't call it the same. I'd have to go do more research on the history of how that would came through the feds to the county, but we are not receiving money from the county anymore.

1:00:05 >> And so >> You were talking before we would receive basically a check from the county for a million dollars. Right. We just put into our street fund and could spend on our streets however we wanted. A lot of the projects and a lot of the funding now that comes from the fed whether it come typically comes through the state to us. Um and going back to your question or your comment on Mill Street and and I agree and and on the communication to the public is those dollars are specific to that project. We we go out and I and I know that gets tough. It gets tougher us in our world too because sometimes we're looking at streets that maybe weren't right where we wanted or weren't in that area where we needed to go do

1:00:50 something on them, but it's the street or the project that fits the grant application criteria to make us the most successful, but it may not be the project that everybody wanted to do. >> Well, I mean I think we got to back up a we got a couple of things. One of the things is when we went out for the original the original projects uh the original bond or probably circa 2018, the commitment we made to the community that what was we were going to fix Mill Street. That was part of the campaign. That it was a discussion about re- repaving Mill Street and repaving 42nd Street. So, I think the first caveat we have to have is really ground people in how did we get here, right? When you tell this tell the entire story, when we say we're going to do something, we're going to do something.

1:01:36 Now, the second piece to it and I've heard this a couple of times and Jeff, this may be the first takeaway as far as giving us, you know, some more um facts to kind of educate the educate the public, right? Because the thing I hear about Mill Street is Mill Street was really expensive, right? But, this entire street had failed. And that there wasn't, you know, yeah, we could probably argue around was concrete the right the right stage or not and what does that all mean, but that entire road had failed at that point that there effectively wasn't a cheaper option because we didn't preserve, you know, preserve the road at that point. And so, I think giving us a couple bullet points so we could help remind people, talk to people cuz we've had new people move into the city since then about well, why does it look the

1:02:22 way that it did? >> Mhm. >> And then the other bullet point really is about the concrete about the concrete piece, which means it's effectively yeah, we paid more up front, but we have zero maintenance costs. >> Yeah. >> And so, if we can kind of get some of those places and then probably add a bullet point because people are going to look at some of the pedestrian features on Mill Street and say, well, why, right? And helping us remember the that there's ADA requirements, right? We're getting We're all getting that question right now. And that there's sort of federal transportation requirements because it was a federal project. We had to do certain things. That would help us all. And then we can kind of feed that back back to folks. >> Mhm. >> And then I think the other kind of next step here is,

1:03:08 you know, we've got this conversation at the state that we've got to track from at the legislative perspective. So, I think I would like to get more information from the legislative folks about where is that? How do we engage with the legislative committee? And um and then broadly talk about how do we do the communication to the public about what's going on with roads and how and why and and what because there is a like I think Council Buck said it right, which is we are getting a lot of questions. People are deeply concerned about the road that's like 10 ft out their front door. And then Council would you mind jumping in before we talk about other >> Well, and to touch on both your comments and Council Quadrus, I think that was

1:03:53 kind of the purpose is I wanted to get in front of the council first before we got out to the public and get your feedback as we got as I go back and work with the communications team to put a comprehensive kind of um public education plan and communication plan together. Um I didn't want any of you to be surprised at seeing something the first time in social media or >> And I think that's why I'm bringing up the the 2007 sort of loss of what we were leaning into as our ongoing funding of roads because I can tell you that the community is like, "What did you do?" And I don't know that they're hearing that that funding got lost and and just adding that last piece. So, the three pieces that I'm saying is

1:04:38 to tell you that they're saying out there, "If you could just spend a little less on these projects and do a few more things." One. Number two being um if you've got 35 million, we just need to be communicative of of their earmarked. And then number three is I think sharing with the community that this loss of funding created this situation that we just need to rebuild, restart, and get that going. And those streets being the ones. >> Uh Council Rodli. >> Well, and to add to that, which I think Council Quadrus did a great job of sort of segueing into because we've talked about the projects. And now one of your other questions is what about revenue, right? And I think um that was definitely got lost in the um, with the transportation

1:05:23 bill last um, year, which we decided as a city that we were going to support because it was going to double the amount of funding coming back so that we could work on these projects. Um, and I think that that's going to be important for folks to understand if as we're going to go out and talk about community. It might be really helpful for people to see, "Hey, this is actually where the revenue does or doesn't come from, right?" Here's what it looked like in 20 2007 and here's what it looks like now. Um, just like when I was saying, "Well, tell us talk about what that intergovernmental is and how that comes to us." Um, because I do think that people um, and and it's complicated. Like I remember 10 years ago trying to figure out like, "What? We can We can get a million bazillion dollars to fix something new, but we can't fix the potholes because of where

1:06:08 the funding comes from." And that's a really hard thing for people to understand cuz it feels like it seems like it should be so simple. Someone can come out here with a bucket. So, I think in terms of like thinking about the revenue, having folks and even folks up here understand where it's coming from can help us to start to maybe stimulate thinking about, "Well, do we advocate for more funding? Do we think about what how how we raise more revenue for this?" And maybe if you know, there's enough community understanding, then we can get some like community pressure and involvement to be like, "No, this is a priority and this is where we want to spend money because we can't spend it everywhere." Does that make sense? >> I got a question. >> Just one question. Um, heavy not heavy vehicle weight mile

1:06:53 taxes. Is that all lumped into what we see in here or what what what pot of money does the do weight mile taxes go into? I know that we only get cities on the whole only get 20% of the total weight mile tax generated. What do we see of that and where does it go? >> It That's what you see in that intergovernmental. So, it's That's We're just trying to kind of lump everything together in that. So, you're not seeing it all broken out, but that's our gas tax apportionment, our weight mile apportionment, registration fee apportionment. That's all in that five. >> So, >> That's million. >> That's a great answer to that. And I I think I I bring that up to my fellow counselors just to say that I and I would at least be interested just ad hoc knowing, "Hey, what percentage are we getting from each of these different things?" Um

1:07:38 oh, I I bring that up because when we look at like the the amount of impact that a heavy truck has a on a roadway versus a car has on a roadway versus like where we're getting these funding sources. I know we have the discretion to do what we will with them. But I think there's there's an interesting question to me to ask to say, "If I'm if of that, you know, 5.8 million dollars, I'm you know, 1 million of that came from heavy vehicle use, is that an opportunity to both say, 'Hey, we're investing that in the trails where we see or in the routes where we see heavy vehicles the most' and also to say, 'And that's just not sufficient from to from the state level.' Um as cuz again, I I really appreciated your history from the uh uh uh like which things got passed

1:08:23 where it seems like at a state level things got passed, but on a local level they just didn't. Um I I think it's just an interesting conversation at least for the legislative uh matters to just to know what we're actually getting from ODOT in terms of um our our taxes that, you know, I pay on that side back to the community directly. Thank you. >> Okay, anybody else? Um so, I think we got like a really good discussion going. I think it's communication, right? I think Council Quadracci has got a couple a couple of good points and Council Roddey's uh got a good point about like really we're trying to tie this into whatever the legislative discussion is at the state level and make it clear that when we like if there's a state transportation package, that that's

1:09:08 going to flow down to our um to the roads that people see, you know, in in essentially in front of them. Um I would love to have more time probably in the spring and have us talk about streets again where you've had some of this a chance to put some of this material uh potentially potentially together because I think it's going to help people get their arms around it. I think and I think Nancy Look, I know you're getting ready to put together the budget and that's the overall arching arching you know, drive for this conversation. I don't know what they other the other numbers look like but I we could you know, there is a community interest here, right? I think there would be some interest and support if people evaluated

1:09:54 a general fund transfer in the short term. >> Thank you Mary. I think that's this has been a productive discussion. A couple of points that I wanted to circle back on. Regarding the capital funding versus operations fund it is it can be confusing because we do you know, count a lot of things as part of a capital fund. And then we also you know, account for the bond projects in that in that fund as well. Um, you know, we the council selected the bond projects based on what they believe would garner the most benefit for the most amount of people in the city which would tend to be you know, logically then arterial and collector streets. But we also know that people in their own neighborhoods you know, feel

1:10:40 strongly about the streets that they drive every day too. So it's always a balance on those on those points. I think moving forward perhaps I you know, staff would like to talk about you know, what decision packages could come before the council. So if you are making you know, pulling on one end of the of the lever so to speak you know, like okay, we want to look at reduct a reduction by a certain amount. What what is the actual programmatic in in impact in the city. I think that's an important piece of information. Um, and then you know, addressing some of Council Quadros's questions. Apologies for the for the chart in there. We'll get that straightened out. But I think it um, there's a there's a policy decision in here for the governing body as far as what they want to prioritize

1:11:26 in the city as far as our transportation funding. And if if we do decide to seek another bond or some other alternate funding source, how how you would want to look at that prioritization. And I think that's a good policy conversation to have. >> Yeah. Um I think ultimately what we're going down towards is a simple uh transportation strategy so we can start to explain it explain the challenges that we're having to the public and and begin to answer their questions because right now we're at the very first step of this conversation which is really just communicating solicit solicit feedback. We all know that that we're hearing it, you know, hearing from folks in their neighborhoods. And there's a couple of things that places in town that, you know, that we've heard consistently about. 21st Street, 28th Street, right? That little section next

1:12:12 to Safeway on 2nd Street. There you know, I think there you know, we consistently hear from Rainbow. Just making sure that people know that we know and that, you know, part of the challenge is we just got to work the problem ahead of us. >> Councilor Buck. >> And then just, you know, >> [clears throat] >> I guess the the the question I have with this is is is how do we make sure that we don't end up in the same spot we ended up with Mill Street, right? Like, you know, with with some of our streets failing. And I know that's the conversation that's something you're you're paying attention to as well. I don't know where we're at on that. I know that there's kind of a spectrum with that and so I don't know where we're at with that, but um that's also just kind of let's not let it get to the point where

1:12:58 it fails like any street. >> Absolutely. >> It might be helpful. I'm thinking we have some new councilors and we had that great presentation in that map of the assessment of the streets. It might be helpful to come back and look at that again. Um and see, you know, when I had the red and all that. I thought thought that was really I mean that was impactful for me to see that and it might be helpful for new folks to see it, too. >> Okay. Definitely. And I think if, you know, we come back in the spring I can definitely incorporate something like that in and then I can probably with that information we we can get miles, we can definitely put some kind of dollars to what that means. Um just really rough planning dollars to what those mean in those different

1:13:43 colors. That's basically what I used when I brought the last um bond conversation to the council. >> Um two other quick points and I'll then I'll We're going to go to Council Quadros. Uh when we when we do that, if you can make sure you bring the legislative folks for an update on you know, conversations at the at the state. And then help us cuz I can see us We're going to get confused on this portion because really we're talking about a capital stream of dollars that we can do one thing with and an operation stream of dollars that we can do another thing with and we're trying to balance those two things. So more information for us to help educate us about how do we balance those two parts of the conversation would be helpful. Council Quadros. >> I do realize that you probably wanted

1:14:28 some tangible answers around um you know, the budget you're going to be preparing in the spring. Um if there is some time to get you back in front of us in the next few weeks, with that number, I do think it would >> could probably provide you in a communication packet we can provide once we correct that number and even adding that in, it's like it just puts us out another year. I think it really what I'm looking for is like guidance as the council thinks about those programs. Cuz we'll sharpen our numbers and they'll probably be updated again before we get to January and we're having to put our numbers in the system and it's just like I didn't want to bring any surprises to the council during the budget committee meetings about oh wow, when did we cut that or

1:15:13 wow, what's that mean if we cut that program? And so it just kind of getting those kind of sideboards from the council so that we can kind of go back when we're looking at all of those programs and what do we do best because the one thing is we likely I talk about these cuts and these programmatic We've been cutting the street fund for so many times. They were kind of at that point where it's not one of those things where you can just say, "Well, let's just take 2% off the top because we've cut some programs so far that 2% pretty when we look at that it's just not efficient to go out and do that program anymore." And so, I think that's one thing I want to bring to the council when we come and talk back before in the spring and before potentially seeing that budget um in later spring. >> So, if we can get him, that would be

1:15:59 great. >> Okay. Anybody else? Oh, Nancy. >> Just quickly, since we are talking about budget, I I do um anticipate that we should have another discussion about this because there are a lot of um programs that are involved in in our street program and and council may not have a working familiarity of, you know, what and you know, say you have make a recommendation on a certain program, what that impact would be. So, I I really do trust Jeff and his and his staff to come up with some ideas of what impacts would be to different what I would roughly frame a decision package. Um so, that's part of the discussion. I also want us to come back in front of council, which in if for the nerds in the room, that would be called a pavement condition index, but when we're talking about

1:16:45 street conditions in our city and and what the net um basically the the bill that's of deferred maintenance that we have out there that we have yet to do and it only gets worse as the cost of constructions compound over time. >> Yeah, and I I think if we asked the public right now, they would say anything that we could do to you know, about the core deliverable of the transportation system and you know, in the condition of the street would be top notch. And then I think I think we would have to educate them a little bit more on that it's real like really this is about the maintenance and operations of the system, right? So, it's going to take them a minute to see that, you know, it's signals and electricity and all the things as well. Okay. It was a very lively discussion. Thank you, Jeff.

1:17:30 >> Thank you. >> All right, adjourned. We will reconvene Well, actually it's seated executive session at 7:00. So, in 12 minutes we will reconvene in executive session.