►
From YouTube: City Council Work Session - 9/29/2020
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
C
A
C
A
D
Mayor,
yes
with
that,
I
would
move
approval
of
the
fy
2020
interim
budget
changes
for
september
29th,
as
presented
in
the
packet.
E
A
F
F
Just
items
that
are
of
interest
to
us
to
management
to
members
of
the
council
and
we
devise
a
proposed
work
plan.
The
result
of
that
work
plan
was
in
your
agenda
packet
today
and
basically,
we
have
an
array
of
projects
laid
out
there.
Some
of
them
are
of
interest
to
management.
F
Certain
of
them
are
of
interest
to
council
and
that's
why
they're
included,
particularly
on
this
year's
proposed
work
plan
we
discussed
with
audit
committee
and
they
they
approved,
of
the
proposed
work
plan
on
august
12th.
So
with
that,
I'd
like
to
stand
for
any
questions
that
members
of
council
might
have
and
then
seek
approval.
D
D
Just
a
few
comments,
the
audit
committee
did
meet
and
review
this,
as
always
with
the
audit
work
plan.
If
something
comes
up
during
the
year
and
we
need
to
adjust,
we
have
the
ability
to
do
that.
D
It
was
our
determination
that
this
is
a
good
starting
point
for
the
year,
recognizing
that
this
has
been
a
unique
year
overall
and
steve,
and
his
team
have
been
very
nimble
in
changing
direction
when
we
needed
them
to.
This
looks
like
the
work
that
we'll
need
done
in
the
next
year,
but
as
always,
if,
for
some
reason
or
another,
we
need
to
change
directions,
we
certainly
have
the
ability
to
do
that.
D
And
I
guess
with
that,
madam
mayor,
I
would
move
that
we
approve
the
proposed
plan
for
the
office
of
internal
audit
for
fy
2021.
C
F
Thank
you,
medamir
council.
We
will
proceed
accordingly,.
G
Yeah,
we're
not
we're
not
feeling
it
today
mayor,
so
yes,
what
we've!
What
we
are
proposing
is
a
protection
for
renters,
both
commercial
and
residential,
as
we've
learned
over
the
last
few
years,
renters
really
don't
have
much
protections
in
our
community
and
with
the
rising
costs
of
rent
and
those
very
few
protections
that
exist.
Anything
that
we
can
offer
to
provide
security
to
our
renters
is
is
is
greatly
needed
and
greatly
appreciated
by
renters.
G
G
G
So
what
we've
discovered
is
that
there
are
some
areas
or
some
gaps
where
I
myself
had
no
idea
that
security
deposits
were
or
something
that
were
at
risk
of
being
lost
by
a
renter
if
a
property
manager
or
a
landlord
co-mingles
those
monies
if
they
file
for
bankruptcy
or
if
they
sell
the
property
and
there's
a
transfer
of
ownership,
those
security
deposits
can
be
lost
to
the
renter.
So
what
we're
proposing
is
to
have
a
protection,
that's
rather
simple.
G
It's
my
understanding
that
this
particular
protection
was
brought
before
the
idaho
state
legislature
in
the
recent
past,
but
it
was
part
of
a
larger
bill
and
unfortunately,
there
were
other
parts
of
that
bill
that
the
legislature
did
not
have
an
appetite
for,
but
this
part,
actually
they
were
okay
with,
but
unfortunately
it
was
lost
when
that
bill
was
denied.
So
we
are
proposing
to
offer
that
protection
through
this
security,
deposit
protection,
ordinance.
A
Yeah,
thank
you.
Are
there
questions
or
comments
feedback
for
the
council
member.
E
G
You
know
what
I'm
going
to
defer
to:
let's
see
who's
on
tonight.
Is
it
mary.
H
Good
afternoon,
mayor
council,
members,
council
member
halliburton
to
your
particular
question,
I've
come
in
on
this
a
little
late
in
the
game.
This
is
a
project
that
was
initially
a
co,
combined
effort
with
elizabeth
kekeretz
and
and
lisa.
In
any
case,
I
particularly
am
not
aware
of
other
ordinances
of
a
similar
nature.
However,
in
the
draft
ordinance
itself,
we
do
provide
guidance
as
to
how
those
monies
should
be
separated
and
the
expectations
that
we
would
have
of
a
landlord
as
far
as
how
that
should
be
accounted
for.
E
Madam
mayor
marion,
I
guess
council
member
sanchez,
I
guess
just
to
follow
up
with
that.
What
I'm
wondering
is,
because
I
don't
know
the
bankruptcy
side
of
things
very
well,
I'm
I
love
the
idea
and
I'm
hoping
to
make
sure
that
if
people
put
those
monies
aside
in
a
different
account
and
somebody
files
for
bankruptcy
that
those
accounts
would
still
be
safe
and
that
there
are
methods
to
make
sure
that
those
counts
remain
safe
in
a
bankruptcy
claim-
and
I
don't
know
exactly
how
that
works,
and
so
that's,
I
think
my
curiosity.
E
C
I
had
the
same
question
as
councilmember
halliburton,
and
maybe
it's
appropriate
to
follow
up
between
now
and
an
eventual
hearing
on
this.
But
the
question
is:
if,
in
a
bankruptcy
proceeding
those
deposits,
don't
belong
to
the
landlord
they
wouldn't
be
swept
up
in
the
bankruptcy
estate
anyway,
and
it
sounds
like
there's
stories
where
they
have
been
so
the
question
is,
you
know:
does
this
ordinance
change
the
character
of
that
money?
I
mean
it
either.
You
know,
but
a
tenant
pays
a
security
deposit
to
a
landlord.
C
It's
either
the
tenant's
money
or
the
landlord's
money
and
it
sounds
like
bankruptcy.
Courts
have
treated
it
as
though
it's
the
landlord's
money
and
we're
creating
this
ordinance.
That
says
no,
it
belongs
to
the
tenant
and
that
the
question
is,
is
I
think
it's
probably
a
legal
research
question,
but
do
we
have
the
authority
to
do
that?
Can
we
change
the
do
we
have
this?
Does
the
city
have
the
authority
to
change
the
ownership
of
that
money?
C
H
Madam
mayor
councilmember
agent,
I
certainly
can
look
into
that
and
and
provide
an
updated
and
a
memo
to
council
from
my
understanding
and
the
extent
to
which
I
understand
the
bankruptcy
proceedings
that
this
isn't
necessarily
a
matter
of
having
dictated
or
delineated
ownership.
It's
just
putting
it
in
there
requiring
it
that
it
be
separated
and
siphoned
off
into
its
own
fund.
For
the
purposes
of
when
you
have
co-mingled
funds,
it
becomes
more
difficult
to
trace
how
those
monies
have
been
spent
and
what
remainder
of
accounts
is
left
in
a
bank
account,
for
example.
H
You
know
the
provision
in
this
ordinance
that
the
landlord
would
have
to
provide
such
an
accounting
of
what
funds
were
were
deposited.
What
funds
were
withdrawn?
It's
a
matter
of
really
providing
that
tracing
aspect
rather
than
really
changing
ownership.
It's
just
calling
it
out
making
it
more
direct,
but
certainly
if,
if
council
would
like
additional
information
or
legal
background
on
that
more
than
happy
to
provide
it.
C
No,
I
think
it
just
clicked
for
me.
If
they're
co-mingled,
then
the
tenant
has
to
file
a
claim
in
the
bankruptcy
that
says:
hey
my
200
security
deposit
or
my
thousand
dollar
security
deposit
does
not
belong
to
the
landlord.
This
is
my
bankruptcy
claim
for
assets
of
the
estate
and
nobody's
gonna.
Do
that
and
or
a
few
people
will
do
that,
and
so
then
the
result
is
that
money
stays
in
the
estate
and
gets
paid
out
to
credit
so
that
it
doesn't
change
the
character
of
the
money
at
all.
H
C
H
And
madame
mayor
councilmember
beijing,
I
I
would
absolutely
agree
with
that
and
that
also
it
would
be
the
burden
of
the
tenant
to
prove
that
those
were
his
or
her
funds.
And
I
think
that
would
be
a
difficult,
difficult
threshold
to
reach.
As
far
as
tracing.
C
Fair
enough,
madam
mayor,
I
also
had
a
question
for
council
person
sanchez.
If
that's
okay,.
C
What
we
lack
in
technical
competence,
we're
making
up
for
in
formality
tonight,
I
guess,
have
you
had
a
chance
to
talk
with
and
get
any
feedback
from
the
industry
side
of
things
that
landlords
associations,
the
the
commercial
realtors
the
people
who
are
on
the
other
end
of
this
of
this
ordinance.
G
I
haven't
spoken
to
them
directly,
but
just
like
the
rental
application
fee,
ordinance
that
we
worked
on
last
year
been
collaborating
with
representative
john
gannon
on
this,
and
he
is
setting
up
a
meeting
for
me
with
the
association
because
of
idaho
realtors,
and
they
are
actually
very
supportive
of
this.
They
wanted
to
see
it
passed
in
the
idaho
legislature
where
we're
disappointed
to
see
this
part
of
the
bill
not
not
make
it
through.
G
So
there
has
been
an
issue
in
the
past
with
property
managers,
not
not
being
good
stewards
of
that
money,
and
so
there
is
an
appetite
for
it.
C
Okay,
thank
you.
I
in
my
own
professional
life
I
have
to
segregate
funds.
I
have
to
maintain
trust
accounts
and
I
have
to
keep
rigorous
records
of
who
actually
owns
money.
That's
within
my
control
and
it's
onerous
and
it's
a
pain,
but
it's
important,
and
so
you
know
I
I
see
both
sides
of
this
and
I
would
just
be
curious
to
know
what
those
organizations
would
have
to
say.
I
don't
have
any
philosophical
problem
with
it
at
all.
If
the
money
doesn't
belong
to
you,
you
should
keep
it
separate.
C
It's
not
yours,
but
it
does
add
a
pretty
complex
layer
of
financial
tracking
to
my
life
and
I
assume
it
will
for
landlords
as
well.
G
Madam
mayor
council,
member
agent,
part
of
the
reason
that
we're
wanting
to
bring
forward
this
type
of
protection
at
this
time
is
because
of
the
economic
uncertainty
that
we're
dealing
with,
and
we
just
don't
know
how
it's
how
our
renters
are
going
to
fare
and
part
of
what
I
liked
about.
G
D
All
right
madame
go
ahead.
Thank
you.
I
think
this
first
question
is
actually
a
question
of
madam
mayor,
and
that
is,
I
believe,
that
our
contract
lobbyists
did
check
in
with
those
groups
and
got
an
answer
that
they
were
generally
supportive
is
that
is
that
correct.
A
That's
something
that
I
would
have
to
throw
back
to
be
to
follow
up
with
you.
I
mean
this
is
a
work
session
on
this
just
quickly
and
we'll
have
another
go
at
it.
So
I
don't
know
the
deal
of
that.
The
detail
that
would
prefer
to
check
in
with
elizabeth
or
kathy
who
could
tell
us
yeah
and
get
back
to
you,
but.
D
Thank
you.
My
conversations
in
in
preparing
for
this
indicate
that
that
in
fact
did
happen,
but
it
would
be
good
to
get
that
that
report
and
then
my
second
question
for
either
mary
or
councilmember
sanchez.
D
The
administration
of
this,
I
assume,
will
happen
in
the
clerk's
office
and
just
wondered
if
we
have
the
capacity.
If
we've
thought
about
the
capacity
to
ensure
that
this
is
being
done
and
and
whether
or
not
we
also
need
to
think
about
that
and
make
sure
that
the
staff
time
is
adequately
resourced.
G
I
believe
that
we're
we're
looking
at
that.
I
know
we're
trying
to
keep
this
in
the
same
vein
as
we
did
with
the
rental
application
fee
ordinance.
So
I
think
a
lot
of
this
is
going
to
be,
I
think,
we're
looking.
Was
it
90
days,
mary,
I'm
trying
to
remember
yeah,
so
we're
giving
folks
plenty
of
time
to
act
on
it?
G
D
Follow
up,
if
I
could
matter
in
a
few
cases,
at
least
in
the
beginning,
we
will
need
to
follow
up
and
ensure
that
it's
being
done
and
ensure
that
the
landlord
community
understands
how
to
do
it
and
and
perhaps
even
begin
that
with
some
education.
So
I
think
this
is
a
great
idea.
I
really
would
like
to
see
it
come
forward.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
doing
it
in
a
way
that
allows
the
folks
who
really
do
want
to
comply
to
be
able
to
do
that.
I
Mayor,
madam
mayor
council,
members,
thank
you
for
this
opportunity
to
discuss
risk
management
and
workers
compensation.
There's
a
couple
new
council
members.
So
this
is
probably
the
appropriate
time.
Your
risk
management
team.
We
handle
risk
management,
consultations,
liability
and
workers,
compensation
claims,
occupational
safety
and
health
insurance
programs
and
property
loss,
employee
training
and
last
few
months,
we've
answered
a
lot
of
covered
questions
that
has
been
our
world.
I
I
All
right
there
we
go,
the
city
is
self-insured
for
multiple
exposures
workers,
comp
and
liability
are
just
two
of
those
currently
in
workers:
compensation,
we're
self-insured
for
the
first
500
000
for
general
employees,
1
million
for
police
and
firefighters.
That
means
a
city
has
to
pay
the
first
500
or
1
million.
I
When
an
injury
happens,
then
excess
insurance
takes
over
after
that,
as
of
10
1
we're
moving
to
a
2
million
self-insured
retention,
not
out
of
choice,
but
that
is
what
is
available
and
we'll
discuss
that
in
in
subsequent
slides
the
liability
program,
we
have
an
sir
of
500
000,
with
excess
insurance
up
to
10
million,
depending
on
the
type
of
exposure.
There's
some
other
exposures
that
we
have
insured
for
different
amounts.
Airport
liability
has
higher
limits
and
is
a
deductible
program.
I
All
right,
there
are
two
funds:
the
risk
management
fund,
641
and
workers
comp
fund
642..
These
are
funded
with
department
premiums.
These
premiums
are
influenced
by
loss,
history
expected
experience
and
property
values.
We
utilize
actuaries
heavily
to
ensure
adequate
funding
is
available
for
outstanding
liabilities
and
the
next
fiscal
year's
expected
claims
we
target
at
90
confidence
level.
That
means
that
each
fund
will
have
is
expected
to
have
adequate
funding
in
nine
out
of
ten
years.
So
that's
always
been
our
target
and
we
look
to
you
to
to
affirm
that
periodically.
I
We
review
our
insurance
programs,
at
least
annually,
with
our
brokers
and
market
the
city's
coverage
annually,
to
ensure
we
have
appropriate
coverage
at
a
reasonable
cost.
What
do
our
injuries
look
like
in
workers
comp?
This
is
a
typical
year
at
fy
20..
We
have
515
total
injuries
so
far.
322
of
those
injuries
are
information.
Only
no
medical
care
was
needed.
However,
we
do
want
to
report
those,
so
we
can
make
preventative
action.
193
claims
medical
treatment
was
required.
I
We
anticipate,
or
it's
projected
that
we
will
owe
1.3
roughly
1.3
million
for
those
injuries
and
that's
a
pretty
typical
year
and
that's
important
later
on
that
1.3
costs
of
a
claim
very
wide
wildly,
but
the
average
is
6672.
Currently,
how
do
we
compare
with
our
peers
other
entities
out
there?
You
can
see
the
the
graph
on
the
left.
That's
our
excess
insurance
company
has
put
a
matrix
together
with
all
their
insured
entities
and
we're
that
dot.
You
can
see-
and
it
says,
high
frequency
low
severity
of
claims,
not
necessarily
a
bad
thing.
I
As
long
as
we
don't
move
to
the
right
that
circle
doesn't
move
to
the
right.
We
want
to
know
about
even
the
insignificant
injuries,
and
so
we
facilitate
and
encourage
reporting
of
all
claims.
If
we
know
about
it,
we
can
do
something
about
it.
So
that
is
the
key,
and
our
insurance
company
understands
that
as
well.
I
I
We
have
airport
at
five
and
then
it
gets
dfa
at
two,
I
believe,
and
then
it
gets
smaller
from
there.
This
is
the
cost
of
those
roughly
follows
the
same
distribution
of
those
claims.
I
I
We
have
a
aggressive
return
to
work
practice
program
where
we
try
to
get
employees
back
in
in
light
duty,
because
we
found
that
if,
if
they're
in
the
workplace
there's
a
lot
of
benefits,
they
heal
quicker
and
there's
a
lot
of
other
benefits
to
that
because
of
code,
we're
not
able
to
put
employees
back
into
the
workplace
because
we're
trying
to
keep
our
density
in
our
facilities
lower.
So
that's
where
you
can
see
that
there
were
1500
days
out
for
employees
just
in
fire
alone.
I
I
That,
then,
what
are
we
doing
to
control
these
costs?
This
is
a
list
of
just
some
of
the
things
that
we're
doing.
We
have
implemented
an
improved
provider
network
to
facilitate
communication
and
reduce
treatment
costs.
We
have
an
aggressive
return
to
work
program
where
we
get
people
back
into
the
workplace
in
potentially
even
other
departments
where
it
fits.
I
We
target
early
intervention
to
get
our
employees
the
right
care
at
the
right
time.
We
use
nurse
case
managers
and
other
available
resources
to
facilitate
this.
We've
also
adjusted
our
philosophy
from
an
employee
being
a
claimant,
and
this
is
important
to
the
employees.
Employee,
advocacy
approach,
that's
a
shift
in
just
the
thinking
when
you're
talking
to
an
adjuster,
they
think
of
a
person
as
a
claimant.
We've
changed
that
and
are
still
working
with
our
adjusters
and
others
to
change
that
to
employee
advocacy.
If
we
can
help
our
employees,
they
will
heal
faster.
I
We
utilize
data
analysis
and
claim
analytics
using
our
own
statistics
as
well
as
our
insurance,
and
they
have
a
lot
of
expertise
in
this
to
watch
for
trends
and
intervene
when
we
see
red
flags.
What
are
those
trends?
This
is
where
it
gets
a
little
heavy.
We
have
an
increase
in
employees
and
payroll
except
for
this
year,
and
that
influences
costs.
I
I
We
had
a
severe
injury
claim
in
each
of
fy
16
and
fy
17
property
values
have
increased
and
valuations
have
increased
as
we
build
additional
facilities
and
the
market
improves.
Sirs
and
deductibles
have
increased
to
keep
premiums
low.
This
is
something
the
insurance
companies
are
doing.
They
want
to
not
see
increases
in
the
rates,
and
so
they
give
you
a
higher
deductible,
and
we
are
seeing
this
not
just
in
workers
comp
we've
seen
in
flood
insurance.
D
Madam
mayor
so
corey
the
question
I
have
here:
we've
always
been
self-insured
on
workers,
comp
and
other
things.
Given
the
changes
in
legislation.
I
know
there
was
a
lot
of
discussion
about
the
few
cities.
I
think
there
are
only
four
in
idaho
who
are
self-insured
and
the
impact
it
was
going
to
have
on
them
because
their
pool
was
so
small.
C
I
In
some
other
slides
the
the
property
and
liability
we
actually
in
some
sense,
we
do
actually
get
quotes
for
icrim.
We
actually
through
our
broker,
have
gotten
quotes
not
this
year,
but
the
your
previous.
I
We
had
some
calculations
and
it
looks
like
approximately
3.4
million
depending
is
w
and
that's
first
dollar
and
that's
a
potentially
a
sunk,
you'll
cost,
and
so
we
can
right
now
we
pay
the
the
what
was
it
1.3
just
about
for
this
year.
I
We
have
some
flexibility,
but
that
is
something
we
are
always
looking
at
to
see
is.
Is
that
a
better
deal.
A
E
Just
some
clarification
on
the
trends,
it
says
legislation
and
the
post-traumatic
stress
injury
claims
that
was
passed
was
it
was
it
two
years
ago.
Was
it
three.
I
E
I
I
And
then
you
can
see
we,
we
have
fewer
due
to
police
and
fire.
There
are
less
insurance
companies
that
are
interested
in
our
book
of
business
and
that's
impacting
our
costs
and
medical
costs
are
increasing
and
when
there's,
when
you
see
some
global
issue,
the
property
insurance
takes
a
hit
as
well,
and
we
we
help
pay
that,
like
others,
this
shows
our
self-insured
retention
history.
We
have
been
at
that
500
000
level
for
a
long
time.
With
the
recent
changes
we
are
no
longer.
I
Insurers
are
no
longer
fighting
for
us
as
they
were
in
the
past,
and
so
it
goes
fairly
steep.
We
did
try
to
buy
down
that
sir.
We
looked
at
some
options
to
buy
down
that
one
quote
we
received
was
brought
it
down
to
1
million
for
general
employees,
1.5
for
police
and
fire.
The
premium
alone
was
1.25
million
that,
on
top,
we
would
have
to
pay
for
the
injuries
right
now
that
1.3
that
we
talked
about
plus
the
1.25
it
it
puts
it
just
prices
it
right
out
of
out
of
our
market.
I
This
talks
about
the
big
three
cost
drivers
we're
seeing
over
the
last
five
days
or
five
years.
So
excuse
me
there,
the
presumptive
illness
claims
you
can
see
the
bill
passed
in
fy
16
we've
experienced
two
claims
in
fy
17,
one
claim
in
18.
One
claim
claimed
this
year
reviewing
nationwide
cancer
statistics
working
with
our
actuary.
We
anticipate
probably
around
the
rate
of
one
to
two
cancer
claims,
maybe
every
other
year.
So
this
is
not
going
away.
I
I
I
love
to
say
those
are
anomalies
in
the
last
20
years.
I
don't
recall
any
others
like
that,
but
they
will
happen
periodically
and
a
higher
sir.
We
will
have
to
have
be
more
responsible,
have
a
larger
responsibility
for
that,
and
this
slide
really
shows
the
impact
of
that
insurance.
I
Currently,
if
you
took
all
our
claims,
we
have
a
total
incurred.
That
means
what's
expected,
that
we
would
have
to
pay
14.4
million
for
all
claims
on
the
books.
The
cities
portion
due
to
our
great
insurance
that
we've
had
and
low
sir,
is
only
about
3
million.
Our
insurance
company
is
going
to
end
up
paying
about
11.5
million.
I
We
pay
for
that
insurance
under
200
000
a
year.
So,
yes,
we
had
got
a
great
deal
now.
They
need
to
recoup
that
cost
and
they're
still
the
best.
We
surveyed
the
market,
and
they
were
the
only
ones
willing
to
touch
us
at
a
reasonable
price
point.
The
four
presumptive
illness
claims
that
we
currently
have
the
total
incurred
is
3.5
million.
This
is
expensive.
It's
expensive!
What's
occurring
to
us,
the
post-traumatic
stress,
injury,
11
claims
just
over
200
000
and
the
two
catastrophic
claims
you
can
see
it
about
10
million.
I
And
here's
what
this
is
a
trendline
of
the
last
18
years,
so
it
shows
the
blue
is
where
the
property
slight
increases
over
time
relatively
flat.
We
have
a
great
insurer
and
we're
not
seeing
great
increases.
You
can
see
the
general
liability,
it's
actually
down,
we
have
a
great
rate
and
we
haven't
had
significant
losses.
The
red
is
the
workers
comp
and
you
can
see
over
the
past
five
years,
steep
uphill
and
that's
affecting
the
green,
which
is
the
combined
rate.
I
I
For
fy
21
and
beyond
we're
recommending
we
maintaining
fund
balance
to
account
for
increases
due
to
legislative
changes.
The
general
liability
exposures
they're
not
going
away
increasing
self-injured
retentions
and
the
deductibles.
We
also
recommend
maintaining
emphasis
on
prevention,
mitigation
and
cost
control.
D
Go
ahead,
corey,
another
question,
then
you
know
I
you
did
have
a
slide
in
the
beginning
about
some
of
the
things
we're
doing
to
control
some
of
these
costs.
I
guess
I'm
concerned
that
so
many
of
these
of
the
claims
that
we're
seeing
come
from
training
and
wonder
what
we're
doing
to
ensure
that
our
trainers,
the
people
who
conduct
the
training
are
doing
so
in
a
way
that
reduces
the
risk.
I
We
do
data
analysis,
mayor
and
council
members.
We
do
data
analysis
and
we
share
that
with
in
this
case,
with
fire
and
with
police
in
in
those
we
ensure
that
they
know
those
claims.
What
we
found
in
the
in
the
past
was
an
injury
would
happen.
I
The
statistics
over
here
the
injury
happens,
the
trainer
didn't
get
that
we
meet
with
fire
now
and
and
have
a
safety
committee
that
we
go
to
so
that
information
is
getting
down
there.
We
also
implement
or
they've
implemented,
with
some
recommendations
from
megan
that
there's
some
stretching
going
on
during
that,
and
then
we
ask
them
regularly
is
let's
just
think
about
those
trainings
and
they
have
decreased
the
incidence
it
used
to
be
higher
and
more
costly.
A
Do
you
know
just
to
follow
up
on
that?
Have
you
looked
at
how
our
percentage
of
incidences
or,
however,
you
look
at
it,
compares
to
other
similar
cities.
I
Right
there
shows
that
we
do
talk
with
it's
mid,
midwest
casualty,
they
actually
look
at
that
and-
and
they
think
fairly
highly
of
our
programs,
because
we
are
low
severity.
I
Even
with
the
high
number
of
police
and
fire
okay,
it's
the
it's
the
presumptive
injuries,
those
are
the
ones
that
are
really
influenced
us,
the
two
catastrophic
the
presumptive
and
the
ptsi,
the
insurance
companies.
Looking
at
the
legislative
changes
and
saying
idaho
in
general,
not
just
the
city
of
boise-
is
a
place.
They
no
longer
are
quite
as
interested
in
ensuring.
I
D
Adam
mayor,
one
other
question:
if
I
could,
given
the
changes,
are
so
recent
and
I
think
it's
safe
to
assume
that
the
insurance
industry
responded
proactively
and
really
not
based
on
on
case
numbers
but
but
presumptively.
What
will
happen?
Are
we
doing?
What
is
there
something
we
could
do
either
ourselves
or
jointly
with
the
association
of
idaho
cities
to
really
track
these
in
while
this
year
we
may
be
in
this
position,
and
maybe
we'll
be
here
for
a
few
years?
D
I
Madam
mayor
council,
member,
absolutely
they're
not
reacting
quite
as
much
to
just
us
they're
looking
at
what
has
happened,
we're
a
little
late
to
the
game.
Some
other
states
have
already
been
there,
so
they're
seeing
what's
happened
there
and
I've
talked
with
some
risk
managers
in
some
other
states,
they're
in
a
worse
place
than
we
are
and
having
a
very
difficult
time,
even
getting
insured
for
police
and
fire.
I
D
Thank
you,
madam
mayor.
If
I
could
follow
up,
I
would
be
more
than
willing
to
take
this
issue
to
the
association
of
idaho
cities
board.
It
was
a
big
topic
of
discussion,
as
the
legislation
was
being
passed
and
I
think
there's
probably
a
lot
of
other
cities
who'd
be
interested
in
data
collection.
If
we
get
it
put
together
early,
it
might
be
easier
than
if
we
try
to
respond
after
the
fact.