►
From YouTube: Finance and Budget Committee Meeting 4-11-2023
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
A
Up
here:
okay,
let's,
let's
restart
call
to
order,
let's
restart
on
the.
C
All
right
we'll
call
the
roll
councilmember
nuzma
here:
councilmember
Nguyen
councilmember
Reed
councilmember
Burns,
councilmember,
Kelly,
Committee,
Member,
McMillan,
Committee,
Member,
reikis.
D
D
A
Okay,
very
good,
so
we
have
a.
We
have
a
quorum
okay,
so
he
is
on
phone,
very
good
all
right.
So
let's
go
to
public
comment.
Anyone
registered
or
okay
all
right.
So
whoever
wants
to
go
first,
thank
you
and
so
how
many
people
do
we
think
we
have
how
many
people
are
on
online
for
public
comment.
A
All
right
very
good:
we
do
have
it's
an
informal
three
minute
thing,
but
that's
soft.
So.
E
I
appreciate
it.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
First
I
want
to
say
I'm
so
glad
you
guys
exist,
because
this
is
a
a
really
wonderful
way
to
have
an
open
forum
and
discuss
the
finances
that
we
taxpayers
go
crazy
at
in
our
living
rooms,
with
our
significant
others,
because
we
work
so
hard
to
live
in
this
town.
E
I
am
here
again
to
speak
on
this
Surplus
I
am
concerned
that
one
we
have
found
another
10
million
I'm
glad
we
found
it
I'm
concerned
that
we
found
it
because
we
shouldn't
be
that
far
behind
over
budgeted
or
in
surpluses
and
I'm
on
the
Parks
and
Recreation
board,
and
we
get
our
parks
are
in
horrendous
shape
and
we
scrounge
for
every
penny
and
there's
money
here
and
we
have
a
Capital
Improvements
budget
and
I
think
we
need
to
have
a
really
good
public
discussion
with
how
this
Capital
Improvements
budget
is
going
to
happen.
E
We
also
for
the
last
three
years
have
had
huge
surpluses
and
we
haven't
been
maintaining
our
buildings
or,
if
we
have,
we
don't
know
it,
because
when
foia
records,
when
records
have
been
foyed,
they
don't
seem
to
exist.
So
I
don't
understand
how
two
of
our
major
things
that
a
community
government
is
responsible
for,
which
is
their
buildings
assets
and
their
Parks
and
Rec
are
failing,
and
we
have
a
30
million
dollar
budget.
E
There's
a
lot
of
cities
that
a
surplus
there's
a
lot
of
cities
as
you
well
know
that
don't
even
have
that
much
in
their
budget
and
so
I
hope.
We
will
really
look
at
this.
We
got
to
get
figure
out.
How
come
we're
screwing
this
up
so
royally
and
get
our
pensions
paid
down,
reduce
the
tax
burden,
not
spend
things
on
products.
We
have
enough
projects
out
there.
We
don't
need
new,
unexpected
projects
coming
in
from
the
left
or
the
right
that
we
haven't
thought
about.
F
E
E
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
our
contracts
and
I
think
we
have
to
make
it
easier
for
people
to
come
to
our
city
and
be
able
to
work
in
our
city
and
be
able
to
get
the
construction
contracts
that
will
not
be
always
top
dollar,
because
we're
known
to
be
a
difficult
City
to
work
with
so
I.
Thank
you
again
for
your
time.
I
really
appreciate
it
and
let's
get
this
budget
under
control.
G
Hi
afternoon
I'm
Murray
Friedman
second
ward
and
I'd
like
to
say
ditto
to
everything
that
Mary
said:
I
agree
with
her
100
percent
I
have
a
whole
lot
of
questions
about
and
I'm
really
glad
that
finance
and
budget
committee
exists.
So
a
whole
bunch
of
questions
about
the
budget.
The
Oakton
Corridor
I
read
a
few
days
ago
that
it's
going
to
be
16
over
budget.
What
does
that
mean?
G
I
I,
don't
know
how
much
the
budget
is
for
the
Oakton
Corridor,
how
much
in
dollars
and
cents
is
that
over
budget
I
understand
that
there's
going
to
be
that
City
Evanston
is
going
to
have
to
replace
a
park
over
at
Fleetwood
Jordan,
and
how
much
is
that
going
to
cost
the
city
last
council
meeting
two
weeks
ago,
it
looks
like
we
passed
about
22
million
in
general
obligation,
bonds
and
I'm
wondering
why
if
we
have
this
Surplus,
why
do
we
need?
G
We
constantly
are
borrowing
money,
General
obligation,
bonds
is
just
a
normal
thing
that
you
know
we
have
now
over.
We
owe
over
100
million
dollars
in
general
obligation
bonds.
Really.
Last
year
we
paid
15
million
dollars
just
in
debt
service.
Okay,
that's
1.2
million
per
month,
we're
paying
in
debt
service.
Do
we
need
a
hundred
million
in
general
obligation
bonds?
G
Where
am
I
at
what
are
we
going
to
do
with
the
service
center?
With
the
Civic
Center?
Sorry
here
I
mean
last
I
heard
from
Laura
Biggs.
She
said
that
the
windows
needed
to
be
replaced
because
they
weren't
caulked,
and
so
just
the
general
maintenance
on
the
Civic
Center
is
not
being
done
so
now
we
want
to
tear
down
the
Civic
Center
and
and
do
what,
what
are
we
going
to
do
with
Harley
Clark?
Okay,
we
are
giving
away
money
constantly.
Valley
gets
two
million
dollars.
G
Chicago
and
Howard
gets
two
million
dollars.
Soul
and
smoke
was
at
650
000.
they're
over
by
me
on
on
dumpster.
There
was
chicken
and
waffle
they
gave
250
000
to
they
closed
within
a
year
or
two
and
then
Kabul
House
moved
in,
but
we
gave
them
fifty
thousand
okay.
G
This
just
do
the
taxpayers
have
any
say-so
in
the
money
that
we
are
giving
away
millions
and
millions
of
dollars,
studies,
studies
and
Consultants,
consistently
we're
paying
for
studies
and
Consultants
I
don't
get
it.
We
have
850
employees,
but
we
need
constantly
to
hire
studies,
Consultants,
Fountain
Square.
We
paid
seven
million
dollars
for
and
it
doesn't
work.
Okay
and
James
Park,
eight
million
dollars
for
a
lawsuit
and
people
ask
me
why
am
I
bringing
this
up
this
is
years
ago,
because
how
is
this
rectified
at
all?
G
G
Sure
budget
under
under
control,
it's
it's
out
of
control,
spending's
out
of
control,
General
obliga
obligation,
bonds,
Tiff
funds,
borrowing
money.
We
need
to
get
this
under
control.
It's
way
out.
It's
out
of
hand.
Thank.
F
Good
afternoon,
Timothy
Schoolmaster
from
the
police
pension
fund
board
Council
has
been
researching
mostly
mostly
exclusively
outside
of
the
city,
the
pprt
aspects
going
back
to
the
70s.
Some
of
this
has
been
through
foia,
mostly
outside,
and
today
sorry
hitesh.
This
is
not
a
foia
request.
Natasha
has
received
a
request
to
see
all
his
records
on
the
pprt,
which
is
a
provision
of
the
pension
code,
I'm
glad
this
is
a
a
code
thing
which
we
have
subpoena
power.
On
that
we
could
have
hearings.
F
A
Okay,
doesn't
look
like
anybody
else
in
the
room
online
Clayton,
any
idea.
C
Okay,
she's
the
only
or
that
is
the
only
name
that
we
see
in
the.
A
Councilmember
burns
councilmember
Reed,
who
is
William
Otter,
oh
God,
okay,
got
it
got
it,
okay,
very
good.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
those
comments.
So,
let's
go
through
the
approval
of
the
of
the
minutes
for
both
March
14th
and
then
the
follow-up
meeting
we
had
on
the
21st
with
respect
to
the
14th.
A
Does
anyone
have
any
any
comments
with
respect
to
those
minutes?
Okay,
no.
C
Councilmember
nuzma
aye
councilmember
Nguyen,
councilmember,
Burns,
councilmember,
Reed,
aye,
council
member
Kelly,
aye
Committee
Member,
McMillan,
Committee,
Member,
reikis,
aye,
chair
Livingston,.
A
Okay,
so
council
member
Reed
is
on
the
phone
now
right.
He
had
asked
that
so
it
looks
like
we
can
go
in
order
and.
H
Discuss
I'm
about
three
minutes
out:
I
love
if
I
could
be
there
in
person
for
the
next
item.
So
if
we
can
juggle
that
around
still
oh.
A
Okay
sure
so
you're
on
your
way
in
got
it
yeah.
Okay,
all
right,
very
good,
then
all
right,
let
okay!
So
before
we
get
into
the
overview
of
the
general
fund
revenues
which
we
need
to
and
and
sort
of
how
that
Cascades
into
the
current
estimates,
with
respect
to
both
22
and
23.,
I
would
like
to
say
something
because
there's
been
some
back
and
forth
on
emails
and
I
would
like
to
clarify,
and
maybe
if
councilmember
Kelly
has
a
different
view.
A
We
we
could
discuss
this,
but
there
has
been
some
back
and
forth
with
respect
to
what
does
and
we'll
have
more
of
a
pension
discussion
later.
What
does
full
funding
of
pension
mean
and
and
I
would
like
to
say
what
I
think
it
means?
Okay,
if
you,
if
you
have
a
different
view,
you
you
can
say
what
what
you
think
it
means,
but
I
would
just
like
to
clarify
my
position
because
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
where
we
believe
we're
in
the
same.
A
You
know
I
believe
we're
in
the
same
sort
of
sort
of
position.
So,
just
just
very
briefly
so
I
can
clarify
my
position
and
how
this
re
goes
into
the
budget.
So
if
we
look
at
2021
our
police
and
fire
gross
liability,
there's
two
things
here:
we
have
a
liability.
We
have
an
asset
number.
Our
gross
liability
was
467
million.
Our
assets
were
about
300
million
297
million
64
funded.
That's
where
we
were
per
the
last
actual
actuary
reports
that
we
had.
A
Okay,
we
should
get
the
2022
reports,
I
think
over
the
next
couple
of
months.
It's
unfortunate
that
it's
on
that
degree
of
delay,
but
to
look
at
where
we
are
in
22
I.
Think
first,
there's
two
things
that
happen
with
respect
to
22
relative
to
21.
That
I
think
helps
scope
this
for
people.
We
had
obviously
about
a
15
decline
in
asset
values,
something
in
that
order.
I
don't
have
the
final
number,
so
that
means
our
net
of
payments.
Our
assets
likely
went
from
about
297
to
260..
A
We're
likely
at
around
54
but
again
we're
going
to
get
the
the
final
reports.
That
would
be
my
estimate
that
we're
at
54,
but
also,
more
importantly,
relative
to
really
what
our,
where
we're,
asking
Foster
and
Foster
to
look
at
and
where
our
real
starting
place
is.
We
also
have
the
new
Public
Safety
contracts,
which
are
undoubtedly
behind
above
Trend,
with
what
was
assumed
in
developing
the
projections
for
what
the
liabilities
were
so
and
I.
Imagine
that's
one
thing
that
Foster
and
Foster
is.
I
A
To
you
know,
we'll
we'll
take
some
more
work
to
try
to
estimate
what's
the
degree
of
the
increase
in
the
in
the
liability
with
respect
to
those
new
Public
Safety
contracts,
but
that
likely
knocks
off
another
couple
of
points
of
funding,
because
the
liability
is
growing
so
probably
somewhere
a
bit
over
500
million
gross
liability
asset
values,
maybe
at
about
260.
So
let's
say
we're
about
50
50
51
funded.
A
So
that's
how
I
view
the
starting
place
and
I
think
we
would
all
agree,
especially
going
from
64
to
54
and
maybe
51
with
the
increase
in
in
in
in
the
in
the
contracts.
You
know
none
of
us
like
to
see
that
that's
not
acceptable.
That's
not
what
any
of
us
would
call
full
funding.
A
Okay,
what
I
view
as
full
funding
is
as
we
roll
these
projections
on
the
gross
liability
forward
to
2040,
which
is
our
Target
time
to
be
at
full
funding
as
we
roll
those
forward
and
Foster
and
Foster
is
doing
this
work.
But
on
the
back
of
the
envelope
sort
of
view
that
I
would
take,
you
know
our
gross
liability,
not
the
net
liability
is
going
to
be
about
a
billion
dollars
roughly
in
that
sort
of
range,
but
they'll
do
the
real
calculation
and
you
know
I.
A
Clearly
my
number
is
not
exactly
right,
but
the
gross
number
is
about
a
billion,
which
means
we
want
to
contribute
sufficiently
that
our
assets
at
that
time,
with
earnings
net
of
payments
are
about
a
billion
dollars.
Right
to
me,
that
is
full
funding.
Full
funding
is
over
this
path,
and
that's
why
I
continue
to
say
it
is
a
path
that
we
are
on
to
get
get
our
assets
to
grow
from
something
like
260
to
something
on
the
order
of
a
billion
dollars
by
2040.
If
that
liability
is
also
in
the
range
of
2040.
A
and
Foster
and
Foster
will
do
additional
work
to
validate
their
view
on
what
the
present
value
of
the
liabilities
are
by
2040.
and.
A
Up
with
a
different
number
and
whatever
they're
the
experts,
all
all
I've
been
able
to
do
is
my
own
sort
of
rough
estimation.
But
to
me
the
the
bottom
line
point
is
full
funding,
as
as
when
I
talk
about
full
funding
and
council
member
Kelly
I'm
I'm
interested
in
your
view
on
full
funding.
If
it
is
different,
my
definition
of
full
funding
is
by
a
certain
Target
date.
A
The
present
value
of
our
liabilities
equals
the
current
value
of
our
assets.
That
is
100
funding,
and
it
is
a
path
because
the
liabilities
are
affected
by
a
lot
of
things
somewhat
independently
of
funding
right.
The
liabilities
are
affected
by
by
mortality
lifespan.
The
liabilities
are
affected
by
pay
rates.
They're
they're
affected
by
inflation,
they're
affected
by
the
discount
rate
that
we
assume
on
our
asset
returns,
but
Foster
and
Foster
doing
their
best
to
say
what
do
we
think
on
at
our
Target
date?
A
The
liability
is,
and
then
what
are
the
required
contributions
with
earnings
net
of
payments
that
get
us
to
a
matching
amount
and
to
me
that
is
the
definition
of
full
funding
a
date
in
the
future.
When
our
liabilities,
equal
are
our
assets
and
until
we
get
there
we're
playing
catch-up
right
and
and
I
think
that
we'll
see
what
those
say
they,
those
contributions
are
but
I
think
we
need.
A
We
need
to
understand
what
those
are
and
build
into
our
budget,
a
path
to
funding
those
and
I
think
also
a
funding
policy
statement
that
says,
as
we
deplete
excess
reserves,
which
is
good,
that
we
have
maybe
we'll
be
able
to
forecast
that
we're
always
going
to
have
access
reserves.
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
so.
But
what
is
our
funding
policy?
A
So
it's
critical
that
we
get
the
from
the
experts,
Foster
and
Foster
their
views
on
what
the
required
contributions
are,
so
that
our
assets
and
liabilities
match
each
other
by
our
Target
day,
which
is
2040.
so
that
that
is
my
thought.
That
is
my!
You
know
what
I
would
consider
full
funding
and
I.
Think
there's
been
some.
A
You
know
councilmember
Kelly!
If,
if
you
you,
if
you
view
full
funding
as
something
different
I'd,
be
interested
in
in
your
views.
B
Well,
I
think
it's
somewhat
vague.
What
you've
said.
I
mean
I,
understand
your
point:
there's
many
that
path
and
get
to
that
full
funny.
We
have
to
we're
legally
obligated
by
2040.
It's
not
like
to
get
to
that
hundred
percent.
I
mean
we
have
no
choice.
It's
whether
or
not
we
want
to
saddle
our
future
of
estonians
with
yet
even
greater
pension
obligation
and
deficit
and
so
I.
Don't
are
you
interested
in
reducing
that
each
year
or
or
not,
absolutely,
okay?
So
the
way
that
we
do?
B
B
They
did
the
same
thing
that
Evanston
has
been
doing
for
a
long
time
now,
but
they
said
oh
and
we've
heard
this
here
from
staff,
oh,
but
we're
doing
even
better
than
what
the
requirement
is
the
requirement's
90,
and
that
was
a
fraud
for
the
Chicagoans
because
they
kept
putting
that
out
like
oh
we're,
we're
putting
down
even
more
than
what's
required,
and
what
ended
up
now
is
that
Chicago
isn't
a
big
mess,
just
as
we
are
with
an
incredible
pension
obligation.
So
what
I'm
saying
is?
B
What
it
would
cost
to
do
this
again
this
year
to
in
to
continue
to
make
a
dent
in
Our
obligation
honor-
and
this
is
the
most
important
thing
we
can
do-
to
protect
property
taxes
in
this
town
right
now,
this
is
it
I've
talked
to
pasca
Governor
Quinn.
He
said
this
is
exactly
what
we
did
this
year
is
what
we
need
to
continue
to
do
and
I'm.
Sorry,
if
you
differ
on
that,
okay.
A
B
So
that's
what
we
should
do
tonight
and
we've
put
this
off
for
too
long.
David
I
wanted
us
to
do
this
two
months
ago
and
I
hope
that
tonight
we
can
at
least
approve
policy
that
we
put
the
pp.
The
full
pprt
towards
our
pension.
I
would
ask
that
tonight
we
vote
on
that
to
direct
staff
that
100
of
the
pprt
that's
coming
in
here
for
the
next
I
would
say
on
into
the
future.
B
100
of
the
pprt
goes
to
our
pensions.
I
think
that's
a
starting
place
and
I
hope
that
tonight
we
can
vote
on
that
to
to
direct
to
direct
staff
to
to
put.
A
H
A
B
Stay
on
that
path,
not
increasing
our
overall
obligation,
because
you
can
get
to
that
point-
increasing
your
application
and
pay
more
in
the
future.
I
don't
want
to
increase
the
the
debt
on
the
shoulder
of
our
residents
anymore.
I
want
to
start
to
decrease
that
we
did
it
this
year.
This
was
historic.
We
need
to
continue
on
that
path
and
I
do
have
the.
J
J
H
J
Think
you
know
it's
made
to
I
think
the
temperature
is
getting
a
little
hot
here
and
I
think
there's
agreement.
What
I'm
hearing
is
agreement
on
the
definition
and
and
it
councilmember
Kelly
I-
think
the
slight
difference
or
disconnect
is
and
I
I
share.
This
definition
I
think
with
councilmember
Kelly,
which
is
that
I
think
in
our
view,
in
my
view,
full
funding.
Yes,
is
your
definition,
but
also
on
an
annual
basis,
making
sure
that
we're
making
the
contribution
to
get
to
that
number.
J
That
you're
saying
where
our
assets
and
our
liabilities
are
am
I
mischaracterizing,
something
I,
think
that's
a
shared
definition
and
and
that's
where
I
am
and
I
think
it
councilmember
Kelly's
proposal
is
worth
discussion
when
we
get
to
that
point
is
how
to
get
to
the
point
where
assets
and
liabilities
match
at
some
point
in
near
2020
2040,
but
I
appreciate
your
definition.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
K
K
We
can
all
say
full
funding,
but
what
what
I
think
council
member
Kelly
is
trying
to
get
at
is
the
path
we
use
to
get
there
and
that's
where
we're
going
to
have
I.
Think
that's
where
the
work
is
going
to
be-
and
you
know
it
you
know,
and
and
trying
to
provide
the
least
amount
of
Burden
via
either
bonding
or
increase
tax
levies
is
what
we
should
be
working
towards
and
I
think.
The
other
thing
we
need
to
think
about
with
with
pension
obligations
is
they're
an
obligation.
K
You
know,
building
a
a
animal
shelter
you
know
is
not
an
obligation,
that's
not
something
you
have
to
do
so,
I
think
in
the
in
the
taxpayers,
minds
and
the
council
members
minds.
I
think
you
need
to
sort
of
say:
that's
one
bucket
I
mean
that's
sort
of
separate,
and
apart
from
anybody
else,
that's
what
you've
got
to
do
and
if
you're
going
to
do
tax
increases
or
Levy
increases
or
bonds,
then
you
need
to
tie
those
to
discretionary
items.
I
guess
would
be
one
of
the
things
I'd
like
us
to
talk
about.
A
So
maybe
we
can
get
back
to
the
agenda.
I
wanted
to
get
that
in
front
I
I
think
we
have
Clarity.
We
both
want
the
numbers.
We
all
want
the
numbers.
We
need
an
expert
to
give
us
the
numbers
and
we
want
to
stick
to
that
path
and
it's
likely
an
increasing
path
and
we'll
just
have
to
deal
we'll
have
to
deal
with
it
right
right.
So
I
come
up
with
a
funding
policy
and
deal
with
it.
D
B
I,
don't
think
we
should
keep
kicking
this
can
down
David.
We
should
like,
for
example,
you
know
directing
I
think
we
could
decide
this
evening
that
we
want
to
put
100
of
the
pprt
towards
pensions.
That's
what
the
pprt
is
meant
for
by
the
state,
and
it
has
not
been
going
and
I
also
want
to
say.
I
did
get
I
asked
the
I
asked
some
board
members
from
the
fire
pension
and
I
did
Foster
and
Foster
did
give
an
estimate
of
what
they
would
see.
B
It's
about
a
3.7
percent
increase
total
that
the
city
would
owe
based
on
everything
from
you
know:
reduced
number
of
employees
to
increase
salaries
and
everything
else
that
goes
into
the
actual
accounting,
and
so
I
can
tell
that
it's
going
to
probably
be
about
a
million
more
than
what
we
paid
last
year
and
so
I
don't
see
any
reason
why
we
have
to
continue
to
wait
and
wait
and
wait.
B
We
you
know
all
we
have
all
kinds
of
other
numbers
that
come
up
that
are
way
off
like
we
go
from
14
million
surplus
to
34
and
I
mean
why
we
can't
take
the
responsible
measure.
Now,
or
certainly
no
later
than
May
in
direct
and
staff,
how
we're
going
to
fully
respond.
A
So
I
would
I
would
suggest
in
May,
let's
try
to
limit
our
discussion
to
two
items:
a
revised
forecast
for
the
current
year-
maybe
three
items
a
retrospective
on
what
happened
in
22,
right
with
where
we
were
at
the
budget
time
to
the
final
okay,
what
revenues
changed
and
why
an
updated
view
based
on
everything
we
know
on
23
and
let's,
let's
discuss
the
pension
and
potentially
vote
on
the
pension,
then
of
our
recommendation
but
I
think
longer
term,
and
what
we
might
take
several
months
to
do
is
really
come
up
with
a
formal
funding
policy.
A
It
doesn't
have
to
be
multiple
pages,
but
that
goes
through
how
we
think
the
Evanston
going
forward
should
think
about
pension
contributions,
how
they
Define.
What
those
are
you
know,
use
excess
reserves
up
to
X
use
the
full
amount
of
pprt
to
the
degree.
That's
appropriate,
I
think
there's
a
minor
issue
that
that
pprd
is
supposed
to
be
spent
partially
relative
to
what
it
was
historically,
but
most
of
that
was
mentioned,
maybe
so
maybe
it's
80
percent
whatever
that,
whatever
it
is,
what's
the
legal
you
know,
what's
the
legal
requirement
relative
to
pprt?
A
A
So
let's
put
that
in
a
document
that
would
be
great
to
have
the
council
vote
on
so
that
when
the
Evanston,
you
know
when
we
get
to
the
Days,
inevitably
in
a
recession
or
whatever,
where,
where
where
the
reserves
are
gone
and
people
have
to
make
tough
funding
choices,
we
already
have
an
agreed
document
on
what
we
would
do
and
certainly
that
council
could
disregard
it
or
vote
to
do
something
different,
but
I
think
we
create
a
better
hurdle
to
commit
them
to
stay
on
this
path.
A
By
coming
up
with
a
formal
funding
document
and
say
this
is
what
we
thought.
This
is
how
it
should
be
treated.
Mr
Desai
has
recommended.
We
do
that
again.
This
is
not
a
20-page
document.
I
think
it's
a
bit
where
the
Blue
Ribbon
committee
report
fell
short.
They
did
not
Define
that
so
I
think
we
need
to
Define
that
better
of
what
we
think
when
the
day
comes,
that
we
need
incremental
revenues,
what
those
are
and
they
can
be
whatever
right
they
can
be.
A
Whatever
I
am
I,
am
you
know
historically
and
we'll
go
through
this?
A
large
part
of
the
pension
contribution
was
funded
by
property
taxes.
It
doesn't
have
to
be
that
way.
But,
let's
let
us
Define
this.
Do
that
hard
work
now,
so
that
we
make
sure
the
city
is
as
committed
as
it
can
be
again.
They
could
undo
it
to
stay
on
this
path
and
where
the
revenues
will
come
from.
K
A
I
think
part
of
that's
a
question
for
Mr
Desai,
but
I
would
say
yeah,
let's,
let's
do
our
best
to
Define
how
we
would
expect
a
future
to
act.
How
different
you
know
older
people,
you
know
we
thought
about
it,
and
this
is
what
we
would
do,
and
this
is
what
this
Council
passed
and
if
you
want
to
change
it,
there's.
A
A
A
Yeah,
okay
and
we
need
to
reimburse
reimburse
right,
I
mean
at
a
time
that
we
have
access
reserves
right
so
again,
I
don't
think
we
have
any
big
disagreements
as
to
how
we
think
same
thing
and
see
things
and
what
we
want
to
do
and
I
think
we
want
to
commit
as
much
as
we
can
to
the
Future
to
stay
to
this
path
in
a
way
that
is
the
least
painful
as
possible.
A
A
H
A
It
but,
let's
think
about
what
that
is,
we
can
take
care
of
the
short
term
and
the
long
term
by
developing
a
formal
funding
policy
statement
that
Mr
Desai
can
help
us
pull
together,
maybe
they're,
even
if
there
are
relevant
documents
from
other
communities
as
to
what
they've
had
done,
and
we
try
to
make
it
flexible
what
we
do
our
best
to
commit.
So,
let's
get
back
to
the
agenda,
but
I
think
this.
This
relates
to
the
agenda
as
well,
and
so
we
are
on
the
overview
of
the
general
fund
revenues
right
on.
A
D
Oh
David
and
Sherry
and
Zoom
here,
I
forgot,
who
I'm
with
who
is
someone
with
me
on
the
pensions,
because
I
think
I
was
supposed
to
be
the
liaison
with
coachings
sort.
D
You
would
okay,
so
maybe
we
should
dig
deeper
in
between
the
meeting
and
then
Claire
we
can.
One
of
us
can
meet
with
you
because
I
know
we
can't
have
a
full
meeting,
but
I
think
we
should
do
some
work
before
the
meeting
and
then
to
just
have
it
all
come
up
at
the
meeting,
so
I'm
happy
to
dig
a
little
deeper
and
work
on
this
in
between
the
meeting.
A
Great
idea:
okay,
so
all
right
yeah,
so
we're
going
back
then
to
the
transportation
infrastructure,
Enterprise
fund,
referral
from
council
member
Ray.
J
I
will
kicks
off
here.
So
I
made
this
referral
a
while
ago
in
response
to
a
Supreme
Court
decision
that
came
down
in
I,
believe
early
2022
and
and
that
Supreme
Court
decision
was
a
case
brought
by
the
Illinois
Road
workers
against
the
County
of
Cook,
and
they
claimed
that
Cook
County
was
in
violation
of
the
Illinois
constitution
by
there's
a
constitutional
amendment,
I
believe
in
2017
2016
2017.
That
said
that
All
State
funds
must
be
all
Transportation.
J
Related
funds
must
be
spent
on
Transportation
related
expenses.
It's
the
transportation,
lock
box,
Amendment
folks,
remember
and
when
this
was
passed
it
there
was
an
understanding,
in
fact,
I,
remember
reading
in
the
court
case
and
the
decision
that
the
legislators
that
our
state
representatives
and
state
senators
believed
that
this
would
not
apply
to
municipalities
that
this
would
only
apply
to
the
state.
But
the
court
said:
hey:
the
law
is
the
law
it's
in
the
Constitution.
J
It
says
that
all
Transportation
related
funds
must
be
spent
on
Transportation,
related
expenditures
and
and
that's
the
case
for
the
state,
and
that's
also
the
case
for
municipalities,
because
nowhere
in
home
rule
Authority
does
the
state
Grant
a
municipality
powers
that
the
state
doesn't
have
itself,
and
that
was
the
Supreme
Court's
logic
or
municipalities,
or
you
know,
in
this
case
the
County
of
Cook.
J
So
with
that
I
believe
it's
our
it's
a
mandate
that
we
should
be
following
similar
accounting
standards-
and
you
know
this
isn't
going
to
change
a
whole
lot
about
what's
happening
here.
It's
really
going
to
change
things
on
paper
and
make
tracking
easier.
My
suggestion
is
that
we
would
create
a
transportation,
Enterprise
fund
and
all
Transportation
related
Revenue
would
go
into
this
line
item
or
this
fund
or
whatever
you
know.
J
Mr
Desai
can
speak
to
that
better,
but
to
go
into
this
Transportation
Enterprise
fund
and
all
expenditures
would
also
be
noted
in
that
same
fund,
and
so,
as
is
mentioned
here
in
the
memo.
If
you
look
at
Cook
Counties
budget
document
you'll
see
that
there
they
have
a
transportation
fund,
they
show
what
the
revenues
are
with
the
various
revenues
for
it,
and
then
they
show
what
the
expenditures
are.
The
the
county
doesn't
maintain
a
lot
of
roads
like
we
do
so.
You
know
their
their
expenditures
are
different.
J
I
do
want
to
be
clear
that
when
I
say
Transportation
related,
you
know
expenditures
that
also
does
include
enforcement.
So
that
does
mean
that
you
know
we
can
use
some
of
this
money
to
fund
the
police
department,
particularly
the
traffic,
the
division
and
other
again
Transportation
related
expenditures
that
aren't
just
repairing
the
roads.
Why
is
this
important?
This
is
important
because
it
makes
sure
again
we
have
a
hundred
million
dollar
unfunded
infrastructure
liability.
J
We
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
making
a
a
a
an
investment
year
after
year
in
our
transportation
infrastructure
and
making
sure
we
bring
that
number
down.
Also,
it's
important
on
the
flip
side
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
relying
on
usually
regressive
sources
of
revenue
to
to
to
to
fund
areas
outside
of
Transportation
and
and
what
we've
seen
from
this
is
the
County
of
Cook.
J
Recently
I,
you
know,
I
think
it
may
have
been
clever
marketing,
but
they
got
rid
of
their
will.
Tax
and
I'd
say
it's
because
they
don't
need
the
revenue.
They
can't
find
a
way
to
spend
it
with
the
new
Transportation.
But
you
know
it's:
they.
They
claim
it's
regressive,
the
wheel
tax,
and
so
you
know,
there's
a
fee
that
has
been
lessened
on.
J
You
know
certain
residents
in
Cook,
County
and
so
I
think
you
know
this.
This
is
good
because
it
makes
sure
that
we're
spending
on
Transportation
it's
good,
because
it
makes
sure
that
we're
not
overcharging
residents
for
for
fees
and
fines
and
services
that
maybe
we're
using
that
excess
Revenue
to
fund
things
com,
not
related,
and
so
it's
really
a
mandate.
I
think
this
is
the
way
we
clean
it
up.
I
will
in
there
and
take
any
questions
and
just
really
quick
I'll
note.
J
You
know
what
are
the
the
funding
sources
it's
in
the
memo,
but
you
know
the
the
parking
tax
wheel,
tax,
annual
parking
permits,
visiting
permits,
truck
permits,
boot
release
fees,
various
tickets
and
fines
for
parking.
J
It's
it
they
go
into
the
general
fund,
so
it's
there
isn't
really
a
clear
accounting
of
exactly
where
they
go,
except
for
the
parking
fund,
which
is
its
own
kind
of
Enterprise
fund
fun
fund.
And
so
there
is
it's
that's
separate,
separated
out
from
the
general
fund.
A
Mr
Desai
the
question:
how
much
if
we
have
to
use
these
revenues
for
these
expenses,
do
you
believe
that
we're
already
sufficiently
spending
in
these
areas
that
it.
L
J
Can
take
a
crack
at
that
when
I,
initially
and
Clayton,
please
chime
in
as
well,
but
when
I,
initially
it
made
this
referral.
I
did
some.
J
You
know
back
in
the
napkin
math
that
has
been
verified
by
this
memo,
so
I
feel
good
about
it,
but
I
estimated
that
we
were
bringing
in
about
10
million
dollars
in
annual
revenue
between
all
of
those
sources
and
I
believe
I
could,
when
I
was
going
through
the
budget
that
I
could
find
just
under
or
just
at
about
10
million
dollars
in
expenditure
and
I
did
not
include
the
police
department.
J
So
you
know,
but
if
you're
talking
just
infrastructure
and
Road
improvements
on
an
annual
basis,
we're
spending
just
under
10
million
on
that.
So
certainly
can
we
justify
spending.
You
know
the
10
million
dollars
in
revenue
on
I'm,
not
saying
we're
breaking
the
law,
I'm
saying
we're
we're
very
likely
doing
the
right
thing,
but
we
I
think
for
accounting
purposes
and
for
transparency
and
make
sure
that
we
are
are
following
this.
It
makes
sense
because
there's
a
lock
box
amendment
to
create
some
sort
of
a
lock
box
within
our
reporting
structure.
C
Can
speak
to
it
just
a
little
bit
more
too,
because
we
did
do
a
little
bit
of
of
crunching
on
the
general
fund
to
establish
a
number
as
you,
as
you
mentioned
earlier,
councilmember
Reed,
the
the
State
amendment,
is:
it
opens
the
door
to
being
able
to
use
these
funds
for
Public
Safety
and
enforcement
traffic
laws
and
our
Patrol
operations
alone.
The
salaries
for
our
Patrol
Division
is
about
11
million
dollars,
so
it's
it.
They
largely
cover
it.
C
We
also
have
about
four
million
dollars
in
the
Public
Works
Department
salaries,
folks,
that
maintain
roads,
Transportation
traffic
signal
and
street
lights,
probably
another
100,
probably
another
million
in
in
the
parking
enforcement
folks,
they're
budgeted
in
the
general
fund.
We
purchase
a
million
dollars
worth
of
vehicles,
give
or
take
annually
that
we
also
use
to
maintain
streets,
another
million
dollars,
or
so
in
Fleet
division
salaries
for
folks
to
maintain
those
Vehicles.
So
we
we
can,
you
know
with
the
11
million
dollars
in
Revenue
the
expenses
existed.
I
H
I
Mr,
chair
I
appreciate
councilmember
Reeds,
bringing
this
to
our
attention.
I,
don't
know
what
you
do
when
you
go
home
at
night,
but
I
think
you
must
read
the
Congressional
Record
in
your
free
time
or
the
this.
The
the
legislative
record
so
I
appreciate
you
bringing
this
to
our
attention
in
addition
to
having
a
council
member
flag
this
to
our
attention.
I
am
also
curious
if
the
municipal
League
or
the
the
city
Managers
Association,
has
weighed
in
on
this
and
provided
any
guidance
to
municipalities.
C
There
hasn't
been
there
yeah,
there
hasn't
been
communities
where
I
worked
previously.
We
we
didn't
respond
to
this
and
I
think.
The
main
reason
for
that
too,
is
is
following
the
Supreme
Court
decision
and
we
detail
it
in
the
memo.
There
was
some
additional
judicial
procedures
where
Cook
County
put
this
money
towards
Public
Safety
and
the
Illinois
road
builders
association
took
issue
with
that,
and
so
that
process
is
still
sort
of
working
itself
out.
C
There
may
be
more
to
come
on
the
judicial
front,
so
I
think
that's
probably
one
reason
why
communities
haven't
rushed
to
respond
to.
I
I
I
have
I,
also
have
a
question
with
regards
to
the
scope
and
to
the
extent
to
which
parking
is
included
is
it
it
seems
like
it
should
be,
but
parking
wasn't
mentioned
in
the
article
that
you
forwarded
so
just
a
question
about
about
the
scope
here
and
then
a
question
I
think
which
has
already
been
answered,
maybe
about
the
implementation,
if
we're
already
kind
of
in
compliance
just
for
all
the
expenses
you
just
mentioned,
which
did
not
include
any
Capital
expenses
right.
I
C
From
from
our
perspective,
too,
the
good
news
about
parking
is,
it's
already
tracked
in
its
separate
Enterprise
fund,
so
we're
already
tracking
those
revenues
sort
of
as
an
Enterprise
in
terms
of
another
fund.
We
have
39
funds
right
now
and
all
39
of
those
funds
have
their
own
restrictions
as
to
how
you
can
use
the
money
that
goes
into
those
funds.
So
this
would
be
a
40th
fund
with
very
specific
revenues
for
very
specific
purposes
it
we
can
create
it.
C
It's
it's
another
fund
and
we
we
have
plenty
and
to
have
great
experience,
tracking,
very
special
purpose
funds.
We
have
an
mft
A
sustainability.
This
would
probably
be
very
similar
to
those
types
of
funds,
so
it
would
just
be
an
exercise
to
create
that
additional
fund.
J
So
from
my
research,
certainly
the
the
there
are
as
Clayton
mentioned,
there
are
things
that
are
still
out
there
about.
You
know
how
much
can
you
spend
you
know?
How
can
you
justify?
J
You
know
the,
for
example,
the
county
is
spending
money
on
the
juvenile
court
system,
and
you
know
traffic
and
other
things,
and
so
there
still
is
some
unsettled
law
regarding
the
use
for
Public
Safety,
but
it's
very
clear,
I
think
from
the
Supreme
Court
case
and
from
what
has
transpired
thus
far,
that
municipalities
are
required
just
like
the
state
to
create
to
make
sure
that
you
know
all
transportated
Transportation
related
revenue
is
going
toward
Transportation
related
expenditures,
so
there
must
be
a
transportation
lock
box.
I
J
That
that
is
the
law
but
I,
think
and
and
if
I
can
respond
to
your
question
into
what
Clayton
was
was
saying,
I
mean
for
you.
All.
A
new
fund
is
essentially
just
a
line
on
a
piece
of
paper,
and
so
it
I
don't
think
that
creating
a
new
fund
would-
and
please
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
you
know
be
some
hard
task.
The
only
thing
is
just
juggling
around
where
these
things
land
on
the
budget.
J
So
it's
very
clear:
if
anyone
you
know
if
the
state
or
the
road
workers,
Association
or
some
Union
takes
issue
with
Evans,
and
they
can
very
clearly
look
at
our
budget,
say:
hey:
they
bring
in
10
million
dollars
in
Transportation,
related
revenue
and
hear
from
this
fund
they're
clearly
spending
you
know
at
least
or
more
than
that
10
million
dollars
in
transportation.
So
it's
just
really.
J
You
know
you
asked
about
the
urgency:
does
it
help
or
hurt?
It
certainly
doesn't
hurt.
It
helps
if
anything
I
think
it.
It
just
is
transparency
for
our
residents,
transparency
for
any
naysayer
out
there
who
may
want
to
bring
a
similar
lawsuit
again
against
Evanston,
to
very
clearly
be
able
to
look
at
our
budget
and
say
yeah
they're
doing
the
right
thing.
A
A
I
would
encourage
I
think
we've
talked
before
that
40
funds
or
39
funds
if
we
were
to
Benchmark
that
against
other
communities
might
be
a
lot
of
funds
already
and
I
think
maybe
as
part
of
this,
if
we're
thinking
about
establishing
another
fund,
all
the
funds
are
actually
listed
on
the
last
page
of
this
deck
because
of
the
budget
amendment.
A
C
We've
we've
spoke,
we've
spoke
about
it
a
bit.
There
are
a
couple
and
many
of
the
ones
that
exist
are
created
at
the
direction
of
city
council,
things
like
the
sustainability
fund
and
others.
It's
been
the
desire
to
track
it
there,
the
tiffs,
the
ssas,
those
have
to
maintain
their
own
fund,
the
Enterprise
funds,
the
water,
the
sewer,
the
solid
waste
and
the
parking
you
have
to
maintain
those
as
separate
funds
where
we
do
have
some
flexibility
is
in
our
internal
service
funds
like
fleets
and
Equipment
replacement.
C
J
Because
the
parking
is
a
part
of
this
and
I
hear
what
you're
saying
but
I
do
think
what
I
remember
reading
is
I
mean
it's
clearly
related
to
Transportation
you're,
taking
the
car,
and
you
have
to
put
it
somewhere,
but
you
would.
We
would
need
a
parking
fund
because
it
would
be
a
part
of
the
transportation
Enterprise
fund
parking.
I
J
Here
is
oh
well,
if
I
can
note
the
county,
if
you
look
at
the
county
budget
on
page
57
is
was
noted
in
the
here.
They
include
parking
in
their
Enterprise,
their
transportation.
They.
I
Already
have
a
program
so
since
we're
already
in
compliance
with
our
you
know,
preliminary
understanding
of
the
law
I,
don't
think
we
need
to
take
any
immediate
action
here.
It's
kind
of
my
sense.
Let's
see
what
the
policy,
what
the
law
kind
of
settles
out
to
be
wait
for
some
guidance
from
IML
and
other
in
other
sources.
C
We
have
spoken
with
Corporation,
Council
and,
and
he
I
think
the
extent
to
which
we've
done.
That
is.
He
said
that
the
Supreme
Court
decision
applies
to
us
we're
home
rule,
but
we
have
to
comply
with
the
amendment,
we're
not
immune
to
it.
But
again
we
haven't
gotten
him
like
a
really
deep
conversation.
We've
gotten
IML
guidance
in
Northwest
Municipal.
We
haven't
really
seen
anybody
else
doing
it
yet
so.
J
Know
if,
if
I
may
share
respond,
I
I,
don't
think
we
should
should
wait.
You
know,
I
I,
think
that
waiting
puts
us
potentially
I
mean
we
can
calculate
the
risk,
it's
probably
pretty
low.
But
if
the
count,
if
Cook
County
had
had
a
transportation
Enterprise
fund
already
right,
they
were
already
complying
essentially
with
the
law.
They
were
in
the
same
boat
that
we're
in
now
and
if
they
had
done
the
accounting
ahead
of
time,
God
knows
how
much
money
they
spent
on.
J
Taking
this
all
the
way
up
to
the
Supreme
Court
and
fighting
the
road
Workers
Union,
they
wouldn't
have
to
spend
that
money
and
waste
taxpayer
money
on
defending
a
case,
and
you
know,
then
you
know
retroactively
going
back
improving
the
accounting.
We
should
just
do
it
up
front.
We
know
that
we
are
mandated
by
state
law
by
the
Illinois
constitution
to
have
you
know
to
to
make
this
expenditure,
and
it
was
called
the
transportation
lock
box
Amendment.
J
Let's
just
create
the
line
item,
let's
avoid
the
potential
of
being
a
part
of
some
new
lawsuit
or
some
class
action
that
the
road
workers
file
against
a
bunch
of
municipalities.
Let's
inundate
ourselves
from
that
and
just
change
a
few
lines
on
a
piece
of
paper,
and
then
we
know
that
we're
we're
safe
moving
into
the
future,
and
it's
just
for
transparency
for
our
residents.
So
they
know
that
you
know
when
we're
raising.
Potentially
you
know
parking
fees
or
other
costs.
A
So
this
was
just
a
discussion
item
in
the
agenda,
I,
think
and
I.
Think
where
we
know
we're,
we
know
where
we
are.
We
can
I
mean
I
would
like
I
said
earlier.
I
would
love
for
the
May
meeting
to
just
be
on
these
three
subjects
of
22,
actual
23
forecast
and
pension.
So
maybe
we
could
talk
about
it
more
or
you
know.
If
there's
any
additional
developments,
we'll
talk
about
it,
I.
J
Would
love
to
move
that
we
bring
this
back?
He
said
the
main
meeting
you
and
I
have
the
just.
J
June
yeah
so
I'd
like
to
move
that
we
bring
this
back
in
June
with
you
know,
yeah.
As
for
action.
J
J
That
input
I
think
all
of
that
should
come
back
in
June
with
our
legal
department
with
you
know
some
communication
with
IML
and
others,
and
you
know,
let's
just
bring
it
back
as
a
policy,
so
I
move
that
we
do
I
move
that
we
bring
this
back
in
June
for
action
and
we
can
make
the
decision
then
to
table
it
or
whatever.
But
that's
that's
my
emotion.
I
I
looked
on
the
IML
website
this
afternoon.
It
didn't
find
anything
related
to
this
topic.
I,
don't
know
if
they
have
a
timeline.
If
they're
planning
to
weigh
in
here.
If
that
doesn't
not
happen
by
June
I,
don't
want
to
box
ourselves
into
a
corner
here.
J
J
A
fairly
new
thing,
as
I
mentioned
I,
you
know
I
I
happen
to
come
across
this
doing
research
for
reparations
and
that
that's
how
I
came
across
this.
This
is
a
pretty
you
know.
Obviously,
IML
would
have
their
eyes
on
something
like
this,
but
this
is
pretty
you
know
novel.
This
is
not
a
something
that
was
talked
about
widely,
so
I
wouldn't
expect
that
there
would
be
a
you
know.
Huge
discussion
on
this.
F
A
Talk
about
it
in
June
would
that
would
that
we
can
add
it
to
the
agenda
in
June.
If
there's
something
to
talk
about,
and
maybe
the
council
members
could
just
decide,
do
they
want
this
on
the
agenda
in
June?
Would
that
would
that
be
okay?
I
mean
you
know,
we
will
talk.
J
About
I
mean,
if
you
guys
want
to
talk
about
it,
yeah
I,
I,
I,
I,
stand
by
the
motion,
my
apologies,
but
I,
I
and
I.
Think
that's
important
if,
for
some
reason,
I
think
we'll
have
more
information
about
June
we'll
have
the
motion
is
asking
staff
to
buy
June
have
conversations
with
IML
to
have
the
Law
Department
look
at
this
further.
J
This
is
something
Nick
and
I
have
Council,
Cummings
and
I
have
discussed
previously
I
think
we
can
get
that
feedback
that
you're
looking
for
by
June
and
maybe
even
have
someone
from
the
county
who's
been
close
to
this.
In
fact,
the
County
budget
manager,
who
I
think
the
council
members
are
familiar
with
I,
had
a
conversation
with
with
the
county
budget
manager
about
about
this
very
this.
This
launch
so
I
think
we
can
get
some
of
that
feedback
as
well.
I
A
It
so
do
we
have
a
second
to
have
it
in
June
okay.
So
we
have
a
second
to
talk
about
this
in
June.
Well,
I,
don't
know
if
you
already
just
Voice
vote.
That's
fine
yeah.
H
A
Okay,
totally
plan
to
go
along
all
right,
got
it:
okay,
okay,.
F
A
We're
going
to
talk
about
the
the
general
fund
revenues
in
a
couple
of
pages
here
on
the
the
budget.
Clearly,
there
there
has
been
some
based
on
late
recovery
of
some
revenues.
Above
forecasts,
there's
been
some
growth.
There
was
some
growth
in
the
22
actuals,
as
people
have
noted
that
we
have
a
current
year,
Surplus
now
of
26.3
million,
which
is
good
at
good
at
one
level,
and
but
you
know
probably
absolutely
should
have
had
well
to
the
degree
would
have
been
possible.
A
It
would
have
been
good
to
have
better
visibility
with
respect
to
that
in
the
in
the
budget
process.
So,
let's,
in
light
of
that
26
million
current
I,
think
actually
we
might
be
out.
L
A
Order
here,
whichever
page
you
want
to
go
to
next
Clayton,
be
at
the
general
fund
revenues
page
or
the
general
fund
forecast
page,
this.
C
Just
shows
all
right
yeah,
so
I
can
jump
right
in
with
the
presentation
Mr
Desai
has
is
not
feeling
well
so
he's
given
the
mic
to
me
for
the
evening.
So
this
is
just
the
forecast
we
showed
it
last
month.
It
hasn't
changed
much
from
what
you
saw
last
month.
C
Looking
at
the
second
slide,
we've
talked
about
this
already
last
month,
so
we
talked
about
potential
uses
for
that
Surplus
and
expenses.
Some
of
these
have
already
been
approved.
To
date,
we've
approved
15.5
million
in
use
of
that
Surplus.
In
order
to
balance
the
general
fund
to
cover
overages
on
three
capital
projects.
Last
night
the
Oakton
Corridor
was
included
and
approved
using
a
portion
as
well
and
then
three
million
for
police
and
fire,
and
then
we've
already
talked
a
bit
about
some
of
these
other
potential
uses
moving
forward.
C
This
item
was
focused
on
these
general
fund
Revenue,
so
that's
kind
of
where
we
want
to
spend
the
conversation,
giving
you
a
a
five-year
look
back
at
some
of
the
major
revenues
and
give
you
an
idea
of
our
budget
for
23
shown
here
are
18
individual
Revenue
sources.
These
18
revenues
comprise
80
percent
of
general
fund
revenues,
so
they
cover
a
vast
majority
of
the
move
movement
that
you
see
from
year
to
year
in
terms
of
of
total
City
general
fund
revenues.
C
The
other
line
at
the
bottom
includes
107
individual
line
items,
but
again
those
are
only
20
20
of
our
budget.
So
these
these
are
the
ones
we
look
at.
Whenever
we
talk
about
where
you
know
windsurpluses
happen,
is
it's
generally
a
result
of
the
revenues
pictured
here,
highlighting
just
a
couple
of
them
and-
and
this
is
in
your
packet-
it's
it's
on
the
third
slide.
I
know
the
numbers
are
probably
really
hard
to
see
up
on
the
screen,
but
it's
starting.
A
A
C
So
highlighting
just
a
few
of
these,
the
state
income
tax
in
the
first
line,
This,
is
the
largest
general
fund
Revenue
outside
of
the
pensions,
the
IML
estimate
when
we
developed
the
budget,
was
about
139
to
158
dollars
per
capita.
It's
currently
155
per
capita.
So
this
is
one
of
those
many
revenues
that
we
get
estimates
from
the
IML
in
order
to
budget,
for,
if
the
current
trend
of
155
dollars
per
capita
holds,
we
could
see
about
a
half
a
million,
an
upside
from
our
budget
of
11.5
million
I'm.
A
Is
in
the
packet,
it's
just
there's
some
line
items
on
the
bottom
that
we're
not,
but
the
the
these
primary
streams
that
account
for
any
of
the
revenue
that
was
in
the
original.
If.
C
J
B
B
That
gives
us
a
much
better
picture
as
to
what's
going
on,
because
the
last
column
is
just
simply
adopted.
Where's
the
column
before
is
what
we
ended
up
with,
and
we
have
no
idea
where
that
stands
relative
to
what
we
actually
adopted.
So
I
I've
asked
this
before
so
I
would
ask
going
forward
if
we
could.
Please
have
adopted
an
actual
I.
A
B
B
C
So
and
that's
a
belabor
quicker,
but
the
point
two
of
the
table
in
in
this
exercise
is
to
see
where
we
finished
22
and
what
we
budgeted
for
23,
so
that
we
can
at
this
point
what
we
budgeted
in
22,
while
important
for
some
analysis.
C
What's
really
important
at
this
point
is
where
did
we
actually
finish
22
and
are
we
wrong
with
our
23
budget,
based
on
where
we
finished
22,
and
so
that's
kind
of
where
we're
looking
here,
I
mean
for
state
income
tax
at
the
top
we
finished
22
at
8,
at
12.8
million
we
budgeted
11.5
million.
So
it's
it's
important
that
we
kind
of
spot
those
differences
and
so
but
going
down
the
list
just
a
little
bit.
More
I
only
have
four
other
revenues
on
this.
That
I
would
want
to
highlight.
C
One
is
sales
sales
taxes,
budgeting
into
anticipation
of
some
of
the
inflationary
Trends
beginning
to
level
off,
as
we
saw
at
the
end
of
22.
Those
remained
very
strong
and
all
indications
are
that
those
are
carried
into
23..
So
we
could
see
another
two
to
three
million,
an
upside
between
those
two
sales
taxes.
22
is
probably
a
bit
High
because
we're
assuming
that
a
recession
or
something
at
some
point
tapers
these
off
and
we
begin
to
see
them
level
off
a
bit.
C
But
even
if
we
only
get
to
21
totals
you
could
still
see
about
two
to
three
million
dollars
in
upside
for
our
sales
taxes.
The
issue
with
trying
to
project
at
this
point
we
don't
get
January
sales
taxes
until
later
this
month,
maybe
in
the
next
day
or
two
I
would
guess,
and
January
and
February
are
always
the
worst
sales
tax
months,
because
everybody
spends
all
their
money
at
Christmas.
So
you
really
don't
start
you
really
don't
start
to
get
an
idea
of
how
our
sales
taxes
are
trending
until
July
August,
but
you
can.
C
We
can
compare
it
against
last
year
and
make
sure
January
February
start
to
come
in
similar
to
where
we
were
last
year.
Whenever
we
saw
12.9
million
record
highs
in
both
state
and
home
rule
sales
taxes,
another
one
worth
highlighting
I
believe
it's
a
Miss
is
Recreation
program
fees.
You
can
see
we
finished
FY
22
at
6.7
million
and
we
budgeted
5.3
million
for
FY,
23.
C
and
I
understand.
There
were
some
term
over
both
in
our
department
and
with
the
Parks
and
Rec
Department
as
well.
There
was
a
fee
increase
of
10
for
non-residents
last
year
on
our
programs,
and
so
we
generated
a
record
of
high
6.7
million,
which
far
exceeded
even
pre-pandemic
levels,
which
wasn't
making
a
whole
lot
of
sense.
Considering
that
you
know
there
were
still
some
of
the
pandemic
impacted
programming
going
on,
but
I
think
this
is
one
where
we've
definitely
agree.
C
C
Correct
something
to
consider
at
some
point
too,
building
permits
likely
some
upside
here.
7
million
was
our
actual.
In
22.
we
budgeted
4.2
million
for
23.
C
I
caution
here,
because
Community
Development
has
a
lot
of
really
small
revenues
as
well,
and
we
have
some
some
collaboration
that
needs
to
happen
there
to
make
sure
that
this
7
million
is
truly
building
permits
and
not
something
that
goes
into
one
of
those
other
Revenue
accounts,
and
so
that's
something
that
we
hope
to
clean
up
and
have
a
better
picture
of
in
the
next
few
months
to
make
sure
that
that's
tracking,
correctly
pprt
year
to
date
is
960
000..
C
You
can
see
we
bumped
up
the
budget
or
we
we
finished
last
year,
5.5
million
this
year's
budget
is
2.9
Million
our
year
to
date,
is
960
000
through
two
payments
last
year.
At
this
point
it
was
1.5
million.
So
that's
down
35
from
last
year's
year
to
date.
Now
it's
super
early
I
think
we
get
our
bigger
payments
a
little
later
in
the
year
in
May,
October
and
and
December.
C
C
Our
actual
budget,
for
that
is,
is
3.75
million
they're
the
3
million
that
we've
reallocated
to
the
real
estate
or
to
the
reparations
fund,
even
that
Revenue
Source
last
year,
compared
to
last
year
we're
at
50
percent
of
where
we
were
last
year
at
this
point
in
the
year.
So
it's
it's
really
dropped
off
quite
a
bit,
but
again
it
just
takes
one
really
large
office,
Tower
or
retail
building.
In
order
for
this
one
to
catch
back
up
and
get
and
get
back
on.
Last
year's
Trend.
K
C
Think
that
I
think
in
total
we
at
this
very
very
preliminary
early
stage.
We
could
have
about
six
million
to
10
million
a
potential
upside
I
think
this
ties
back
to
last
year,
we
finished
with
the
25
million
dollar
Surplus
I,
just
rattled
off
the
same
revenues
just
now
that
contributed
to
that
large
Surplus.
So
there
we
still
have
some
potential
upside
in
our
budget
for
23..
On
the
last
slide,
I
talked
about
a
handful.
B
Of
things
with
regard
to
the
the
real
estate
transfer
tax,
so
so
you're
saying
you,
you
took
out
from
that
line.
What
we
budget
for,
because
it's
going
to
the
reparations
fund,
I,
think
that
should
still
be
reflected
there,
even
though
it
will
be
transferred.
So.
C
C
B
C
Yes,
three
million
three
million
okay.
C
Account
same
code,
it's
very
similar
to
pension
and
pension
pprt.
Now,
since
both
of
those
are
in
the
general
fund,
I
manipulated
the
data
to
be
able
to
combine
it
into
a
single
line
so
that
it's
not
confusing
and
we're
seeing
the
two
separately.
But
it's
very
similar.
It's
the
same
Revenue
Source,
just
different
different
funds.
A
So
I
think
bottom
line,
you're
saying
when
we
get
to
a
made
discussion
on
a
revised
outlook
for
the
year,
we
could
see
six
to
ten
million
dollars
more
in
revenues
that
offset
some
of
the
cost
increases
that
we
just
and
I
think
look
it's
important
to
be
conservative,
but
there's
a
tension
about
you
know
being
overly
conservative.
You
know
we
don't
want
either
right.
So
I
think
it's
good
that
with
the
additional
tools
that
we
have
now
this
table
didn't
exist.
At
least
what
I
saw
before
last
year,
really
good
work.
A
You
know
Clayton
and
attached
to
to
pull
this
together.
It
helps
really
clarify.
You
know
what
what
what
questions
and
perhaps
areas
of
adjustment.
So
it's
it's
good,
and
so
it
will
get
a
new
outlook
in
May
and
then
I
would
also
say
we
should
do
another
Outlook
in
maybe
September.
You
know
before
we
go
into
budget
season
and
we'll
look
at
what
have
been
our
Trends,
and
so
we
we
have
the
most
informed
view
of
the
current
year
activity
to
provide
a
basis
for
the
20.
A
You
know
the
24
budget,
so
you
know
it
would
we
have
some
cost
increases.
It
would
be
great
if
we
have
offsetting
Revenue
increases
and
we're
still
looking
at
about
the
same
number,
that
of
the
of
the
use
of
the
excess
reserves,
or
maybe
less
right
so
we'll
just
take
a
a
good
view
so
and
we'll
just
continue
to
refine
the
tools
that
we
have
to
get
the
best
ongoing
forecasts
that
we
can.
Okay,
any
other
questions
on
this
page.
B
No,
but
I
would
respectfully
asked
if
we
could
have
the
adopted
and
the
actual,
and
you
know
if
it
means
we
transferred.
A
A
A
I
think
the
next,
the
next
page
we
talked
about
this
in
February
I
just
wanted
to
recap-
and
this
goes
back
a
bit
to
the
budget
discussion.
Just
this
puts
on
one
page.
Look
where
what
have
the
contributions
been
going
from
18
8
to
25?
What
was
the
source
The
Source
was
almost
exclusively
property
tax,
so
I
guess
we
do
have
to
ask
the
question
on
the
pprt
should
should
I
don't
know?
What's
that?
What's
the
impact,
if
some
of
the
pprt
should
have
gone
into
here,
do
we
I,
don't
know
right?
A
What's
what's
the
impact
of?
If
we
were
all
sort
of
property
tax
pension
Levy,
we
did
have
from
other
sources.
I
guess
you
know
we
could
attribute
the
23
budget
to
pprt.
But
what
what
do
we
need
to
think
about
with
respect
to
you
know
how?
How
have
we
funded
it?
How
should
we
have
funded
it?
But
by
and
large
it
has
been
property
tax
pension
Levy
that
has
been
the
source
of
most
of
our
pension
funding
until
23.,
so
the
23
number
maybe
catches
up
on
some
of
the
pprt.
L
L
If
their
requirement
is
10
million-
and
you
say,
Okay
5
million
of
pprt
goes
to
the
pension
fund.
Then
the
tax
levy
goes
down
by
that
five
million
dollars.
It
cannot
be
a
double
dipping,
so
it's
clear
there.
A
So,
let's
talk
about
that
more
in
May,
right,
they're,
saying
it's
not
incremental!
Pprt
is
not
incremental
to
a
property
tax
levy.
Okay,
so
we
need
to
understand
that
we
need
to
understand
that
all
right,
okay,
so
all
right
so
again,
we'll
get
into
this
more
in
in
in
May,
but
again,
I
think
everyone's
in
agreement.
We
will
fully
fund
what
Foster
and
Foster
says
4
24.,
you
know
through
the
establishments
in
Levy
appropriately
through
pprt,
where
we
got
to
figure
out.
Is
it
incremental?
A
Is
it
non-incremental
we're
not
in
a
position
to
cut
the
property
tax
levy
at
this
point,
and
I
would
also-
and
you
have
it
on
your
sheet-
if
the
Foster
and
Foster
numbers
indicate
a
higher
recommended
contribution,
we
can
make
a
higher
recommended
contribution
off
of
the
available
access
reserves
that
currently
exist
for
this
year
as
well.
So
you
know
this
group
is
not
looking
for
excuses
to
not
fund
right,
let's
fund
what
we
need
to
fund
okay.
A
A
So,
finally,
then
we
have
the
the
ordinance
to
True
up
some
of
the
budget
numbers
with
the
actuals
and
I
think
this
is
largely
an
administrative
exercise,
Clayton
or
hitesh.
If
you
want
to
go
through
this,
but
we
need
to
amend
the
budget
422
in
light
of
the
actual
actual
spending.
C
K
C
Okay,
just
a
really
brief
overview,
so
I
think
you
said
it
best
when
you
said
it's
a
largely
administrative
in
nature,
we're
not
asking
to
spend
anything,
we're
just
really
asking
to
True
up
some
of
the
funds
that
we
did
did
spend
of
the
39
funds
we
mentioned
where
expenses
recorded
last
year,
15
had
funds
that
went
over
budget.
In
the
memo
we
highlight
the
reasons
for
those
over
budget
amounts.
C
Many
of
those
are
the
SSA
funds
comprise
four
of
those.
Those
are.
The
city
serves
as
a
pass-through
for
property
taxes.
So
if
we
get
more
money
in
property
taxes,
we
hand
off
more
money
over
to
the
those
who
manage
the
SSA
for
the
tiffs,
there
were
some
property
purchases
that
were
not
budgeted,
as
well
as
some
consulting
services
that
were
approved
throughout
the
year
and
approved
by
city
council
that
resulted
in
those
going
over
budget
as
well
this
year.
C
For
the
first
time,
we're
also
including
funds
that
were
were
way
under
budget
for
funds
were
highlighting.
Most
of
these
funds,
large
budgeted
expenses
didn't
materialize
in
22,
but
they're
being
care
were
carried
forward
to
23..
Those
are
including
those
include
arpa
where
we
haven't
spent
all
the
money
yet
so
we're
we're
carrying
forward.
Whatever
our
fund
balance
is
there
our
water
intake
project
that
was
a
portion
of
that
was
budgeted
last
year.
C
The
full
project
is
budgeted
this
year
as
well,
so
we,
it
didn't
materialize
as
much
as
we
budgeted
and
then
in
the
affordable
housing
fund,
I
believe
and
speaking
with
Miss
serif
wax
community
development
director
there.
It
was
in
a
housing
project
that
that
didn't
materials
last
materialized
last
year,
but
was
approved
last
night,
and
so
that's
why
this
one
was
a
million
dollars
under
budget
last
year
as
well.
C
So
it
offers
a
better
explanation
as
to
why
our
budget,
by
reducing
those
funds
where
we
under
spent,
were
not
artificially
inflating
our
budget
to
a
level
that
that
isn't
accurate.
So
we've
opted
to
include
those
in
this.
This
year's
Amendment
as
well.
K
I
have
some
questions
on
the
wording,
so
one
area
you
say
if,
if
you've
gone
over,
you
have
to
amend
the
you're
required
to
I'm.
Sorry
I
can't
read
my
glasses
on
that
you're
required
to
amend
the
budget
budget.
If
you're
under
it
says
you
can.
You
know
if
you'd
like
to
have
you
done
this
before.
C
C
If
we,
if
we
weren't
doing
it
as
part
of
this
amendment,
the
recommendation
would
be
to
increase
our
22
budget
by
about
two
million
dollars,
which
kind
of
artificially
inflates
our
budget
last
year,
because,
while
we're
increasing
it
by
2
million
in
order
to
comply
with
state
law,
we
also
underspent
by
several
million
in
other
funds
too.
So
this
is
you
go
over
in.
D
C
K
L
I
mean
we
haven't
done
it,
but
again
the
kind
of
amount
was
involved,
particularly
with
the
arpa
and
water
37
and
generally
I
see.
The
perception
is
even
if
we
ask,
for
a
two
million
dollar
increase
that
okay
now
the
budget
has
gone
from
300
and
X
dollars
to
this
in
reality
and
and
then
we
checked
from
the
kind
of
a
legal
standpoint
whether
we
can
do
it,
we
check
with
the
Auditors,
they
say:
yeah
I
mean
I,
don't
think
it's
illegal.
We
check
with
our
Corporation
Council.
He.
L
Suggested
this
was
our
intent
to
kind
of
bring
the
true
picture
in
front
of
the
council
and
the
people,
and
particularly
the
arpa
fund
and
Waterfront,
with
almost
35
million
dollar
reduced
budget.
We
want
to
be
kind
of,
you
know,
put
the
right
numbers
out
there
and
again
we
have
left
some
room
there.
While
we
work
on
the
audit,
so
it's
not
exactly
a
waterfront
could
be
a
little
bit
less
right.
I
guess
right.
L
Do
you
write
to
answer
your
question?
In
short,
has
the
Evanston
done
this
before
no
I?
Don't
think
so?
But
again
the
Auditors
and
Corporation
Council
says
yeah.
We
don't
see
anything
illegal,
so
we
move
forward
with
them
again.
Yeah
I
mean
you
can
recommend
the
other
way
and
the
council
can
make
the
final
decision.
B
B
So
last
year,
in
so
the
21
year,
staff
overspent-
probably
11.5
million
and
came
to
us
before
the
audit.
It's
always
like
right
for
the
audit
to
adjust
to
increase
the
21
budget
last
year
by
11.5
million,
but
it
was
okay
because
there
was
31
million
in
Surplus.
B
So
my
question
is
we're
choosing
now
to
reduce
the
budget,
rather
that-
and
there
was
a
lot
of
talk
and
I
held
over
that
increase
with
to
in
order
to
get
an
assurance
that
going
forward
when
there
was
a
projected
overspending
by
fun,
not
within
funds
but
by
by
whole
fund
that
we
would
first
be
when
possible
if
it
wasn't
or
emergency
that
finance
and
budget
would
be
approached
to
overspend.
So
I
also
see
find
this
I.
Don't
see
any
need
to
do
this.
B
L
I
mean
it's
not
the
kind
of
a
I
would
say
the
the
real
Surplus,
the
real
Surplus.
What
we
say
like
in
general,
from
when
you
say,
23
million,
is
the
actual
revenue
and
actual
expenditure
yeah
budget
to
actually.
We
would
look
good
that,
okay,
we
spent
30
million
less
in
Waterfront.
Okay,
let's
battle
is
that
the
right
picture,
no,
it's
and
as
I
think,
we
explained
why
it
happened.
The
main
in-tech
project
just
carried
forward
our
performance.
We
will
be
spent
more
in
this
year
and
probably
next
year.
L
So
yes,
I
would
be
happy
if
that's
a
real
Surplus,
which
is
the
difference
between
actual
revenue
and
actual
expenditure,
it
would
be
a
difference
between
budgeted,
number
and
actual
number,
and
so
yeah
and
again
I
mean
it
is
up
to
the
this
committee
and
finally,
the
recommendation
to
the
council.
The
idea
will
just
go
with
the
so
yeah
I
would
leave
it
up
to
them,
but
our
reason
was
to
be
kind
of
more
transparent
and
particular.
The
number
involved
was
so
big
in
two
different
forms.
A
Right,
council,
member
Reed
I
think
you
were
first
and
then
council
member
news,
one
yeah.
J
J
It's
for
the
second
and
so
I
I.
Do
I'd
like
to
see
that
moving
forward
to
I'd
like
to
see
that
come
to
this
committee
or
counselor
somewhere
just
to
get
approval
because
I
think
just
by
state
law.
That's
what
should
happen,
but
as
far
as
the
reduction
of
last
year's
I
mean
to
me,
it
doesn't
really
matter.
D
J
Way
the
money
is
in
the
account
we
have
whatever
the
Surplus
is
I
think
it
would
be
I
think
it
makes
sense
to
just
you
know:
have
the
Surplus
leave
the
numbers
where
they
were
if
we
overestimated
expenses
or
underestimated
Revenue
both
of
those
two
happening
just
leave.
J
What
we
estimated
have
the
Surplus
make
the
adjustments
for
the
overages,
and
that
should
again
happen
ahead
of
time,
but
I
I
I,
don't
think
you
know
reducing
last
year's
budget
after
the
fact
really
makes
a
difference,
particularly
you
know
yeah,
because
the
whole
point
of
the
budget
setting
it
at
a
certain
level
is
so
we
don't
spend
over
and
if
folks,
just
if,
then
rightfully
so,
sometimes,
if
maybe
sometimes,
if
folks
overspend
in
in
a
fund
regardless,
then
you
know
it
it
what's
the
point
of
the
budget,
but
thank
you.
I
Thank
you
I
like
doing
it
this
way,
it's
it's
a!
It
gives
us
the
whole
picture
rather
than
a
part
of
the
picture.
It
really
doesn't
matter
I'm
in
favor
of
doing
it.
This
way,
I
do
have
a
question
relative
to
our
previous
discussion,
about
including
some
additional
columns
on
that
report,
which
council
member
Kelly
referred
to
as
the
adopted
budget.
I
Which
is
a
Thursday
column
would
be
a
third
column
which
would
just
be
confusing
to
look
at
so
yeah
I'm,
not
okay.
That
answers
my
question
adopted
budget
is
what
we
are,
what
we
originally
adopted
and
whatever
budget
year.
What
we're
doing
talking
about
now
is
amending
it
to
just
kind
of
bureaucratically
close
the
books
going
a
little
bit
above
and
beyond
what
the
state
requires.
I
J
Be
it
point
of
information,
I
I
beg
to
differ
with
that
categorization
that
the
adopted
budget
is
the
budget
that
the
council
approved
whether
that
budget
has
been
amended
or
not
whatever
we.
Whatever
final
action,
we
took
to
say
this:
is
our
budget
for
this
year?
That's
the
adopted
budget.
So,
even
if
we
amended-
and
we
amend
the
budget,
you
know
if
the
week
after
we
passed
a
budget,
we
amended
it
to
make
a
slight
change.
J
That
would
still
be
the
adopted
budget,
and
so
even
now
this
would
still
be
the
adopted
budget,
because
it's
it's
what
we
adopted
I.
L
Clarify
for
how
we
do
it
in
the
audit,
you
might
see
the
column
and
the
Auditors
do
that
in
the
previous
jobs
yeah
we
see
the
other
the
original
budget
when
it's
adopted
in
November
December,
it's
called
adapted
budget
and
again
this
is
how
the
audit
or
the
I
don't
know.
If
we
have
amended
the
budget,
they
put
the
one
column
called
amended
budget,
so
they
just
want
to
reflect
that
this
was
the
original
budget,
which
was
adaptive
again
amended.
They
know
that
it
has
been
approved
by
the
council.
L
I
L
I
A
Can
I
also
point
out:
it's
only
selected
line
items
where
the
money
moved
from
22
to
23,
where
you
are
where
you
are
reducing
the
budget
right.
It's
not
every
line,
item
right,
so
I
think
the
way
it's
presented
is
reasonable.
Right,
like
the
arpa
is
moving
to
23
and
forward
the
Human
Services
fund,
I
think
is
moving
out,
I
mean
so
it's
not
every
line
item
where
you're
favorable
that
you're
adjusting
I,
don't
think.
So.
That's
a
misunderstanding.
A
K
A
A
Nothing
I
mean
I'm
comfortable
in
the
way
this
is
presented,
and
but
it
is,
we
are
meant
to
vote
on
it
right
and
I.
So
I
would
make
a
motion
that
we
adopt
this
as
presented.
Second.