►
From YouTube: Public Works and Utilities for May 26, 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).
B
D
B
A
quorum
mr.
chair,
thank
you.
So
I
only
have
nine
people
on
my
screen,
so
if
any
councillors
have
something
to
say
or
something
to
ask
just
begin
to
speak
and
I
think
ill
you'll
appear
as
the
main
speaker,
but
just
get
my
attention.
If
not
the
more
button
with
the
three
toggles
has
a
raised
hand
feature.
So
you
can
raise
your
hand
there
and
ask
any
questions
to
get
my
attention
that
way
so
we're
on
item
three
approval
of
the
agenda.
Any
changes
from
staff
start
with
mr.
Romero
I.
E
F
G
B
C
B
B
J
B
B
B
C
B
B
C
B
From
mr.
ray
Diaz,
no
mr.
chair
all
right
public
comment
is
closed.
We're
on
to
the
consent
agenda
item
a
request
for
approval
of
amendment
number
8
to
service
contract,
18-0
552
in
the
total
amount
of
974
thousand
plus
applicable
NMR
gt4
annual
security
services
counselor
the
helicopter
and
you
pull
this
Thank.
K
K
It
looks
pretty
grim,
so
I
am
concerned
about
the
amount
of
hours
and
the
description
of
what's
to
be
done,
especially
because,
apparently
this
security
system
was
was
intending
on
either
patrolling
or
even
doing
some
inside
work
on
events
and
such
and
and
as
I
know
it
today
we're
not
having
a
lot
of
events
but
maybe
I'm
wrong.
So
mr.
Burnett,
maybe
you
could
address
that.
L
L
Allied
security
can
and
will
adjust
the
amount
of
hours
they
work
at
any
facility
based
on
needs.
So,
even
today,
in
the
contract,
the
2019,
through
2020
contract
we've,
been
able
to
adjust
the
amount
of
security
we've
used
at
any
facility,
an
allied,
only
bills
us
for
the
number
of
security
hours
provided.
L
I
managed
the
portion
of
caught
the
contract
for
Midtown
campus,
and
we
have
done
that
here.
We
have
both
increased
and
decreased
the
amount
of
security
provided
here
and
they've
build
accordingly.
I've
worked
with
Maria
Tucker
at
the
library
we've
reduced
the
amount
of
security
currently
provided
there
and
they've
adjusted
their
billing
accordingly,
trying
to
think
of
I
believe
there's
another
location,
I
believe
the
Santa
Fe
Trails
location
has
also
reduced
their
hours
and
they've
built
accordingly,
so
they
have
been
very
flexible
in
working
with
us.
They
document
their
hours.
L
They
only
bill
us
for
the
hours.
They've
worked,
I've
spoken
both
with
their
contract
manager
and
the
city
of
Santa
Fe
security
manager
about
the
Kovach
crisis
and
the
likely
implications
to
our
contract
with
them,
and
they
understand
the
situation
we're
in
and
are
ready
and
willing
to
work
with
us.
I
do
understand
the
confusion
it
took
a
while
to
clarify
all
the
details
and
building
this
contract.
L
Amendment
and
I
thought
it
made
a
lot
of
sense
to
to
continue
forward
with
you
know
kind
of
I,
don't
know
how
to
refer
to
a
best-case
scenario:
business
as
usual,
and
then
just
have
allied
Billis
for
the
hours
they
actually
spend,
rather
than
trying
to
reforge
a
contract
for
an
unknown
future
landscape
and-
and
so
we
ended
up
in
this
position,
but
very
clearly
they're
willing
to
work
with
us
have
done
so
in
the
past
and
I
completely
trust.
You
know
their
ability
to
do
that.
B
B
B
Okay,
I
do
have
one
mr.
Burnett.
Are
we
flexible
enough
in
this
contract
there
with
a
hundred
million
dollar
budget?
If
we
had
to
shut
down
a
recreational
facility
that
we
can
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
that
security
services
they
probably
need
to
be
upgraded
in
those
situations?
Do
we
have
the
flexibility
to
have
potentially
upgraded
security
services
to
any
of
those
facilities.
L
B
C
D
M
M
B
J
You
chair
just
a
quick
question
on
this
I
saw
a
couple
of
different
proposals,
one
as
recent
as
May
18th
from
SFRC
see.
However,
what
we
were
being
asked
here
is
not
the
consideration
of
that
proposal,
nor
their
previous
proposal,
but
we
are
being
asked
here,
is
to
pass
and
to
approve
the
amendment
suggested
by
city
staff.
Is
that
true.
B
B
J
J
I
N
I
I
If
I
could
man
on
to
compliment
bells
question
the
reason
why
were
we're
adding
this
amendment
to
this
agreement
is
that
we
have
a
nationally
known,
cable,
TV
production
company
that
wants
to
rent
the
campus
and
they
want
to
expand
their
foot
rent
by
almost
reiax.
So
our
operations
charges
aren't
going
to
change,
but
if
this
production
company
comes
in,
we
could
see
almost
a
3x
amount
of
income.
Surely
it's
gonna
pay
our
expenses,
but
I?
Think
Sam
could
explain
what
the
what
the
current
oh
he's
just
he
just
jumped
out
well.
J
I'm
not
exactly
sure
how
that
works.
If
a
tenant
comes
in
that
way,
I
thought
that
we
were
so
leasing
that
to
someone
else
and
our
rent
would
remain
the
same
and
whomever
we're
subleasing
it
to
might
get
three
times
the
rent,
but
I
don't
think
that
the
way
that
I
read
this,
that
we
would
get
three
times
the
rent.
Mr.
I
Chair
console
window,
but
there'll
be
additional
buildings
for
rental
that
have
not
been
monetized.
So
that's
where
the
additional
rental
income
comes
in.
So
currently,
you
know
we're
looking
at
the
stage
sets
or
the
different
stages,
but
there
are
two
or
three
more
buildings
that
they
would
like
to
rent
that
will
bring
in
additional
income
which
have
never
been
buildings
that
we've
rented
before
so
it's
new
rental
income.
N
Maybe
um
chair
counter
well,
maybe
I
can
explain
but
Lisa
the
agreement
itself
gives
Garson
the
ability
to
license
out
the
ground.
So
we're
talking
about
the
entire
footprint
of
the
campus
itself.
That's
what's
always
been
part
of
their
lease
agreement
right
to
license
it
out.
So
previously,
in
the
in
the
lease
agreement,
we
had
a
base
rent
fee
that
accounted
for
all
the
studios
and
stages
and
because
one
of
those
stages
is
is
necessary
for
the
master
developers
that
were
selected.
They
would
like
to
start
utilizing
that
we
have
carved
that
out.
N
So
we
have
augmented
the
base
rent
of
what
their
footprint
is,
but
they
have
the
right
to
license
out
the
remainder
of
the
grounds
according
to
the
market
rate,
fair
market
rate
value
rentals.
So
that
does
come
to
us.
So
it's
not
memorialized
in
terms
of
this
as
each
piece
of
property
in
the
employment,
but
it's
an
attachment
to
the
agreement,
and
so
that
is
what
is
paid
if
they
use
another
building.
I.
J
Appreciate
that
I'm,
just
I'm
just
trying
to
find
out
what
we're
renting
and
how
much
rent
we're
going
to
get
for
it
and
what
the
term
is
and
I'm
concerned
about
our
agreement
in
terms
of
what
we
have
agreed
to
pay.
As
far
as
operational
expenses,
I
see
that
there
is
some
cap
on
those
of
ten
thousand
a
month,
but
it's
only
that
approval
would
be
aided
if
it's
over
ten
thousand
a
month.
I
don't
know
who
gives
that
approval
either.
L
Yeah
absolutely
I
know
and
the
specific
dollar
amount
I
would
defer
to
rich
on,
but
in
the
case
of
Garson
studios
any
work
they
were
to
do,
but
on
campus
there
is
a
a
dollar
amount
threshold
at
which
they
would
need
the
authorization
of
mr.
brown
or
this
Midtown
steering
committee
to
approve
that
work
and
I
believe
that
dollar
amount
is,
is
fairly
low.
L
L
I,
do
not
have
the
dollar
figure,
so
I
can't
speak
to
that,
but
that
that
seems
exceptionally
high
to
me.
My
guess
would
be
it
would.
My
guess
would
be
somewhere
between
like
a
thousand
and
twenty
five
hundred
dollars
would
be
the
cap
on
a
tenant's
discretionary
spending
that
would
be
deducted
from
their
rent.
Well,.
J
J
Committee
selection,
committee,
I
I,
don't
think
that
that's
been
vested
in
to
that
committee.
I,
don't
know
if
it's
mr.
Brown
I,
don't
know
if
it's
the
city
manager
or
the
city
attorney
I,
just
think
that
we're
being
asked
to
approve
things
that
we
don't
really
know
what
we're
approving
here
and
that
bothers
me.
We
this
this
needs
some
clarity
to
it,
and
maybe
it
needs
an
executive
summary
to
it
also.
I
Mr.
chair
council,
endo
I
know
that
I
don't
make
the
the
operational
approval
and
I
don't
think
the
steering
committee
does
either
it
gets
to
ask
to
go
through
the
city
manager
and
in
the
city
managers
current
signing
approval,
but
it
will
ultimately
have
to
come
to
the
City
Council
for
approval
so
that
there's
some
transparency
and
accountability.
Actually
in
what's
being
done.
I
I
J
Well,
that's
just
one
thing:
I
think
that
there's
really
a
lack
of
clarity
of
what
we
are
renting,
this
property
for
and
what
we're
responsible
for
with
it
and
what
those
costs
have
been
in
the
past
and
who
has
the
authority
over
it.
But
I
think
that
it's
there's
a
real
lack
of
clarity
in
this
contract.
I
Yeah
mr.
chair
there
there
is
a
time
constraint
as
and
we
have
a
as
I
said,
a
global
TV
cable
company
that
wants
to
lease
the
space,
but
they,
the
Garcias
Studios
principle,
does
not
to
go
into
a
license
agreement
with
that
studio,
which
is
worth
about
a
hundred
ten
million
dollars
a
year.
um
Grt
are
actually
written
in
premier
without
this
amendment
to
the
lease
and
I
appreciate
the
councilman
Dells
questions
that
I
want
to
get
answers
for
when.
I
O
Yeah,
thank
you.
Can
counselor
Mendell
members
of
the
committee
they're
there
I
think.
If
I
understand
councilman
Del's
original
question,
there
were
some
pieces
that
I
could
help
clarify
um
the
utilities
for
all
the
facilities
at
Midtown
are
not
broken
out.
We
don't
have
separate
meters
on
every
building,
so
we
don't
have
the
ability
at
this
point,
to
to
build
separately
for
all
the
utilities
for
all
the
renter's,
but
we
are
looking
at
the
possibility
of
making
some
improvements
in
that
way.
O
um
So
I
think
that
that's
one
thing
um
we
actually
have
been
managing
this
lease
for
a
number
of
years.
Now
the
whole
time
that
I've
been
here-
and
we
do
have
a
really
clear
process
for
managing
it.
So
the
the
renters,
the
lessee,
speak
to
Sam
about
the
issues
that
they
want
done.
If
they're
small
like
he
said,
sub
$1,000,
then
he
works
it
out
with
them.
If
they're
bigger,
they
come
through
the
steering
committee
and
counselor
Lyndell
for
the
Midtown
property
that
we've
had
in
place
for
some
time
now
and
councillor.
O
Lyndell
might
remember
that
there
was
actually
a
big
project
that
came
through
that
steering
committee,
and
that
was
for
paving
the
parking
lot,
and
that
was
a
couple
hundred
thousand
dollar
and
we
did
seek
steering
committee
approval
on
that.
So
so
we
do
have
a
really
well
defined
process
where
it
we
used
and
in
fact,
there's
a
sub
committee
to
the
Midtown
steering
committee,
that
which
is
the
Midtown
Infrastructure
Committee
that
what
used
to
meet
on
a
week
every
other
week
from
the
steering
committee,
and
then
we
reviewed
all
of
the
issues
that
were
arising.
O
So
anything
that's
over,
like
a
thousand
dollars
comes
above
out,
you
know
above
and
outside
the
the
lessees
we
discuss
it
in
our
infrastructure
subcommittee
and
then
we
bring
in
large
and
so
for
the
most
part.
There
haven't
been
a
lot
of
things
that
came
forward,
but
there
there
was
the
one
for
the
paving
of
the
parking
lot.
I.
O
But
it's
a
really
really
important
piece
and
you
guys
must
know
that
it's
incredibly
central
right
now
to
the
Midtown
redevelopment
conversation,
which
is
why
rich
said
that
this
is
extremely
time-sensitive,
that
the
redevelopment
team
and
the
pressure
from
the
film
industry
to
expand
their
operations
in
Saturday
is
significant
and
they
want
to
move
quickly,
they're
talking
about
employing
in
August
and
being
on
site
and
starting,
and
that
generates
more
and
more
revenue
for
us.
So
it's
really
you.
J
Know
Bruce
wheeler
I
appreciate
all
that,
but
I
just
don't
think
that
we
should
approve
contracts
that
aren't
clear
and
this
contract
doesn't
appear
to
have
clarity
to
me.
I
agree
with
everything
you
say
it's
a
contract
that
we
need
to
pursue.
We
need
make
it
work,
but
we
need
clarity
of
the
contract
so
that
we
know
what
we're
getting
and
what
we're,
giving
and
and
who
controls
that
and
who
looks
at
it
and
who
pays
attention
to
it.
That's
that's
my
point
with
this:
it's
not
that
it's
not
a
good
project.
J
J
Those
are
pretty
broad
and
we're
on
the
hook
for
them
and
maybe
in
the
past
they
haven't
been
too
much.
I
couldn't
begin
to
guess
what
the
utilities
for
this
area
of
the
campus
cost
us,
although
not
much
else
on
the
campuses
running.
So
we
probably
will
have
some
idea
what
they're
costing
us
I'm
just
I'm,
not
trying
to
be
obstructionist
about
this
I'm,
just
trying
to
make
sure
that
all
our
bases
are
covered
and
we
don't
have
any
surprises
and
that
we're
not
committed
to
pay
for
things
that
we
don't
want
to
pay
for.
L
Mr.
chair
councillor
lindau
what
I
was
what
I'm
thinking
is
a
couple
things
first
and
foremost,
I
just
completed
some
work
on
the
garcin
Studios
to
add
electric
submetering
and
gas
summary
metering,
which
can
help
us
clarify
utility
usage
in
those
buildings.
So
that's
something
we
could
incorporate
into
a
contract.
Another
thing
that
I
would
like
to
recommend
to
mr.
Brown
and
to
the
counselors
here
is
to
develop
kind
of
a
benchmark
for
what
the
council
feels
comfortable
with
in
terms
of
a
limit
for
the.
B
L
I
Chair
impossible
for
us,
because
we
still
have
to
go
back
to
the
the
lessee
and
provides
these
terms
and
then
maybe
have
to
go
back
to
the
developer.
Who
is
working
on
studio
C
so
that
we
can
look
at
the
terms
and
then
agree
upon
them
and
then
have
a
wee
signature,
because
this
document
was
was
signed
by
the
parties
involved
over
over
three
week
time
period.
So.
I
I
I
Mr.
chair
I
I
can't
guarantee
all
her
concerns
are
answered,
but
I'm
gonna
make
you
10
to
get
all
the
parties
involved,
because
if
we
change
the
amendment,
I
have
to
go
through
the
cycle
of
the
signatories
that
were
there
and
I
will
need
to
get
through
their
channels
and
write
up
the
changes
and
make
sure
that
you
have
it.
You.
B
Understand
so,
as
a
committee
we
have
Duty
either
to
disapprove
to
approve
or
we
can
move
on
without
a
recommendation.
So
it's
up
to
this
committee,
whatever
you
decide
so
I,
don't
know
if
we're
ready
for
a
motion
yet.
But
if
there's
any
other
discussion
please
chime
in
now,
I
can
see.
Cuts
reveal
cobbler.
B
M
B
B
H
B
H
B
H
B
H
P
B
B
P
P
So,
like
burna
had
said,
we
had
made
some
changes
for
the
presentation
based
on
some
of
the
feedback
that
we
received
from
prior
presentations
from
the
Finance
Committee.
We've
changed
the
formatting
on
a
little
bit
of
it
to
make
it
easier
for
you
to
see
side-by-side
comparisons,
so
this
first
screen
is
just
showing
the
current
plan
designs
in
column.
A
it's.
The
premium
plans
with
the
blue
color,
the
first
one
called
a
is
all
the
non-union
employees,
the
police
union
and
the
Athenian
Union
are
enrolled
on
that
plan
in
column
B.
P
You
can
see
the
fire
plan
and
we've
highlighted
in
red
font,
where
there
are
benefit
differences
between
the
two
plans.
You
can
see
on
the
fire
plan
for
certain
services
they
do
have
lower
co-payments
or
they
have
differences
in
the
benefit
column,
C
and
D
is
the
core
plan
and
then
column
in
F.
Is
your
HRA
plan
a
majority
of
your
enrollment
and
is
in
the
premium
plan,
which
is
in
columns
a
and
B?
P
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
regarding
this
information?
This
is
one
has
been
in
place
for
a
few
years
now,
since
I
think
2015.
These
plan
designs
have
been
in
place.
What
does
HRA
stand
for?
It's
a
health
reimbursement
account.
So
with
this
plan
it
has
a
higher
deductible,
but
the
city
does
provide
what
is
called
a
health
reimbursement
arrangement
or
account
to
where
the
city
500
dollars
for
an
individual
and
a
thousand
dollars
for
a
family
to
help
the
member
with
their
out-of-pocket
costs.
P
P
As
you
all
are
aware
that
you
know,
we've
been
asked
to
price
some
different
options
to
help
control
the
increase
that
the
city
is
facing
with
this
renewal.
So
on
this
we
proposed
an
option.
This
is
a
slightly
different
option
than
what
has
been
presented
in
past
committees
um
with
this
option.
What
we're
showing
in
column,
C
and
D
is
the
changes.
That
would
be
me
it's.
P
What
is
different
from
past
presentations
is.
This
is
keeping
fire
on
their
current
plan,
with
some
minimum
changes
to
stay
in
agreement
with
their
union
collective
bargaining
agreements
so
in
column
C.
That
would
be
the
new
premium
plan
that
would
be
offered
to
your
non-union
employees,
the
police
union
employees
and
ask
me
union
employees:
we've
highlighted
in
blue,
where
there
are
benefit
changes,
so
column,
C,
compares
back
to
column
a
you
can
see.
There
was
some
minor
changes
to
co-pays
of
for
a
primary
care,
physician,
$25
specialist,
going
up
to
40.
P
P
There
would
be
a
change
to
the
hospital
care,
so
the
copay
would
be
going
up
by
a
hundred
dollars
from
250
to
350
that
outpatient
hospital
co-payment
would
be
going
up.
$50
from
150
to
200,
Urgent
Care
would
go
from
$30
to
forty-four
125
to
175
dollar
co-payment
mental
health
in
a
physician
office,
it'd
be
a
40
dollar
co-payment
and
sorry
be
the
copay.
There.
P
We've
changed
this
multiple
times,
I,
don't
know
why
it
keeps
coming
back
to
500,
but
it
should
be
350
matching
the
inpatient
hospital,
acupuncture
Kairo
and
now
capaci,
proposing
a
$50
copay,
a
combined
24
limit
for
those
three
services
breaking
out
massage
therapy
into
its
own
category.
Massage
therapy
currently
today
has
a
$30
copay
that
would
go
up
to
50
dollar
co-payment.
With
a
6
visit
limit
physical
speech
and
occupational
therapy.
We
would
add
a
copay
of
4
dollars
and
reduce
the
visit
limit
to
30
and
then
ambulance
at
a
30
dollar
copay.
P
When
we
look
at
column
D
to
the
fire
plan,
the
only
changes
that
are
being
made
which
keeps
the
changes
in
compliance
with
what's
in
the
union,
collective
bargaining
agreement
is
adjusting
the
visit
limitations
on
the
benefits
under
other
services.
So
there
are
co-pays
for
acupuncture
chiropractic
care
and
a
per
Papy
will
remain
the
same
at
$10.
P
D
P
Yes,
before
in
Prior
presentations,
they
were
all
lumped
together.
We
have
confirmed
front
with
Cigna
that
they,
with
the
fire
plan
that
acupuncture
chiropractor
care,
Napa
path,
II
and
massage
therapy
all
had
separate
visit
limits.
So
each
one
of
those
benefits
had
a
twenty
four
visit
limit.
That
was
for
the
fire
plan.
Only
so
what
we
did
is
we
decided
to
break
them
out
because
we're
the
issue
with
use
is
in
the
massage
therapy.
P
P
On
the
next
slide,
we
are
presenting
an
option
to
and
with
this
option
this
option,
to
meet
closely
mirrors
what
the
state
of
New
Mexico
offers
to
their
employees.
So
it
is
a
lot
of
changes
on
this
benefits
compared
to
what
is
being
offered
today.
But
this
was
one
of
the
ass
in
Prior
meetings
that
we
compared
what
it
would
look
like
if
we
mirrored
the
state
of
New
Mexico
benefits
again
on
this
program.
Under
this
option
we
are
keeping
the
fire
on
their
own
separate
plan
to
to
comply
with
their
Union
collective
bargaining
agreement.
P
P
You
can
see
there's
a
whole
lot
of
blue
highlighted,
because
there
are
a
lot
of
planned
design
changes.
It
does
introduce
a
deductible
to
the
plan.
There
are
some
co-payments
for
your
primary
care
and
specialist
services,
but
you
can
see
there's
quite
a
few
changes.
One
of
the
biggest
is
inpatient
hospital.
It
would
have
a
be
subject
to
the
deductible
and
then
it
would
have
a
$1,250
co-payment
per
admission
out
inpatient
mental
health
services.
It
would
be
a
thousand
dollar
co-payment
I'm,
just
highlighting
some
of
the
differences
not
going
through
each
one.
P
The
biggest
difference
in
other
services
is
again.
We
split
out
massage
therapy
into
its
own
bucket,
but
acupuncture
chiropractic
and
nephropathy
would
have
a
sixty
dollar
co-payment
for
acupuncture
chiropractic
and
a
65
for
Napa
path.
Ii
with
a
25
combined
visit
limit
on
the
massage
therapy
would
be
60
visit,
a
sixty
dollar
co-payment,
six
limits
and
physical
therapy.
Forty
dollar
co-payment,
with
sixty
visit
limits.
Those
are
the
most
significant
changes
under
this
planet
does
also
incorporate
pharmacy
changes,
which
would
be
quite
different
compared
to
your
current
plans.
P
Generic
would
be
a
six
dollar
co-payment,
so
that
way
reduction
to
what
members
of
claim
pain
today,
but
the
preferred
brand
would
be
a
thirty
percent
coinsurance,
with
a
minimum
copay
of
thirty
five
dollars
and
a
max
of
ninety
five.
So
the
member
would
pay
no
more
no
less
than
thirty
five
dollars,
but
no
more
than
ninety
five.
For
those
prescriptions
that
fall
in
that
category
and
then
for
non-preferred
brand,
they
pay
forty
percent
with
a
minimum
of
sixty
dollars
and
a
max
of
130
the
brands.
P
P
P
P
You
know
if
you
would
call
from
prior
meetings.
There
is
a
forecasted
deficit
for
the
current
plan
year
of
about
two
million
dollars.
So
when
we
offset
that
that
leaves
a
balance
of
4.2
million,
we
do
need
to
put
some
money
aside
for
the
incurred,
but
not
reported
reserve,
which
was
one
point,
six
nine
million,
so
that
leaves
a
balance
in
the
medical
fund
of
2.5
million
dollars
and
we're
gonna
address.
P
Looking
at
these
options,
if
we
tap
into
that
remaining
balance,
what
that
will
look
like
so
I
think
when
we
look
at
the
table
on
the
left
in
the
blue
column,
a
is
the
2019
2020,
estimated
annual
cost
and
in
row
1
we
show
the
annual
premium.
This
is
the
total
premium
projected
premium
and
then
beginning
on
row.
5
we
show
the
employees
share,
which
is
collected
through
their
payroll
deductions.
Over
the
course
of
the
year
row.
P
8
shows
the
employers
contribution
and
then
beginning
on
11
will
show
what
the
impact
is
if
we
use
the
fund
balance
to
help
offset
some
of
these
increases
so
column
B
is
the
renewal
and
if
you
recall,
we
initially
presented
in
Prior
presentations.
The
renewal
making
no
changes
to
the
plan
designs
would
be
a
nine
point.
Four
percent
increase.
That's
a
one
point:
eight
million
dollar
increase
over
all
of
that
the
employees
contributions
are
projected
to
be
5
point
1
million,
so
that
is
the
increase
of
441
thousand
to
the
employees
on
row.
P
8,
you
can
see
the
employer
share
of
the
renewal
increase
would
be
sixteen
point,
seven
million.
So
that's
1.4
million
increase
to
the
city.
If
we
take
the
fund
balance
from
the
right-hand
side
of
the
screen
and
we
offset
the
increase
to
the
city,
the
1.4
million
that
would
leave
a
fund
balance
of
1.8
million.
P
Column
C
goes
through
the
same
example,
but
that
was
looking
at
that
option,
one
where
it
was
making
some
changes
to
some
of
the
benefits
that
is
offered
to
the
non-union
police
and
the
AskMe
Union,
and
then
leaving
the
fire
plan
co-pays
the
same,
but
changing
to
some
of
the
visit
limits.
So
that
option
would
be
an
overall
seven
point:
seven
percent
increase
or
1.5
million
increase
in
total.
That
is
a
difference
from
the
renewal
of
making
no
changes
of
$342,000
the
impact
to
the
employees.
P
Their
contributions
on
an
annual
basis
would
be
fight
a
little
over
five
million
dollars.
So
an
increase
from
what
they're
playing
in
the
current
plan
year
of
three
hundred
sixty
thousand,
but
is
eighty
thousand
dollars
less
than
what
the
renewal
would
come
in
at
row.
Eight
is
the
impact
to
the
city
share,
so
the
city
share
under
option.
One
would
be
sixteen
million
four
hundred
forty
eight
thousand
dollars.
That
would
be
an
increase
of
one
point:
one:
seven
million
versus
the
one
point:
four:
three:
five
million.
P
So
it's
a
two
hundred
sixty-two
thousand
dollar
savings
to
the
city
to
make
those
plan
design
changes
in
option
number
one.
So
if
we
use
the
fund
balance
to
offset
these
increases
again
we're
taking
the
current
balance
of
2.5
million,
so
tracting
out
the
employer
increase
from
row,
nine.
That
leaves
us
on
balance
of
one
point:
three:
five
million.
P
If
we
also
offset
the
fun
with
the
employee
increase
on
row,
six
360,000
that
would
leave
a
fund
balance
of
nine
hundred
and
eighty
nine
thousand
dollars
option
two,
which
had
the
most
dramatic
changes
to
the
benefit
plan
design
you
can
see
it
has
the
biggest
savings
to
the
benefits
it
actually
is
a
reduction
in
cost.
It
would
be
a
three
point:
five
percent
reduction
to
your
current
cost,
so
that
would
be
a
savings
of
over
seven
hundred
thousand
dollars
compared
to
what
you
are
paying
in
the
2019
2020
plant
year.
P
P
If
we
take
a
look
at
the
fund
balance,
because
this
plan
option
is
projected
to
come
in
with
lower
claims
cost,
we
would
not
need
to
use
the
fun
if
claims
run.
As
expected,
we
would
not
even
need
to
use
the
fund
balance
to
offset
the
increase
for
the
employer
or
the
employees,
and
we
could
intentionally
be
looking
at
putting
some
money
back
into
the
fund,
provided
claims
run
as
expected.
However,
they
run
higher
than
expected
than
these.
These
numbers
and
the
fund
balance
will
be
affected
in
even
further.
P
P
B
R
R
P
Mr.
chair
councillors,
if
I
may
so,
if
we
look
at
the
purple
box
at
the
upper
right
sure-
and
we
presented
this
at
the
Finance
Committee
and
talked
about
this
a
little
bit-
the
fund
balance
is
sitting
at
6.2
million.
We
know
that
at
the
end
of
this
plan
year
the
2019
2020
plan
year
we're
gonna,
have
a
shortfall
in
the
fund,
because
claims
have
been
running
higher
than
expected
right
now.
The
shortfall
is
looking
to
be
about
two
million
dollars,
so
the
fund
is
gonna,
gonna,
take
care
of
that
shortfall.
P
So
we
have
to
subtract
out
that
two
million
dollars
from
that
fund,
so
that
leaves
a
balance
of
4.2
million.
Then
we
need
to
leave
for
the
incur
for
not
reported
reserves.
So
that's
what
we
need
to
leave
on
hand
for
claims
that
have
been
that
have
happened
but
have
not
been
presented
for
payment.
So
that's
estimated
at
one
point:
six,
nine
eight!
So
when
we
subtract
that
from
the
one
to
four
point
two
that
gives
us
a
two
point:
five,
four
million.
So
that
two
point
five
four
million
carries
down
to
row.
P
11
of
the
of
the
chart,
on
the
left
hand
side:
do
you
see
that
okay?
So
we
take
that
balance
and
that
what
we're
saying
here
is
if
we
use
this
balance
to
offset
the
increases
that
the
employer
the
city
is
facing
and
the
increases
that
the
employees
would
face.
So
that
way
there
would
be
no
change
to
what
the
employees
are
paying
today
and
what
the
city
is
paying
today.
It
would
deplete
the
fund
so
that
two
point
five
four
million.
P
P
So
that
would
be
if
column
B.
If
we
renew
the
plans
as
they
are
today,
no
plan
changes
whatsoever,
but
the
but
using
the
fund
to
offset
the
increasing
costs.
So
that
way
there
is
no
increase
to
the
city
and-
and
if
this
council
decided
they
didn't
want
to
pass
along
the
increase
in
cost
and
premiums
to
the
employees
and
using
the
fund
balance,
it
would
totally
you
know
pretty
much
deplete
the
fund
balance.
R
Okay,
so
Mike.
My
question
is
this:
what's
the
expected
total
claims
and
fixed
cost
that
they
expect
F?
Because
if
we,
if
we
add
those
numbers
together,
while
we're
gonna
pay
the
offset
plus
what
the
increase
is
we're
anticipating
to
spend
almost
twenty
two
million
dollars
this
year
on
health
insurance
claims
and
fixed
costs?
Is
that.
P
Chair
counselors,
yes,
that
is
correct,
so
that
is
what's
showing
on
row
one.
So
currently,
your
total
costs
your
fixed
costs.
What
you're
putting
inside
to
pay
claims
is
what
is
showing
in
Row
one
so
in
the
2019
2020
plan,
you're,
projecting
that
to
finish
out
and
be
nineteen
point:
nine,
six:
six
million
okay.
S
P
The
renewal
not
making
any
benefit
design
changes
that
would
go
up
to
21
million
eight
hundred
and
forty
three
thousand.
If
we
adopted
the
changes
in
option
number,
one
it'd
be
twenty
million,
twenty-one
million
five
hundred
and
one
thousand.
If
it
was
adopted,
the
change
in
the
option
number
two:
it
would
actually
drop
cost
to
19
million
two
hundred
sixty
thousand
dollars.
P
R
Light
question
is:
is
how
much
money
are
we
expecting
to
go
out
from
the
fund
so
historically
in
20,
in
the
in
the
fiscal
year,
our
1819,
the
fund
cost
twenty
million
dollars.
Two
hundred
and
twenty
one
thousand
three
hundred
seventy
eight
thousand
dollars
that
year.
That
was
all
our
fixed
expenses
that
were
all
of
the
claims
and
things
like
that.
Are
we
expecting
it
to
be
when
you
show
the
fund
balance
at
six
hundred
and
forty
seven
thousand?
R
P
What
we're
saying
is
not
taking
the
just
ignore
the
fund
balance
for
a
minute
okay.
So
what
we're
saying
is
in
2020
2021
if
the
plan
does
not
change
whatsoever,
if
all
the
co-payments,
all
the
limits,
everything
stays
the
same,
the
costs
were
we're
estimating
to
be
based
on
current
trends.
We're
expecting
that
the
total
cost
between
fixed
costs
and
claims
would
be.
Twenty-One
million
eight
hundred
forty-three
thousand
okay.
R
P
P
P
R
If
we
change
the
premiums
at
the
9.4,
we
should
break
even
on
the
estimates
and
then
how,
if
the
annual
premium
is
what
you
expect
to
cost
going
out
in
the
concept
end
to
be,
twenty-one
thousand
plus
we
haven't,
does
the
increase
of
the
one
point
eight?
What
did
that
mean?
The
money
coming
in
would
be
over
the
one
point
eight,
so
we
would
be
bringing
in
almost
twenty
two
million
or
help
me
understand.
R
Help
me
understand
that
he
comes
in
and
all
the
money
goes
out
because
I
look
at
the
page
on
like
page
ten,
where
you
guys
are
showing
the
money
coming
in
the
money
going
out,
and
this
page
doesn't
really
reference
that
very
well
but
I'm,
looking
and
trying
to
understand
how
the
fund
is
going
to
be
so
negatively
impact
when
we're
increasing
premiums
to
offset
the
anticipated
increase
in
claims.
But
then
the
fund
balance
comes
down
to
647.
R
P
Sher
counselors,
so
let
me
let's
just
focus
on
this
page
and
let
me
explain
it
so:
just
comparing
call
the
renewal
so
column
B
to
column
a
column.
A
is
your
current,
where
we're
expecting
the
twenty
to
a
nineteen
twenty
twenty-five
year
to
end
up
at
nineteen
million,
just
under
twenty
million
in
costs
with
the
renewal,
we're
projecting
the
fixed
costs
and
the
claims
are
gonna:
equal
21
million
eight
hundred
forty-three
thousand
dollars.
P
So
when
we
compare
the
difference
of
that
number
in
column,
B
row
one
to
where
it
is
currently
in
column,
a
row
one
that
is
a
difference
of
one
point:
eight
million
dollars
so
total
costs.
If
we
look
at
year
over
year,
it's
going
up
one
point:
eight
million
dollars,
so
that
is
not.
That
is
just
showing
you
the
difference
here.
It's
not
being
added
to
anything.
It's
just
showing
that
the
total
costs
are
going
up.
One
point:
eight
million
dollars.
P
If
we
look
at
the
employees
portion
on
row,
five,
the
employees
share
equates
to
currently
about
four
point:
six:
nine,
two
million.
That
will
go
up
to
five
point,
one
three,
three
million,
so
that
when
we
look
year
over
year,
that
means
employees
would
pay
four
hundred
forty-one
thousand
dollars.
More
of
this
share.
Okay,
the
city's
cautious
on
row,
eight
they're,
currently
at
fifteen
point
two:
seven,
four
million
with
the
renewal
cost
is
sixteen
point:
seven
one
zero.
So
when
we
look
year-over-year
their
cost
is
going
up.
P
So,
overall,
if
we
were
not
touching
the
fun
balance,
just
ignoring
that,
what
we're
saying
is
in
total
this,
the
city's
plan
is
going
up.
One
point:
eight:
seven
million
their
costs
are
going
up.
One
point:
eight
seven
million
the
employee
share
is
going
up
for
forty
one
and
the
employer
share
is
going
up.
One
point:
four:
three:
five
million.
P
So
if
this
City
was
not
in
a
budget
shortfall
and
they
could
be
voting
in
saying
okay,
we
can
absorb
that
one
point:
four
million
dollars
and,
and
and
we
could
you
know
they
could
vote
and
make
that
move
on.
But
the
problem
is
the
city?
Isn't
a
budget
shortfall.
So
where
do
we
find
this
one
point?
Four
million
of
increased
cost
to
the
city.
It
could
come
from
the
fund
balance.
P
So
if
we
do
that
that
takes
that
fund
balance
down
by
one
point,
four
million,
so
it
would
leave
the
fund
balance
down
at
one
point:
zero:
eight
million.
If
the
city
councilors
were
to
vote
to
decide
and
say
hey,
you
know
what
we
don't
want
to
pass.
Any
cost
premium
increase
to
employees
we'll
use
the
fund
balance
to
offset
so
the
employees
payroll
deduction
cost
won't
go
up,
then
we'd
pull
if
that
money
gets
pulled
from
the
fund
balance,
that's
where
it
takes
it
down
to
four
hundred
or
to
buy
four
hundred
thousand.
I
C
H
R
R
B
G
H
H
Counselor
detail
coppler
after
the
last
discussion
from
Finance,
Committee
I
think
there
were
three
options,
so
we
narrowed
it
down
to
two
taking
into
consideration
with
the
Union
have
has
voiced
regarding
concerns
of
changes,
I
think
option.
Two
definitely
is
the
most
cost-effective
option,
but
it
has
the
most
significant
changes
so
option.
One
you
know
provides
for
some
cost
savings
and
has
minimal
changes
to
employees.
H
So
I
would
say
if
we're,
if
we're
concerned
about
the
changes,
my
recommendation
would
be
option,
one
with
the
caveat
that
we
would
bring
forward
on
a
monthly
basis,
or
at
least
um
at
a
minimum
quarterly,
but
perhaps
monthly,
how
the
fund
is
doing
and
entertain
the
idea
of
maybe
having
another
change:
effective,
January
1st.
Possibly
if
we
see
that
our
fund
is
in
the
shape
that
it's
in
right
now,
if
we're
gonna,
be
using
reserve
funding,
because
the
reserve
funding
is
really
going
to
be
depleted.
If
we
go
with
option,
one.
H
P
Mr.
chair
counselors,
thank
you.
So
this
page
follows
the
same
format
as
what
we
presented
previously,
but
it
is
making
the
assumption
in
column,
C
option
1a
that
it
would
move
all
employees
to
the
premium
plan
making
the
changes,
so
the
fire
would
would
be
moved
on
to
the
same
plan
as
the
remainder
of
the
employees.
Option.
2A
would
be
moving
the
fire
to
the
same
plan
that
was
illustrated
and
option
2.
P
K
H
A
lot
of
insurance
plans
are,
on
a
calendar
year
basis
we're
on
a
fiscal
year
basis.
So
that's
another
option
that
we
can
look
at.
Do
we
want
to
change
to
a
calendar
year
basis
that
would
require
some
changes,
but
we
could
absolutely
look
at
that
and
that
might
give
us
a
few
more
months
to
look
at
how
our
budget
is
looking
as
a
whole
and
then
again
have
some
more
months
under
our
belt
and
looking
at
our
ID,
our
insurance
plan.
K
H
And
then
counselor
V
Hill
coppler,
the
report
that
was
provided
back
to
the
council
in
February
regarding
the
performance
was
also
provided
to
the
Union
Cigna
has
since
provided
some
other
information.
That
was
I,
think
a
little
more
historical
and
we
can
work
with
them
to
provide
the
more
updated
information
after
February,
but
they
did
receive
the
information
that
you
all
received
in
February.
H
H
K
K
D
D
Okay,
thank
you.
The
the
concern
I
have
with
with
premiums
and
I'm
sorry
with
co-payments
for
for,
like
physical
therapy,
occupational
therapy
and
speech
I
have
a
I
have
a
concern
with
the
proposed
increase
for
those
co-payments,
especially
for
for
speech,
physical
therapy.
I
know,
there's
there's
been
an
increase
over
the
years,
especially
with
children
being
referred
to
physical
therapy
for
speech
issues
and
I.
Think
I
saw
something
where
the
one
of
the
proposals
is
for
that
co-payment
to
go
up
to
$60.
Is
that
did
I
see
that
correctly
or
$40.
H
E
H
Mr.
chairman,
councillor,
Abeyta
I
would
recommend
that,
if
you're
looking
for
some
sort
of
a
change
that
we
get
that
information
now,
so
we
have
the
rest
of
tonight
and
tomorrow
morning
to
recalculate
before
it
comes
to
the
governing
body
tomorrow.
If
that's
something
that
you
would
like
to
see,
um
what
that
costing
would
look
like?
Okay,.
B
J
This
is
a
this
kind
of
a
risky
path
that
we're
looking
to
travel.
Here
we
have
a
current
balance
of
6.2
million.
We
went
over
this
some
years
ago.
I
know
that
councillor
Rivera
was
there.
We
asked
to
increase
our
reserves
at
that
point
in
time.
What
we're
looking
at
with
certainly
two
of
these
plans
is
exhaust.
J
Our
reserves
I
know
that
the
numbers
are
based
on
what
we
think
we're
gonna
pay
in
the
next
year.
They've
gone
up,
not
only
of
our
claims
gone
up,
our
costs
go
up
every
year,
the
problem
being
that
when
you
look
at
column
B
here
on
the
2021
renewal,
if
everything
goes
according
to
plan
and
everything
works
out,
we'll
have
a
fund
balance
of
about
six
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars.
J
We
only
need
one
or
two
major
claims
to
eat
up
that
amount
of
money
and
we
have
zero
fund
balance
and
we're
kicking
the
can
down
the
road,
because
in
order
to
build
that
fund
balance
up
in
the
future,
it's
going
to
take
much
bigger
costs,
then
than
it
is
now
I
think
I
think
this
is
risky
and
we
could
easily
deplete
that
entire
fund
balance
of
650.
For
that
matter,
look
at
this
year's
numbers.
We
could
easily
deplete
the
fund
balance
of
column
C
of
1.3
million.
J
M
So
so
with
that,
is
there
a
way
we
can
blend
between
option
one
and
option
two
and
have
a
option
1.5,
where
we
can
begin
to
save
more
money,
but
not
necessarily
have
a
great
increase
on
the
costs
of
health
healthcare
for
our
employees?
You
know
when
you
see
co-pays
go
up,
let's
go
to
option
2
slide
3,
you
see,
co-pays
go
up
triple
and
for
your
primary
care,
basically
and
the
that's
it
to
me.
M
I
think
we
need
to
go
back
and
look
how
we
can
not
put
so
much
cost
savings
and
hit
the
hit
the
employees
pocket
and
in
the
out-of-pocket
I
know
there
was
the
the
comments
made.
If
we
take
option,
2
will
save
213
dollars
up
front,
but
on
the
back
end,
how
much
in
more
exact
in
a
constant
employees
as
they
pay
out-of-pocket
there
I
guarantee
that's
going
to
be
a
lot
more
than
those
savings,
so
I
wish.
We
had
a
blending
of
both
and
I
guess
to
Bernadette.
How
do
we
do
that?
M
M
H
All
the
feedback-
this
is
a
very
complex
process
in
dealing
with
the
different
plans,
the
collective
bargaining
and
trying
to
figure
out
the
best,
the
best
solution,
moving
forward
when
we
presented
to
the
Finance
Committee
a
couple
weeks
ago,
one
of
the
options
was
essentially
a
combination
or
hybrid
of
option,
one
and
option
two
and
after
discussion
with
the
union
leadership.
You
know
that
was.
H
That
was
not
something
that
they
were
amenable
to,
uh
and
so
we
were
trying
to
come
up
with
other
solutions
to
help
reduce
that
liability
that
the
city
has
well
lessening
the
impact
to
employees
and
then
providing
a
mechanism
where
we
can
review
the
fund
meet
with
the
insurance
committee
meeting
committee
on
a
monthly
basis
and
then
provide
counsel
with
reports
at
a
minimum
quarterly.
So,
like
I
say
it
is
a
very
complex
process
and
I.
H
M
And
so
question
I
have
should
option
to
be
recommended,
is
their
estimation
or
any
thoughts
to
how
many
folks
might
leave
the
cities
and
Aaron's
plan
and
how
it
might
affect
numbers,
given
that
they
might
have
a
spouse
that
has
a
better
insurance
plan
through
their
employer
and
employees.
Then
drop
the
city
insurance.
H
K
You,
mr.
chair,
you
know
I'm
concerned
about
having
you
know
a
lot
of
the
having
a
lot
of
these
hit.
The
employees
after
we
just
hit
them,
and
also
you
know,
there's
no
telling
for
next
year.
What's
gonna
happen,
and-
and
maybe
maybe
these
costs
a
lesson
if
we
don't
have
anymore,
there's
many
employees,
I'm
not
sure,
but
I
agree
with
councilor
Garcia
that
we
ought
to
come
up
with
a
little
more
gentle
gentle
ER
plan,
and
you
know
I
know
this
is
hard,
but
on
the
other
hand
you
know
we
don't.
K
We
still
don't
know
for
sure.
What's
gonna
happen,
so
you
know
I
think
that
the
employees
should
bare
bare
some
increases,
but
I
think
some
of
these
are
rather
steep
and
that's
what
I'd,
like
HR
and
I
on
to
look
at
I,
don't
think
we're.
We've
really
explored
all
the
avenues
and
so
I'd
like
to
see
a
little
bit
lessening
of
the
pain.
K
H
Hurt
chairman
counselor
mihail
coupler,
the
a
on
contract
is
not
in
the
same
time
frame
as
the
Cigna
contract.
The
Cigna
contract
that
you
just
approved
about
a
month
ago,
the
administrative
fees
went
up,
100
I
believe
it
was
110,000,
and
that
was
primarily
the
increase
to
stop-loss
insurance,
and
that
was
because
you
know
of
the
claims
and
the
stop-loss
insurance
did
go
up.
I
think
it
was
to
the
tune
of
about
9%,
as
I
mentioned
in
previous
presentations
and
I.
Think
mr.
H
Burley
has
also
mentioned
that
the
renewals
for
stop-loss
on
the
market
are
in
the
double
digits
about
20%.
So
we
feel,
like
the
city,
got
a
pretty
good
rate
with
the
stop-loss
rate
that
we
got
from
Cigna
back
to
the
your
first
question
about
what
you
would
like,
HR
and
Heian
to
before
you
move
you.
Can
you
tell
us
what
we're
paying
a
on
off
the
top
of
my
head?
I
want
to
say
it's
about
60,000
annually,
maybe
less,
but
it's
definitely
under
um
definitely
under
100,
well
below
100.
H
The
only
increases
being
recommended
with
option
1,
the
premium
rate
increases
for
employees
under
this
scenario
of
column,
C
are
being
absorbed
by
the
fund
balance,
so
the
increases
on
a
bi-weekly
basis
for
employees
would
be
absorbed
by
the
fun
balance,
and
so
really
the
only
changes
to
the
employees
would
be
the
co-pays
on
a
previous
slide
and
that's
it.
So
that's
why
the
fund
balance
would
be
reduced
down
under
option
1
to
under
a
million
because
we'd
be
pushing
the
employee
contribution
increase
towards
the
fund
balance.
K
Okay,
but
there
there
could
still
be
some
some
wiggle
room
on
the
co-pays
as
counselor
a
beta
mentioned,
because
sometimes
we
don't
really
know
if
if
those
medical
services
are
going
to
be
used
by
an
employee,
but
it's
it's,
you
know
that
it
might
not
make
a
real
difference
if
we
did
lower
the
co-pays
I
mean
in
some
services,
because
we
don't
know
if
they're
gonna
use
them
so
I,
don't
think
that's
as
risky
and
I.
Think
that's
better.
K
The
other
comment
I
have
more.
Is
you
know
it's
it's
real
hard
to
make
this
decision
because
we
don't
have
options.
I
really
feel
like
the
cities'
kind
of
being
held
hostage
a
bit,
because
we
didn't
go
out
to
bid
and
I
know
you
said,
and
one
of
them
prior
meetings
that
you
didn't
have
you
didn't
have
time
or
you
didn't
have
people
or
I,
don't
know
what
you
said.
K
Something
like
that,
but
the
fact
remains
we
didn't
go
out
to
bid
and
when
you
don't
go
out
to
bid,
you
don't
have
choices
and
you
don't
have
comparisons
and
I.
Think
that's
risky
I
mean
that's
the
riskiest
thing
of
all,
and
you
know
now,
especially
in
these
times
I
think
you
know,
I
I
would
imagine.
K
Insurance
companies
are
also
kind
of
losing
some
money,
but
nevertheless
you
know
when
you
don't
have
options,
you
don't
have
choices
and
right
now
we
only
have
one
choice
and
that's
the
choice
we've
been
with
for
all
these
years
and
where's
the
competition.
You
know,
competition
I
think
drives
costs
down.
K
I
get
me
wrong,
but
hopefully
I
mean
there
might
be
some
increases,
but
I
think
we
would
have
more
to
look
at
and
compared
with
different
companies
and
and
so
I'm
I'm
disappointed
in
that
you
know,
I'm
disappointed
that
we
only
have
the
same
companies
bidding
for
our
attention,
which
is
why
I
asked
what
are
we
paying
them,
but
that
be
that
as
it
may,
it's
what
we've
got
but
I
just
want
you
to
know
that
I
I
hope
that
this
is
a
priority
going
out
to
bid
next
time.
I
think
it's
a
real.
K
H
Pursuant
to
the
email
that
I
sent
you
we
did,
we
did
not
go
out
for
RFP
and
really
I
will
address
the
whole
stop-loss
insurance
again,
because
it's
really,
if
we
would
have
went
out
for
RFP
based
on
our
claims,
because
we're
self-insured
plan
and
I
don't
know
if
Todd
Burleigh
is
still
on
the
line.
You.
H
It's
really
based
on
the
claims
and
if
we
look
at
the
market
of
the
stop-loss,
which
is
really
what
drove
up
the
cost
of
the
administrative
fees
for
Cigna,
you
know
they
were
in
the
double
digits.
When
you
look
at
the
market
value,
so
I
hear
what
you're
saying
and
but
they
do
also
look
at
our
claims.
H
And
if
you
look
at
our
claims
over
the
course
of
the
last
three
years,
you
know
they've
been
pretty
high
and
that's
why
we're
in
the
situation
that
we're
in
right
now
so
I
do
hear
what
you're
saying-
and
you
know
we
will
continue
to
work
through
this
and
provide
more
frequent
reports
to
you.
So
you
can
see
the
changes
as
we
progress
through
the
months.
Mr.
chair,
it
respond.
K
To
that
Bernadette
you
know
I,
we
may,
we
may
very
well
have
been
looking
at
the
same
data.
If
you
know
if
Cigna
and
AM
had
reapplied
or
I,
don't
know
how
you
bid
for
this,
but
signify
sure,
and-
and
hopefully
they
would
have.
You
know
submitted
a
proposal
as
well,
but
we
would
have
had
choices.
That's
are
enabled
to
see
the
experience.
I
mean
you're,
saying,
stop,
loss
increases,
but
we
didn't
see
that
I
mean
I,
don't
know
eat.
Maybe
even
I
didn't
see
those
increases
to
know
the
country,
but
the
fact
remains.
K
We
compete
in
a
way
against
ourselves
because
we
are
self-insured
so
I'm
just
saying
it
not
that
you're
wrong
or
anything
like
that,
but
it
would
have
been
nice
to
have
comparisons
more
than
just
what
we're
seeing
today
option:
1
2,
3
or
whatever
we
could
have
had
a
review
or
not,
maybe
us,
but
the
people
who
decide
on
the
RFPs
a
committee.
You
know
the
options
we
could
have
had
more
information
so
again,
I'm
hoping
we
get
to
that
point
in
the
future.
So
thank
you.
B
Q
Sorry
about
that
week,
I
had
to
come
in
the
side
door
here
to
speak,
but
I
do
have
Gilbert
Baca
with
me.
I
have
good
work.
Our
team
is
with
me
and
we're
just
sitting
here
at
the
Union
office,
so
we
had
a
couple
grave
concerns.
First
of
all,
I
know
that
your
HR
director
saying
that
they
have
been
bargaining
with
us.
We
feel
that
we
really
haven't
had
a
million
opportunity
to
speak
on
this
matter.
Q
Q
We
using
concert
Garcia
term
that
something
about
the
blending
of
both
or
even
consular
copper,
V
Hill
or
she
mentioned
something
a
little
bit
more
tender.
If
you
will
something
along
that
line,
please
correct
me:
if
I'm
wrong,
we
still
believe
there's
room
for
negotiation
and
getting
this
done
right
now
for
the
city
to
consider,
harming
or
avoiding
after
hour
of
benefits.
In
the
midst
of
a
code
19
pandemic
a
worldwide
pandemic.
We
feel
that
it's
dangerous.
Q
Q
We've
been
very
blessed
here
in
New
Mexico
that
we
haven't
been
hit
as
hard
as
other
parts
of
the
country,
but
right
now
there's
a
resurgence
going
on
and
then
there's
also
some
long
lasting
effects
from
covet
19
that
are
affecting
children,
whether
it's
a
skin
illness
or
brain
development.
There's
other
issues
that
are
coming
up
that
are
far
rearing
you.
Q
We've
witnessed
that
with
the
Fertile
that
took
effect
2-3
weeks
ago
and
how
it's
affected
our
people
and
we're
just
really
concerned,
and
we
had
a
really
good
education
tonight
on
Don's
presentation.
It's
giving
us
something
to
look
at
something,
I
think
that
may
be
something
that
we
can
get
back
with
the
city
and
we
just
and
just
cut
this
short
I
just
want
to
thank
thank
you
all
for
listening
to
us
this
evening
and
for
allowing
us
this
opportunity
to
see
what
we
can
do
to
try
and
work
on
a
solution.
Q
That's
going
to
be
for
the
better
man,
and
not
only
of
the
city,
employees,
your
constituents,
but
also
for
the
community
as
a
whole,
because
we
know
this
affects
everyone
and
we're
all
in
it
together.
So
once
again,
thank
you
so
much
cherry
I
appreciate
the
moment.
You
allowed
us
here
to
speak
and
we
hope
that
we'll
be
able
to
have
an
opportunity
to
speak
with
you
all
tomorrow.
Q
Right
now.
We
understand
that
the
city,
in
order
to
if
they
kept
the
current
plan,
they're
looking
at
the
parochial
robbing
Peter
to
pay
Paul
from
that
fund
to
cover
or
up
short
there,
their
portion
of
funding
the
current
pension.
But
we
believe
that
we
can
really
sit
down.
We
can
come
to
an
agreement
and
presenting
something
to
the
City
Council.
That
I
think
everyone
would
that
be
agreeable.
To
me,
I
mean
that
I'll
walk
away
happy,
but
at
least
we'll
walk
away,
knowing
that
we
were
able
to
work
collectively
together.
Thank
you,
sir.
B
H
As
that
would
allow
us
more
time
to
review
the
plan
and
look
at
what
the
plan
is
doing
on
a
monthly
basis.
Also,
if
you
look
at
the
the
changes
for
option
one,
it's
still
a
significantly
more
generous
plan
than
other
plans
that
local
and
state
employees
receive
the
room
throughout
the
state
of
New
Mexico.
H
So
if
you
go
back
to
I,
think
it's
in
the
appendix
Don
I
don't
know
if
you
could
get
to
that
slide,
even
with
the
changes
that
we
that
we're
proposing
on
option,
one
again
would
still
make
our
plan
more
generous
in
hopes
that
you
know
it
would
be
less
of
an
impact
to
our
employees,
and
so
certainly
we
wouldn't
be
reducing
anything.
Any
service
in
is
just
adding
the
co-payments
all
right.
So
that's
everything.
B
Thank
you,
mrs.
are
so
with
everything
I've
heard
tonight,
option
one
seems
to
have
the
last
the
least
amount
of
impact
to
the
employees
right
away
and
I.
Think
with
the
upcoming
budget
discussion,
employees
may
be
hit
pretty
hard,
so
I
think
softening
the
blow
of
insurance
might
be
the
best
option
at
this
time.
The
other
thing
is
is
that
it
buys
us
time
in
order
to
have
those
deeper
and
harder
discussions
with
unions,
with
with
the
council,
to
keep
us
updated
on
a
monthly
basis
as
to
what's
going
on
I
think
option.
B
One
with
councilor
betas
recommendation
to
me
is
not
the
ideal
situation,
but
it's
probably
the
best
in
light
of
of
everything
going
on.
So
that's
the
that's
a
plan
that
I
would
support
at
this
time.
I,
don't
think
we
can
stay
where
we
at
where
we're
at
and
I
think
option.
Two
is
too
too
aggressive
it
at
this
point.
So
that's
that's
my
take
on
it.
B
We've
had
a
lot
of
discussion
on
this,
so
I
think
we're
ready
to
move
on
clearly
we'll
all
see
this
tomorrow
night
at
the
council
meeting
and
at
that
point
we'll
have
to
to
make
a
decision
on
where
we're
going,
but
that
that's
my
take
on
it.
So
one
last
plea
for
any
other
for
any
councillors
or
any
other
comment
from
the
committee.
B
E
We
fine-tune
the
capital
project
list
that
I
presented
a
couple
of
committee
meetings
ago
and
I
wanted
to
show
you
what
we've
come
up
with
we'll
bring
it
forward
after
this
point
in
an
official
forum.
So
that
way,
you
guys
have
it
in
advance
to
look
at
it,
but
I
just
wanted
to
go
over
some
highlights
of
what
we've
done.
I'm
going
to
share
my
screen,
real,
quick
and
just
go
over
those.
So
this
is
the
same
list
that
I
went
over
with
you
guys
before
and
I
can
go
over
it
one
by
one.
E
If
you
guys
are
like
oh,
but
I
was
gonna
do
for
now
is
just
highlight
some
of
the
additions
and
changes
that
we
made.
We
were
trying
to
scrape
the
bottom
of
the
barrel
here,
so
we
also
brought.
We
initially
showed
you
these
darker
orange
projects,
which
are
2018
GRT
fund
bond,
2018
bond
projects,
22
hours,
jpg,
our
team.
We
also
had
some
remnant
older
GRT
bond
projects
in
this
light
orange.
So
we
added
those
and
we
added
what
those
savings
would
be
the
small
amount,
but
it
does
it
does.
E
E
Excuse
me
so
uh
fire
station
to
the
bits
came
in
I.
Think
roughly
one
point
four
point:
five
million
dollars
over
what
money
we
have
so
because
of
that,
and
because
of
the
fact
that
building
a
real
fire
station
would
require
new
staff
funded
by
the
general
fund
we
and
so
a
new
operating
costs.
We
thought
that
it
would
be
a
good
idea
to
hold
on
for
a
moment
before
we
move
forward
with
that
project,
maybe
looking
out
to
an
outer
year
bond
in
the
next
couple
of
years.
E
If
that
is
possible,
our
fire
chief
is
a
we've,
been
in
close
contact
with
our
fire
chief.
He
is
going
to
be
coordinating
and
communicating
with
the
county
to
determine
coverage
and
how
that
looks
when
I
bring
this
back
to,
in
its
official
form,
we're
going
to
look
to
have
a
report
of
how
that
coverage
is
going
to
look
like
our
fire
chief
believes
that
we
can,
with
coordination
with
the
county,
provide
coverage
to
that
area.
The
two
areas
with
that
project
savings
brings
up
is
the
six
billion
dollars
from
the
fire
station.
E
It
actually
brings
up
roughly
about
a
million
dollars
from
this
public
savings
and
I
didn't
put
out
yet
the
spreadsheet
I
apologize,
but
I
will
put
that
on
before
it
comes
to
in
your
final
form.
So
with
that
this
bottom
line
gets
close
to
eight
million
dollars
of
projector
capital
savings,
again
PR
the
purpose
for
capitalizable
expenses
that
we
normally
try
to
absorb
in
our
operating
budget,
reducing
what
we
pull
from
our
general
fund
and
gr
TV
Dania
revenues.
E
E
So
we
decided
to
pull
that
back
a
bit
and
right
now
we're
proposing
a
budget
at
three
hundred
forty
nine
thousand
seven,
two
hundred
fifty
thousand.
What
this
will
accomplish
is
it's
going
to
get
us
a
lot
of
a
few
more.
It's
gonna
allow
us
to
not
only
design
but
construct
some
of
the
smaller
things
like
horseshoe
pits.
Screening
we're
gonna,
look
to
put
up
some
concrete
wall
barrier,
some
Jersey
barrier
around
the
perimeter
to
control
ATV
access
things
of
that
nature
dog
park.
E
But
what
is
being
omitted
are
some
big-ticket
items
such
as
the
concession
stand
bathroom
facility,
the
second
access
road
things
that
are
quite
a
bit
expensive
and
we
don't
have
enough
money
to
build
right
now,
as
it
is
so
we're
proposing
that
a
savings.
Now
this
savings
it.
This
is
related
to
a
general
obligation
bond
money.
So
it's
not
as
easy
to
to
spend
the
way
that
the
bond
question
went
out
to
the
voters.
E
Is
it
was
X
amount
of
dollars
for
parks
and
trails,
so
this
money
can
only
be
diverted
to
another
park
or
trail
project.
So
what
we're
looking
to
do
for
now
is
move
that
to
the
MRC
and
it
can
do
one
of
two
things.
First,
at
the
MRC
right
now,
if
I
can
I'm
gonna
scroll
down
the
last
change,
here's
the
MRC-
and
we
have
it
in
this
gray
area,
because
it's
a
mixture
of
funding,
but
it
has
ground
funding.
So
we
put
it
in
here
again.
The
original
budget
of
the
MRC
was.
E
100
1.25
million
dollars-
and
it
was
comprised
of
two
hundred
fifty
thousand
dollars
of
legislative
money,
$500,000
of
county
and
five
hundred
thousand
dollars
of
city.
We
don't
know
the
status
of
the
legislative
funding,
we're
hoping
that
we
still
can
maintain
that,
but
in
any
event,
is
250
can-can,
replace
that
revenue
loss.
E
So
for
the
time
being,
our
budget
for
this
jumps
up
from
1.25
million
to
1.5
million,
and
then
what
we're
looking
to
do
is
do
a
few
turf,
related
projects,
irrigation
system
stuff,
like
that,
if
we
have
any
leftover
money,
this
will
be
at
a
later
point
in
time.
We
can
use
that
to
help
supplement
our
operating
costs
and
privy
for
the
following
fiscal
year,
but
again
for
now
we're
looking
to
divert
the
250
from
Swan
Park
to
MRC
and
which
are
primarily
voters
of
soccer
valley.
E
That's
it's
a
quick
presentation.
That's
all!
I
have
ready
for
now,
but
again
next
community
meeting
I'm
looking
at
bring
an
official
item
with
a
memo
with
recommendations
for
reappropriation
and
I.
Haven't
talked
to
finance
about
this,
and
so
I'll
have
better
direction
at
next
at
the
next
point
in
time.
E
But
what
I
was
thinking
we
do
is
we
maybe
do
it
in
a
couple
of
steps
right
now
we
get
approval
to
re-appropriate
and
on
d
appropriate
projects,
as
I
showed,
and
then
once
finance
presents
their
operate
operating
budget,
the
city's
operating
budget
will
show,
but
you
guys
all
approved
as
far
as
the
Aqua
D
I
mean
D
appropriating
as
a
revenue
stream
for
that
operating
budget.
I'll
have
a
better
idea
of
that.
I'll
communicate
with
Finance
between
now
and
then,
and
that
you
guys
know,
that's
really
moving
forward.
K
K
E
B
Thank
you
John.
So
again,
I
support
you
coming
with
a
memo
next
meeting.
I
think
we
need
to
start
the
cutting
process
before
the
Finance
Committee
starts
its
budget
discussions
and
whatever
we
can
do
to
try
to
decrease
that
100
million
deficit
that
we're
gonna
have
and
have
a
balanced
budget.
I
think
is
important,
so
appreciate
all
the
work
you're
doing
any
other
questions
from
committee
members.
E
K
You
mr.
chair
two
things:
I
wanted
to
pass
along
to
John
I
redeem
a
this
morning,
but
definitely
wanted
to
talk
with
you
and
express
my
sincere
appreciation
to
the
Public
Works
employees
who
helped
along
with
the
firefighters,
hang
the
banners,
the
veterans
banners.
They
were
up
early
and
they
they
just
did
a
marvelous
job
and
I.
K
Just
really
want
you
to.
Please
pass
that
on
and
and
when
we
get
back
into
the
council
chambers.
I
expect
to
have
a
presentation
to
make
it
more
formal
and
thank
them
more.
You
know
widely
and
and
give
them
the
recognition
they
deserve.
So
thank
you
very
much
and
and
please
pass
it
on
to
them
and
then.
E
K
And
then
the
second
thing
is,
if
you
all,
haven't
driven
down
sereis
Road
from
Airport
Road
to
rodeo
Road,
where
the
ball
is
that
intersection
all
the
way
to
I-25
and
then
turn
around
it.
That's
not
quite
way
at
the
end,
look
at
those
banners
and
then
come
back
and
look
at
the
others
on
the
other
side
of
Cerrillos
Road.
It
is.
K
It
is
remarkable,
it
is
just
the
most
wonderful
thing
and
Kris
I
saw
your
Facebook
post
with
your
father
very
nice
to
honor
him
and
anyone
else
who
has
relatives
that
have
a
banner
up
there
I'm
just
so
proud
of
everyone
for
doing
this
and
to
all
city
for
having
these,
because
again
we're
the
only
one
in
New
Mexico.
That's
done!
This
we've
got
a
lot
of
press
a
lot
of
TV.
K
B
B
B
They
put
flags
above
each
veterans
poster
which
just
added
a
sense
of
pride
that
our
community
has
for
all
our
veterans.
It
looks
beautiful
I
would
support.
You
know
this
project
expanding
even
next
year.
I'm
getting
calls
from
people
on
on
a
daily
basis
are
saying
we
want
to
get
our
father
or
grandfather
up
there
and
honored
in
the
same
way
and
we're
already
running
out
of
space
and
look,
it
looks
tremendous.
B
So
if
you
haven't
had
a
chance
to
look
at
it,
like
councilor,
Vito
coppler
said,
take
a
drive,
look
at
it
check
it
out.
It's
it's
an
amazing
thing
to
see.
So
thank
you
for
that
and
then
I
wanted
to
thank
the
public
works
committee.
John,
for
you
know,
we're
gonna
have
to
make
some
tough
decisions
and
you've
already
started
that
process.
So,
thank
you
for
that.
Bernadette,
the
insurance
discussion.
I
know
it
was
a
lengthy
tonight
but
very
much
necessary.
B
Hopefully,
it'll
decrease
the
amount
of
discussion
we
have
tomorrow
night,
maybe
maybe
not,
but
it's
an
important
thing
for
all
our
employees,
so
I
think
option
one
which
softens
a
blow
is
a
pretty
decent
scenario
to
go
with,
but
does
buy
some
time
and
doesn't
have
such
a
big
punch
on
the
employees
of
with
that.
Our
next
meeting
is
Monday
June,
8
2020,
unless
there's
anything
else
we're
adjourned.
Thank
you
all
very
much.