►
From YouTube: Salt Lake City Council Work Session - 06/09/2022
Description
To view the agenda for this meeting please use this link https://slc.primegov.com/public/portal
A
A
A
A
We
welcome
the
members
of
the
public
who
are
in
person
and
who
may
be
watching
usual
video
feeds
online
hybrid
council
meetings
allow
people
to
join
online
through
webex
or
in
person
at
that
city
and
county
building.
We
are
continuing
to
watch
coveted
rates
to
make
the
safest
choice
for
all
of
us.
In
fact,
although
masks
are
no
longer
required
in
the
building,
since
covet
cases
are
rising,
we
encourage
people
to
wear
masks,
while
here
in
our
meetings,
there's
some
in
the
hallway.
A
If
anyone
needs
to
use
one,
we
will
continue
to
monitor
the
situation
and
take
any
reasonable
precautions
for
the
public
and
staff.
Our
agenda
today
is
to
focus
on
the
continuing
to
review
and
discuss
the
mayor's
proposed
fiscal
year
2022-23
budget
for
each
city
department.
Today's
meeting
will
help
us
the
council,
discuss
review
and
ask
final
questions
about
this
proposed
budget.
In
order
for
us
to
prepare
our
final
decision
for
budget
adoption
on
tuesday
june
14th.
A
A
A
Today,
in
person
you
have
four
council
members,
and
then
you
also
have
two
council
members
on
joining
us
via
webex.
So
thank
you,
everybody
for
joining
us
this
evening
or
this
afternoon
I
guess,
and
we
will
move
on
to
item
number
one
fiscal
year.
2022-23
budget
unresolved
issues,
follow-up
follow-up.
A
B
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
so
I
sent
updated
information
to
the
council
last
night
about
some
preliminary
property
tax
information
we
received
from
the
county.
I
I
think
I
I
want
to
emphasize
that
this
is
preliminary
information.
It
hasn't
been
officially
finalized
yet
in
the
state
website,
and
it
has
swung
wildly.
B
So
I
think
that
that's
the
giant
caveat
that
I
want
to
make
sure
I
emphasize
with
the
council
that
right
now,
as
of
preliminary
data,
the
new
growth
that
the
city
would
be
entitled
to
receive
is
2.4
million,
which
is
just
about
2.1
million
dollars
over
what
is
in
the
mayor's
recommended
budget,
because
if
you
remember
the
mayor's
recommended
budget
had
a
small
c
conservative
estimate
for
new
growth,
because
last
year's
new
growth
calculation
was
unexpectedly
low
and
it
required
us
to
sort
of
rebalance
the
budget
cutting
things
at
the
last
minute,
which
is
not
a
fun
experience.
B
So
this
year
we
have
the
opposite
experience.
I
wanted
to
caution
the
the
2.4
million,
because
hours
before
I
sent
that
email
last
night,
new
growth
was
nine
hundred
thousand
dollars.
So
I
think
that
that,
hopefully,
that
can
illustrate
for
the
council
the
order
of
magnitude
that
it
can
swing
until
those
numbers
are
listed
as
finalized,
but
it
is
good
news
and
it's
more
money
than
is
in
the
mayor's
recommended
budget,
and
so
now
the
council
can
decide
what
to
do
with
that
money.
B
I've
listed
some
options.
Of
course,
there
are
other
options
that
the
council
could
consider
that
might
not
be
on
this
list.
The
council
could
oh
and
and
sorry-
and
this
is
in
addition
to
where
the
council
ended.
As
of
the
last
discussion,
which
was
about
four
hundred
thousand
dollars,
essentially
in
the
green,
so
four
hundred
thousand
dollars
where
revenue
exceed
excuse
me
where
revenue
exceeded
expenses
and
so
sorry
go
ahead.
Cindy
jennifer.
C
Just
just
to
demonstrate
how
tentative
it
is,
was
there
not
a
year
where
they
told
us,
it
was
final
and
then
had
to
come
back
and
tell
us
whoops
it
isn't.
Yes,
so
really
anything
can
happen
even
after
they
say
it's
final.
Yes,.
B
That's
correct
yes,
and
so
in
the
past,
the
council,
in
the
past,
what's
been
helpful,
is
for
the
council
to
identify
like
a
line
item
where
you
would
make
that
adjustment
if
we
did
receive
that
kind
of
last
minute
news,
so
the
two
easiest
line
items
just
to
be
frank,
are
fund,
balance
or
cip.
Those
are
line
items
where,
if
there's
a
five
thousand
dollar
swing
or
if
there's
a
ten
thousand
dollar
swing,
it's
easy
to
adjust
those
items.
B
So
this
is
the
sheet
that
shows
where
the
council
is
in
the
in
the
positioning
of
positive
or
negative.
If
I
take
out
this
new
growth,
this
is
where
the
council
was,
as
of
the
last
discussion,
four
hundred
and
ten
thousand
dollars
in
the
green,
but
with
this
new
growth.
Obviously
that
takes
it
to
2.4
million
in
the
green.
So
among
the
options
for
the
council
to
consider
you
could
reconsider
the
reductions
that
the
council
made
in
the
public
lands
department,
those
two
ftes
you
could
reduce
the
amount
of
fund
balance.
B
That's
used
to
balance
this
year's
budget.
Currently
this
budget
proposes
to
use
25.2
million
dollars
from
fund
balance
to
balance
the
budget.
So
if
you
reduce
that,
with
that
2.4
million,
you
would
be
kind
of
furthering
your
goals
of
aligning
ongoing
revenue
with
ongoing
sources.
So,
to
the
extent
that
you
use
this,
you
use
fund
balance
to
balance
this
year's
budget.
It
creates
problems
in
future
years.
Right
we've
talked
about
the
structural
deficit
thing,
so
you
could
decide
to
use
this
money
to
reduce
your
reliance
on
fund
balance,
if,
hopefully,
that
makes
sense.
D
B
Include
that
yes,
so
yes,
that's
a
great
clarification
thanks.
The
the
amount
of
money
from
new
growth
is
ongoing
revenue
in
perpetuity
for
the
city
to
use.
Okay.
So
go
ahead!
Sorry,
daddy!
All
right!
Another
question:
oh
thank
you!
Alejandra!
Sorry,.
E
Mr
chair
go
ahead.
Sorry,
I'm
really
lost.
Go
ahead.
Jennifer
you
mentioned
the
two,
the
two
ftes
on
the
public
lands.
I
remember
that
we
sort
of
combined
two
into
one,
which
one
am
I
missing.
B
That's
that's
correct.
You,
you
straw,
polled
to
reduce
those
two
ftes
and
combine
them
into
one,
and
so
the.
If
you
wanted
to
reconsider
that
decision,
you
could
just
leave
the
two
ftes
and
not
combine
them
into
one
sorry
I
should
have.
I
should
have
phrased
it
that
way.
Instead,
oh.
E
Yeah
it
just
made
it
sound
to
me
and
again
I
you
know,
I'm
very
different,
since
this
is
my
second
language,
but
it
made
it
sound
to
me
that
there
were
two
fte
reductions
on
the
public
lands,
but
that
is
us
for
the
straw
poll
bus,
basically
as
one
ft
reduction
but
yeah.
Thank
you.
B
Yes,
sorry,
thank
you.
I
I
think
I
think
about
it
that
way,
because
in
our
tracking
sheet
we
we
reduced
both
and
then
we
added
one
so
it
yeah
sorry,
it
was
not
straight.
In
my
own
mind,.
D
Mr
chair,
could
I
ask
another
question?
Yes,
so
jen,
so
that
me
and
the
public
is
following
where
the
budget
is
going.
D
So
can
we
slightly
like
give
us
a
brief
summary
of
what
the
mayor
proposed
right
with
all
of
the
incred
with
the
so
the
tax
increase
immunity,
all
of
the
things
that
she's
listed
as
increase
so
that
we
can
fund
the
422
million
dollar
budget
or
whatever
it
is,
and
now
that
we
have
and
now
that
we
have
new
growth,
do
we
still
need
a
tax
increase,
because
I
can
remember
the
tax
increase
equal
four
million
dollars,
two
million
dollars.
I
don't.
B
B
Sorry,
I'm
going
to
pull
up
the
exact
amounts,
4.3
million
dollars
for
actually
4.4
million
dollars
for
general
city
operations;
okay,
two
million
dollars
for
property
tax,
stabilization,
four
million
dollars
for
governmental
immunity
and
then
separate
from
the
city,
2.7
million
dollars
for
the
library
and
I'll
get
to
that
area.
Next,
the
library
also
receives
new
growth
to
the
extent
they
do,
and
so
I'll
get
to
that
when
we're
done
talking
about
the
cities,
because
the
council
has
options
with
regard
to
the
library's
budget
as
well.
A
Okay
and
just
to
also
consider
volatiles
in
the
mayor's
budget,
they
estimated
on
the
conservative
side
of
364
thousand
dollars
in
new
growth.
So
that's
that
number
is
already
in
there.
The
funding
that
we're
looking
for
the
new
growth
from
the
county
is
we're
going
to
take
that
out
already.
So
that's
where
that
2.4
million
dollar
comes
from
now
we're
adding
that
to
that.
B
Right
so
so,
I
think
that
it
would
be
accurate
to
say
that
this
new
growth
revenue
that
we
know
now
would
not
be
sufficient
to
eliminate
the
need
for
a
tax
increase.
B
So
I
think
that
there
it's
a
policy
choice
that
the
council
can
make
and
both
are
valid
options.
B
So
the
city
is
using
its
rainy
day
fund
to
balance
the
budget
this
year
and
part
of
the
proposal
from
the
mayor,
the
city,
the
city,
would
have
had
to
use
even
more
one-time
revenue
to
balance
the
budget,
were
it
not
for
the
property
tax
increase
proposal,
and
so
this
opportunity
gives
the
there's
a
there's
an
opportunity
for
the
city
to
have
more
ongoing
or
align
ongoing
revenue
and
ongoing
expenses
more
closely.
F
Chris
go
ahead.
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
So
I
have
to
I've
had
to
ask
this
question
many
many
times
myself
and
so
jen.
F
If
you
could
explain
for
people
that
are
tuning
in
from
the
public,
why
then,
is
there
like
if
the
city
doesn't
change,
basically
about
the
misunderstanding,
about
what
new
growth
means
versus
what
keeping
the
tax
rate
property
tax
rate
the
same
and
how
that
doesn't
automatically
fluctuate
can
because
it
because
it
might
sound
to
people
tuning
in
like
if
you're
getting
this
new
growth
and
that's
going
not
one
time
it's
ongoing,
then
can't
you
just
fund
everything
by
keeping
tax
rates
the
same
and
just
waiting
for
more
new
growth
next
year
to
do
the
things
that
you
want
to
do
exactly.
B
Yeah,
I
think
I
can
take
a
little
bit
of
a
crack
at
that
so
and
please
jump
in
and
tell
me
if
it's
not
making
sense.
So
I
think
one
clarification
to
make
is
that
new
growth
revenue
comes
from
property
taxes
generated
by
fully
new
buildings.
So
it
is
not
from
someone's
house
increasing
from
four
hundred
thousand
dollars
to
five
hundred
thousand
dollars.
The
city
is
not
allowed
to
collect
any
more
money
from
that.
B
The
city
is
allowed
to
collect
more
money
when
a
a
piece
of
property
goes
from
having
a
small
shopping
strip,
mall
on
it
to
having
a
40-story
office,
building
on
it
or
residential
tower
on
it.
So
that
is
new
growth
and
according
to
state
law,
the
the
state
allows
the
city
to
have
that
as
increased
budget
for
the
city's
property
increase
revenue
for
the
city's
property
tax
budget.
So
because
it's
new
people,
essentially
new
people
paying
for
things,
not
existing
people
paying
more.
B
If
you
look
at
this
year's
budget,
I
think
it's
a
good
example
of
new
growth
is
never
enough
money
to
pay
for
the
year-over-year
increases
in
the
cost
to
run
a
city.
So
our
total
needs
for
this
year's
budget,
were,
you
know,
let's
say
30
million
dollars
for
sake
of
argument
from
compared
to
last
year,
so
we
needed
30
million
more
dollars
to
pay
for
the
needs
of
to
run
the
city.
New
growth
helps
us
pay
for
some
of
that,
but
obviously
not
all
of
it.
B
So
we
rely
on
growth
in
sales,
tax
revenue
and
in
this
year
we've
relied
on
fund
balance
and
arpa
dollars
to
help
us
keep
pace
with
that
cost
and
in
my
years
at
the
city
that
new
growth
revenue
is
not
very
reliable,
it's
not
as
obvious
as
one
might
think
to
say.
Oh,
I
see
a
bunch
of
cranes
in
the
city.
Therefore,
we
must
be
making
tons
and
tons
of
money.
B
It
never
quite
materializes
exactly
the
way
we
can
plan
on
it
and
so
and
I
and
I
think
there
was
a
staff
report
that
included
the
history
of
our
new
growth
revenue,
and
it's
fluctuated
everywhere
from
negative
ten
thousand
dollars
to
positive
three
million
dollars
and
sometimes
zero
dollars
and
and
last
year
it
was
three
hundred
thousand
dollars.
B
And
so
I
think
that
fluctuation
is
another
thing
that
makes
it
hard
to
count
on
that
year
over
year.
Once
you
get
it,
you
know
once
now
that
we
have
the
2.4
million.
We
will
keep
it
in
perpetuity,
but
it's
planning
on
it
to
cover
increased
expenses
each
year
that
that
is
difficult.
B
Does
that
chris
did
that.
F
G
I
think
jennifer
had
two
quick
questions,
one
the
if
I'm
understanding
new
growth
correctly
the
amount,
the
the
fact
that
we
have
a
lot
of
rda
project
areas
in
the
city
also
means
that
that
new
new
growth
number
is
small
er,
because
the
new
growth
is
would
be
directly
proportional
to
whatever
formula
we
have.
That
goes
to
the
rda
versus
the
city.
Is
that.
B
Have
some
pass-through
which
helps?
I
think
that
we
were
actually
helped
a
little
bit
this
year
and
danny
director
of
the
rda
highlighted
it
after
we
had
the.
B
Downtown
a
lot
of
the
projects
that
were
highlighted
in
that
state
of
downtown
are
outside
rda
project
areas,
they're
immediately
adjacent
to
rda
project
areas,
but
they're
outside
project
areas
which
benefits
the
city
in
a
way
because
the
city
collects
that
new
growth
rather
than
the
rda.
Does
that
make
sense.
G
Is
that
two
point,
whatever
million
or
the
the
number
that
we
got
from
the
county?
Does
that
mean
the
does,
that
is,
that
inclusive
of
the
pass-through
rda,
the
one
that
would
go
through
the
rda
and
then
pass
through
to
us?
No,
no.
B
And
that's
already
in
the
rda
budget
so
and
it's
it's
reflected
in
the
budget
here
I
think
I
think
they're,
anticipating
a
million
and
a
half
more
pass
through
from
the
rda.
I
could
be
wrong
on
that,
so
the
rda
do
we.
G
Oh
that's
right,
okay
and
then
my
next
question
is:
you
said:
okay,
we
can
take
this
new
growth
money
and
better
align
our
ongoing
expenses
with
ongoing
funds.
Better
line
is
how
close
to
aligned
is
better
aligned.
Does
it
still
be.
B
G
D
What
big
numbers
are
we
working
on
and
deciding
on?
Ultimately,
if
we're
going
to
do
or
not
so
so,
the
25
million
dollars
that
we're
using
from
fan
balance
so
from
our
savings
money
that
we
had
left
over
from
last
year,
and
where
does
that
leave
us
do
we?
We
will
still
be
able
to
have
some
savings?
Yes,
okay,
yes
and
also.
D
D
D
So
I
wanted
to
make
that
clear
because
we're
funding
again
with
like
savings
and
arpa-
and
I
understand,
there's
labor-
increases
like
cost,
like
that's
a
cost
that
we
can
never
like
reduce
unless
we
cut
like
certain
positions
or
a
lot
of
positions,
but
but
it's
way
to
be
really
mindful
of
that
and
that's
why
I
still
have
this
a
little
bit
of
a
heartburn
on
we're
spending
money
from
savings
or
spending
money
in
taxes,
and
we
still
won't
have
any
money
for
next
year
to
cover
that
so.
A
A
The
reason
why
our
fund
balance
was
at
such
a
high
mark
was
our
sales
tax
well
exceeded
what
our
budget
had
in
it
this
year.
A
Our
sales
tax
budget
is
on
the
conservative
side
and
it's
rightfully
on
the
conservative
side.
So
if
we
do
as
well
as
we
have
done
in
the
last
few
months,
that
fund
balance
will
be
more
and
it'll
be
closer
to
maybe
not
to
25
million,
but
at
least
at
least
still
be
a
bigger
chunk
of
it
because
we're
our
minimum
fund
balance
is
10,
10,
we're
closer
to
16
and
a
half
to
17
percent.
So
we
do
have
some
moon
room
in
there
to
move
to
help
support
our
budget
for
next
year.
B
And
yes,
sorry,
I
think
that's
a
good
reminder
when
we
discuss
with
the
finance
department
the
kind
of
three-year
projection
that
includes
next
year.
Also
using
the
city
savings
account.
So
it's
using
the
city
savings
account
for
multiple
years,
because
the
city
savings
account
is
so
healthy
because
we
had
such
we
had
so
much
sales
tax
revenue
over
our
budget
this
last
year
that
we.
A
Weren't,
anticipating!
So
that's
why?
If
we
have
and
I'll
get
you
in
a
second,
that's
why?
If
we
have
the
the
additional
money
that
comes
in
above
the
mayor's
estimate
of
364.,
if
you
move
that
to
fund
balance,
that'll
allow
us
to
have
that
extra
revenue
to
use
for
that
ongoing
for
that
fiscal
health
of
allowing
us
to
use
it
for
next
year,
because
now
we
have
more
there
right.
B
Close
and
there
are,
there
are
other
line
items
in
the
budget
that
I
think
would
be
obvious
to
cut
next
year,
because
they're
so
high
this
year
and
the
obvious
one
in
my
mind
would
be
cip
so
that
that
you
know
you're
funding
it
at
nine
percent
this
year,
which
is
the
most
I've
ever
seen
it
in
my
years
here
and
that's
that
is
an
ongoing
need.
B
Obviously,
every
year
you
need
to
fund
cip,
but
that
is
one
of
those
like
natural
balancing
figures
that
if
the
revenues
aren't
quite
enough,
that's
one
of
the
things
that
gets
cut.
Okay,.
D
So
so
yeah,
so
so,
yeah,
okay,
cip,
cip,
also
important
things
that
the
public
expects
you
know
with
their
tax
dollars
to
see
and
happen
like
things
that
need
to
happen
right.
So
it
feels
like
what,
what's
the
term,
that
a
lot
of
the
politicians
use
a
big
big
government
like
we
have
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
things
going
on
and
we
cannot
afford
it
and
then
we
are
like
well,
let's
just
not
do
things
but
still
keep
our
big
administration.
D
A
C
We
may
call
it
extra
in
this
conversation,
because
it's
something
that
we
didn't
already
budget
for
or
something
like
that,
but
extra
isn't
a
term
that
is
is
really
relevant
here.
It's
just
what
we're
talking
about
moving
money
and
where,
where
it
can
go
and
where
it
can't
go.
So
just
a
couple
of
examples:
if
the
new
growth
does
materialize,
the
two
to
0.1
million,
that's
beyond
what
was
projected
and
thank
you
to
the
administration
for
being
conservative
in
their
estimates
or
we
would
be
in
a
real
mess.
C
So
if
this
new
growth
does
materialize
next
year,
you
in
case
the
public
could
have
the
misimpression,
but
you
you
would
not
start
the
year
with
an
extra
two
million
dollars
next
year.
So,
no
matter
with
or
without
that
revenue
every
year
when
the
budget
process
starts,
there's
a
gap
in
what
it
would
cost
to
continue
just
the
existing
programs
that
take
place.
C
It
is
already,
though,
in
the
balanced
budget,
so
that's
that
isn't
extra
either
and
then
on
the
sales
tax-
and
I
know
you
guys
all
know
this-
I'm
just
clarifying
for
public
and
then
the
sales
tax
is
not
like
property
tax.
Once
you
have
property
tax
revenue,
you
continue
really
to
get
that
on
an
ongoing
basis.
Sales
tax,
there's
a
base,
amount
that
you
do,
but
when
you
have
a
big
peak
in
sales
tax,
you
can't
count
on
that
in
future
years.
Is
that
yes,
okay,
accurate?
F
Yeah
thanks,
I
I
don't
know
if
this
is
a
question
or
an
argument
or
just
a
statement,
so
I'm
just
gonna
to
do
my
best
and
I'll
say
that
I
think
that
I
I
totally
understand
the
concerns
that
council
member
baltimore
has
raised,
and
I
I
think
that
as
good
public
stewards
of
of
tax
dollars,
we
should
always
be
asking
like.
F
Is
this
drifting
away
from
from
our
lane
or
our
mission
as
the
city
and
the
services
that
we
provide?
You
know,
etc.
I
think
those
are
good
and
healthy
questions.
To
ask
where
I
would
disagree.
F
Is
that
we're
not
like
we're
not
in
this
position,
because
anybody
did
anything
wrong
or
because
we
overspent
or
that
we're
like
existing
within
our
means,
like
with
very
very
few
exceptions
of
like
a
couple,
pretty
small,
what
I
would
say,
relatively
small
programs
to
the
budget
like
we're
in
this
position,
because
we
are
that
this
is
the
cost
of
doing
business
and
running
the
city
that
that
is
growing
and
like,
for
example,
even
though
we're
adding
alternative
response
models,
it's
not
like
those
calls
are,
are
new
or
those
calls
aren't
going
to
come
in.
F
If
we
don't
add
an
alternative
response
model
for
policing
right,
like
we're
still
going
to
get
those
phone
calls,
we're
still
going
to
have
to
send
police
out.
Police
are
just
not
the
best
people
and
it's
not
the
best
use
of
resources
to
send
an
officer
when
there
isn't
a
crime.
That's
been
committed
so
like
we're,
not
driving
making
government
larger
we're
we're.
F
Our
role
is
to
respond
to
those
calls
and
our
job
as
council
members
is
to
figure
out
the
best
way,
the
most
economical
way
to
do
that,
and
so
in
that
sense
like
we're,
not
adding
a
new
program
because
we
have
to
respond
to
emergencies.
F
The
same
is
true
for
a
lot
of
the
other
areas,
like
parks
like
in
order
to
maintain
parks
at
the
level
of
service
that
we
have
them
and
in
order
to
bring
on
the
new
trails
and
the
new
parks
to
accommodate
the
growth
of
our
city,
we
have
to
have
more
money
there,
we're
not
adding
parks
right,
like
sorry,
we're
not
adding
parks
as
a
concept
to
our
city
mission,
we've
always
done
parks,
that's
always
been
within
our
purview.
F
We
need
more
money
to
maintain
the
current
level
of
service,
and
so
I
know
that
there
are
a
few
like
programs
here
and
there,
like
in
sustainability.
Talking
about
doing
you
know
a
new
new
program
about
food
equity,
and
you
know
there
are
some
new
positions
that
we're
hiring,
but
I
don't
see
from
this
budget
anywhere
where
we're
fundamentally
growing
government
artificially
like
we
are.
F
E
And
I
again,
I
don't
know
what
this
is
and
I
I
will
also
say
it.
I,
when
I
see
this
budget
and
what,
when
we
see
the
numbers
here,
the
numbers
are
telling
us
what
the
city
is
needing.
E
We
either
stop
giving
our
employees
a
cost
of
living
living
update
on
their
wages
or
we
stop
funding
government
immunity
which
that
will
be
all
sorts
of
disastrous
or
we
stop
defer
maintenance
in
our
buildings
or
we
stop
traffic
calming
and
or
produce
cip
applications,
or
we
stop
finding
our
firefighters
and
the
growth
that
they
need,
or
we
stop
funding
the
extra
hr.
You
know
employees
that
they
need
or
we
stop
funding
the
alternative
response
for
policing
or
we
stop.
E
You
know
adding
the
people
that
parks
and
open
space
needs
to
maintain
our
parks.
I
you
know-
or
we
also
we
stopped
funding
our
ims-
to
protect
us
from
cyber
attacks.
So
I
you
know
it.
I
think
that
living
within
our
means
is
a
charged
world.
E
E
I
will
be
more
than
happy
to
support
that,
but
as
it
as
a
stand,
I
believe
that
this
is
a
solid
budget
and
it's
not
wasteful.
Yes,
we're
going
to
be
making
changes.
I
believe
I
that
I
I
feel
strongly
about,
but
for
for
the
most
part,
this
is
a
very
solid
and
strong
budget
that
represents
the
values
of
this
of
the
of
the
neighbors
of
salt
lake.
H
H
We
owe
it
to
every
constituent
who
will
have
a
tax
increase
to
ourselves,
to
the
people
working
for
us
to
work
as
efficiently
as
possible
and
to
create
the
metrics.
We
have
a
lot
of
new
investments
and
no
matter
how
brilliant
the
people
planning.
The
programs
are
no
matter
how
well-modeled
they
are
on
other
forms
of
success.
H
They
will
always
require
us
to
be
insightful
and
vigilant
and
to
measure
their
success
in
objective
ways
that
determine
future
investment,
and
we
need
to
make
that
a
huge
priority
as
soon
as
we're
done
with
the
budget
to
get
these
metrics
in
place
as
soon
as
possible,
so
that
the
the
conversations
are
no
longer
about
what
I'm
feeling
about
this
or
what
I
perceive
about
it.
But
what
are
the
actual
needs
that
our
city
has
and
how
well
are
we
using
each
dollar
that
we
are
stewards
over
to
respond
to
those
needs
in
specific
ways.
A
Thank
you
for
the
comments
jennifer
back.
I
think
we
still,
we
still
didn't
get
through
all
of
your
right.
The
options.
B
Options
so
I'll
bring
this
back
so
so,
okay,
so
reconsider
the
fte
changes
in
public
lands
reduce
the
amount
used
from
fund
balance.
You
could
decide
to
deposit
that
amount
into
the
cip
fund
because,
as
I
mentioned,
it's
easy
to
adjust
like
let's
say
if
the
new
growth
final
new
growth
is
1.7
million
dollars.
B
Instead
of
2.4
million
dollars,
the
cip
fund
could
always
use
more
money,
additionally
kind
of
a
corollary
to
the
cip
fund
ben
confirmed
with
finance
that
there
is
152
000
just
over
152
000
to
recapture
from
dormant
cip
accounts
accounts
that
are
over
three
years
old
projects
that
are
no
longer.
You
know,
they're
closed
or
they're,
not
going
forward
for
the
council
to
recapture
in
previous
years.
B
G
Consider
mono
is
now
the
appropriate
time
to
discuss
those
options.
Yeah,
okay,
so
I
want
to
discuss
the
public
lands
ftes.
I
and
I
have
a
different
idea
and
what
you
put
on
there.
I
think
that
our
decision
to
reduce
those
two
fds
to
one
as
in
as
far
as
I
understand
what
those
fta
e's
are
for.
I
would
like
to
stick
with
that
decision
and
as
the
fisher
mansion
gets
up
and
going,
and
we
have
these-
we
can
actually
see
a
more
demonstrated
need.
G
I
would
be
okay
considering
bringing
those
back
in
the
next
budget
year.
The
ftes
that
I
would
consider
putting
money
towards
is
trying
to
get
at
least
a
portion
of
those
groundskeepers
to
be
full-time
and
not
seasonal,
because
I
think
that
to
me
is-
and
I
know
that
it's
a
two
million
dollar
need,
at
least
in
the
presentation-
is
two
million
dollars
to
get
all
of
the
groundskeepers.
G
I'm
wondering
if
there's
an
option
where
we
can
get
like
a
third
of
the
groundskeepers
to
stay
on
for
the
whole
year
and
give
them
benefits
and
allow
them
to
work
through
the
winter
and
maintain
some
things,
and
I
see
kristin's
here
so
and
I
think
it's
for
multiple
reasons.
I
am
very
interested
in
that,
one
being
that,
I
think
our
parks
don't
shut,
and
I
know
that
our
parks
do
not
shot
in
the
winter
and
we
still
need
to
maintain
the
grounds
in
the
winter.
G
There's
a
lot
of
maintenance
that
I
hope
those
people
could
be
doing
to
catch
up
in
the
winter,
but
also
that's
trying
to
stabilize
that
base
of
the
pyramid.
And
I
just
on
a
personal
note.
I
interacted
with
one
of
the
groundskeepers
at
the
cemetery
the
other
day
and
this
individual
said
they
started
as
a
seasonal.
They
were
moved
over
and
I
was
like.
G
Oh,
do
you
like
your
job,
and
he
said
you
guys
have
me
for
40
years,
I'm
going
to
be
here
for
the
rest
of
my
career,
and
that
really
touched
my
heart
and
I
thought
those
people
that
are
dedicating
their
lives
to
maintaining
our
parks
really
start
at
that
lower
level.
And
I
think
at
this
point
we
can't
get
people
to
start
at
that
lower
level,
because
there
are
too
many
other
jobs,
entry-level
jobs
that
are
available
that
are
full-time,
not
seasonal,
and
have
benefits.
A
G
This
chart
it's
2.38
million,
which
is
a
convenient
number,
but
that
would
be
giving
putting
all
of
the
park
staff
all
the
groundskeepers
to
full-time
rather
than
seasonal
is
my
understanding.
But
I
I
don't
see
why
we
couldn't
do
half
of
them
or
something
like
that.
Half
of
them
become
full
time,
and
then
we
still
have
some
seasonal,
but
kristin
might
know
a
reason
why
we
can't.
I
Thanks
yeah,
we
could
do
any
number
that
you
wanted
to.
If
that's
the
wishes
of
the
council
we'd
be
happy
to
look
at
whatever
number
you
have
and
let
you
know
how
many
staff
we
could
convert
for
that
number.
E
I
just
wanted
to
you
know:
the
need
on
the
parks
is
great,
and
everybody
knows
about
this.
Even
in
the
winter,
when
we
have
trees
of
collapse
and
branches
and
unfortunately
our
staff
is
struggling
because
sometimes
we
don't
have
enough
people
to
go
pick
up
all
those
branches,
and
you
know
we
still
have
some
branches
and
some
of
the
parks
and
some
public
spaces,
and
I
think
this
could
actually
make
make
a
big
difference.
H
I
think
whatever
we
prioritize,
we
have
to
prioritize
those
things
that
will
create
revenue
for
the
city.
Permitting
processes
are
very
difficult
planners.
I
don't
know
I
have.
I
have
not
I
never
dreamed.
We
would
be
in
this
position
where
we
could
even
be
having
this
conversation,
so
I
haven't
drilled
down,
but
while
I'm
in
full
support
of
parks
and
agree
that
they're
important
to
our
enjoyment.
H
Additionally,
I'm
going
to
say
something:
that's
going
to
make
everyone
in
the
building
hate
me
and
city
government
is
officially
now
going
to
hate
me.
I
would
like
us
to
enter
into
like
a
two
to
three
year
cycle,
where
we
contract
an
external
audit
for
each
department
to
ensure
that
we're
being
as
efficient
as
possible.
I'm
not
saying
people
are
not
being
mindful,
but
when
you're
in
the
weeds
doing
things,
sometimes
we
miss
efficiencies,
and
this
is
a
practice
in
other
industries
that
really
does
promote
efficiency.
I
am
not
expecting
to
find
anything
negative.
D
I
know
I
appreciate
victoria
saying
that
I
think,
like
she
said
and
me
as
a
business
owner,
sometimes
when
you're
so
into
the
business
working
within
the
business
you're
not
working
on
your
business.
So
you
need
that
external
help.
That
will
look
at
your
whole
program
and
see
where
the
inefficiencies
are
and
where
to
cut
and
where
to
invest
right.
D
A
And
I'll
kind
of
on
the
same
lines,
I'm
all
in
favor
of
supporting
our
parks
and
making
sure
they're
maintained
properly
and
healthy
and
safe
for
our
residents.
I
just
don't
feel
this
is
the
time
to
be
adding
more
positions
or
changing
them
from
a
seasonal
to
a
fte.
I
think
it
takes
a
little
bit
more
deliberate
thought
process
here
and
to
look
at
our
and
to
allow
us
to
make
sure
that
we
have
enough
ongoing
revenue
to
meet
our
ongoing
needs
and
to
make
sure
that
we
have
money
in
that
fund
balance.
A
To
offset
that,
I
do
look,
I
think,
going.
Full
time
is
of
a
value.
I'm
don't
just.
I
don't
believe
it's.
This
is
the
time
to
do
that
and
we
need
to
have
a
deliberate
thought
process
going
forward
on
that.
So.
A
So
are
we
looking
for
a
straw
poll
here
to
keep
it,
but
yes,
so
the
straw
poll
would
be
keep
this.
Keep
the
current
two
ft's
down
to
one
in
the
public
lands.
A
B
Sorry
satan
keep
the
two
ftes
or
keep
the
previous
decisions.
The.
B
A
So
that
that's
six
to
zero
counts,
more
fowler,
absent
now
the
second
straw
poll.
B
Hundred
thousand
to
shift
part-time
groundskeepers
to
full
time.
B
D
G
A
Before
that,
that
is
it
three
to
three
at
this
time
with
without
counseling
free,
so
that
one
then
fails
sales
yeah,
okay,.
J
F
B
Okay,
so
I
will
make
a
note
to
revisit
that.
It
makes
it
a
little
difficult
to
go
to
other
options.
J
E
I
wanted
to
suggest
an
argument
here,
so
I
was
reading
about
the
defer
maintenance
related
to
upgrading
our
parks
sprinklers
on
water,
so
we
can
actually
shut
down
the
grass
without
killing
our
trees
when
it's
drought,
it
seems
sorry,
my
the
school
is
more
in
the
lawn
right
now.
E
So
the
it
seems
to
me
that
this
year
might
be
as
bad
or
worse
than
last
year's
as
far
as
drought
and
it's,
I
think,
it's
a
trend
that
is
going
to
continue
and
we
need
to
have
our
parks
in
understanding
that
we
don't
want
to
hurt
our
trees,
our
urban
canopy,
but
at
the
same
time
we
can
actually
separate
and
stop
watering
our
grass
and
that
cost
a
lot
of
money.
If
I
remember
right,
it
was
over
two
million
dollars
needed
for
that.
E
I
know
that
is
a
lot
of
money,
but
I
was.
I
would
like
to
make
an
argument
to
the
council
to
put
at
least
10
percent
of
what
they
are
suggesting
in
this
budget
session,
which
I
don't
know,
it's
probably
going
to
do
a
lot.
But
I
wonder
if
that
could
make
a
difference,
maybe
turn
a
park
into
you
know,
and
so
we
don't
start
wasting
our
water,
the
city,
water
ourselves.
While
we
tell
our
neighbors
to
not
waste
their
water.
E
So
I
would
like
to
suggest
this
to
the
council
members
and
maybe
we
can
hear
from
from
parks
if
two
hundred
thousand
dollars
will
make
a
difference
on
this
and
turning
into
turning
a
park
into
the
new
sprinkler
system
needed.
I
Thank
you
for
that
question,
councilmember
pulley,
so
just
to
give
some
context
we
we
have
done.
Oh
there's
my
phone.
I
We
have
done
a
little
bit
of
work
with
estimating
some
costs
of
replacing
irrigation
systems,
in
particular
in
the
the
golf
area
and
so
we're
looking
at
rose
park
as
you
all
are
familiar
with,
and
and
that's
the
last
time
we
had
it
estimated
it
was
about
3.5
million
and
that's
just
over
100
acres.
I
I'm
guessing
that's
higher
at
this
point.
To
do
that
amount,
so
200
000
would
be
a
small
park
and
I
think
that
could
be
a
great
demonstration
park.
We
could
look
at
as
you
get
smaller,
the
efficiencies
get
less,
and
so
it's
harder
to
do
as
much
one
of
the
things
I
I
was
thinking
about
when
I
was
coming
here
today.
I
was
on
my
bike
and
just
looking
at
all
the
the
green
scapes.
I
A
As
a
budget
amendment
com,
because
right
now
you
wouldn't
have
an
idea
on
that.
E
I
yeah
I
would.
I
will
welcome
this.
I
think
this
is
something
that
is
obviously
is
becoming
more
expensive
by
the
minute.
Obviously,
it's
very
problematic
and
we
don't
need
our
parks
wasting
precious
water,
but
we
also
need
to
keep
our
trees
and
are
you
know
our
trees
healthy?
So
that's
something
that
I
feel
very
strongly
about.
E
H
I'm
just
on
my
dead
horse
again,
I'm
sorry,
like
I'm
gonna,
keep
saying
it.
This
doesn't
feel
to
me
like
found
money
or
new
money.
This
feels
like
money
that
we
have
to
allocate
to
the
things.
We
have
a
very,
very,
very
good
budget
in
front
of
us
that
prioritizes
so
many
of
the
things
that
are
important
and
we
are
going
into
potentially
the
most
financially
precarious
moment
of
our
shared
lives,
and
we
have
got
to
take
care
of
who
is
here.
H
E
And
to
that
I
want
to
say
that
water
is
probably
one
of
our
main
needs
in
this
valley.
The
the
the
drought
concern
in
this
city
and
in
this
valley
is
considerable,
so
I
just
wanted
to
throw
out
there
that
this
is
not
just
a
superfluous.
I
don't
think
it's.
H
E
A
K
G
Just
take
it
to
councilmember
pui's
goal,
I'm
wondering
if
we
want
to
put
some
of
this
into
cip
with
a
legislative
intent
that
we
review
the
cip
list
and
anything
that
has
already
been
applied
for
with
an
eye
towards
what's
going
to
save
the
most
water,
and
maybe
that's
in
parks.
Maybe
it's
in
golf.
G
Maybe
it's
actually
in
something
else,
but
we
we
review
the
unfunded
cip
list
and,
put
I
don't
know
500
000
to
whatever
is
the
going
to
save
the
most
water,
and
maybe
we
need
to
get
stephanie
do
or
somebody
from
public
utilities
to
help
us
figure
out
what
that
is,
but
but
that
we
I
mean
that
might
be
the
fastest
way
to
do
it
this
year.
G
But
I
don't
know
if
that
would
that
be
a
straw
poll?
Yes,
so
I'm
making
them
all
today,
but
councilmember.
How
much
do
you
think
you
want
to
put
into,
or
do
you
want
to
make
this
trouble,
because.
E
No,
I
I
think
you
you
got
you
rounded,
this
crazy
idea
into
a
more
a
real
one.
So
I
appreciate
that
I
you
know.
I
think
that
your
your
number,
maybe
is
something
that
is
more
accurate
and
considering
that
one
park
costs
more
than
three
million
dollars.
So
you
know
if
we
can
find
efficiencies
and
the
whole
system,
and
it's
not
only
in
the
parks-
I
I'm
totally
done
for
that.
So
I
support
that.
There.
A
Okay,
so
there's
straw
paul
in
the
nutshells
like
to
put
this
as
an
intent
for
using
cip
funding
to
study
it
and
then
possibly
initiate
it.
G
B
A
G
B
B
So
what
bannon
finance
identified
was
152
000
to
recapture.
D
D
I
I
I
think
there's
two
options
here:
one
of
them
could
be
just
a
study
to
look
at
all
of
the
parks
and
the
irrigation
systems
and
to
understand
which
ones
are
the
least
efficient
and
the
costs
that
it
would
take
to
upgrade
those
least
efficient
parks.
So
that's
that's
one
piece
and
then
the
other
piece,
I
think,
is
what
council
member
puja
is
saying.
I
Is
you
know
let's
actually
do
something
and
and
change
the
irrigation,
so
those
are
two
different
things
and
I
guess
in
your
straw
poll
it
would
be
nice
for
us
to
know
which
or
both
what
you're
proposing
in
this
do
you.
I
So
resolution
29
asks
us
to
understand
the
design
and
the
cost
estimates
of
our
projects,
and
so
that's
that's
a
little
bit.
It
puts
us
in
a
hard
position
because
I
don't
know
how
much
to
tell
you
to
put
in
for
a
project
to
upgrade
something.
If
you
want
to
just
put
in
a
mount,
we
can
look
into
it
and
try
to
figure
out
which
size
of
park
would
fit.
What
you're
trying
to
do
and
and
use
that
as
a
demonstration
park
and
or
large
park.
It's
up
to
you.
I
But
if,
if
it's
just
an
amount,
then
we
would
do
the
homework
to
try
to
figure
out
what
it's
going
to
cost
put
together
the
construction
documents
and
then
do
a
construction
project.
E
I
you
know,
I
I
think
the
study
will
be
useful.
I
can.
I
can
see
that
I
also
you
know
waiting
for
a
study
to
be
completed
a
year
and
whatnot
from
now
and
then
the
cost
also
switching
from
now.
It's
I
it's
it's
either
the
chicken
or
the
egg,
and
it's
just
complicated
to
pick
one
or
the
other.
I
think
they're
both
needed.
I
I
don't
know
how
other
council
members
feel
about
this.
A
I'm
all
agreeing
with
that.
We
need
to
do
something
about
it,
but
I'd
also
like
to
know
where
we
want
to
start
and
spend
our
money.
So
I'm
I'm
all
for
it.
But
I'd
like
to
know
if
we
allocate
100
000
and
do
it
in
this
park
or
a
million
dollars.
So
I
think
the
idea
that
we
need
to
know
where
to
spend
the
money
and
how
much
we
can
spend
would
be
nice
to
know,
and
I
you
may
not
like
studies,
but
sometimes
you
need
that
study
to
make
your
right
decision.
C
Go
ahead
cindy,
oh
just
mr
chair,
we
do
have
some
work
already
done
in
this
area.
There
was
quite
an
extensive
review
that
was
done
based
on
the
idea
of
what's
the
esco,
the
saving
money
thing.
So
so
it's
safe
to
know
that,
no
matter
what
amount
you
put
in
it
can
be
used
in
this
direction,
though
they
do
have
they.
It
isn't
as
though
they
don't
have
any
information.
I
think
you
do
have
some
things
that
you,
you
know
about
a
lot
of
deficiencies.
I
K
B
It's
not
so.
B
It
is
likely
that
there
will
be
some
extra
money,
but
the
exact
amount
is
yeah.
It's
not
so.
K
Sure
but
then
we
could
come
back
in
a
budget
amendment
and
have
this
discussion
after
kristin
comes
back
and
says,
oh
by
the
way,
all
of
the
work
that
cindy
just
mentioned.
We
know
that
these
five
parks
are
the
things
that
could
happen
and
we
wouldn't
necessarily
need
to
allocate
any
money
to
cip
right
this
moment.
B
I
think
that
the
challenge,
I
think
yes,
the
council,
could
absolutely
do
that.
The
challenge
would
be
that
it
would
compete
with
all
the
other
budget.
Amendment
requests
that
might
come
up
in
the
year
and
the
council
would
have
to
weigh
those
options
right
sure,
like
you
always
do.
K
E
I
withdrew
my
my
thought
or
I
guess
it's
gary
manos
motion
he
can.
He
could
potentially
continue
to
do
it,
but
I
think
that
is
a
good
argument
to
this.
I
would
like
to
say
that
council,
member
fowler,
saying
that
we
should
look
into
a
budget
amendment
on
this
is,
is
something
to
note,
so
I
will
I
would
like
to.
I
think
this
is.
I
think
we
all
agree
that
this
is
a
big
issue,
and
maybe
we
can
wait
until
we
know
how
much
money
this
is.
K
May
I
suggest
something
sorry,
mr
chair,
could
I
suggest
that
we
ask
park?
Sorry
kristen,
I'm
putting
you
on
the
spot,
but
you
don't
have
to
come
up
here
just
to
come
back
with
some
of
that
information
that
cindy
mentioned
out
of.
Maybe
we
can
put
it
on
a
future
date
so
that
we
can
kind
of
determine
what
we're
interested
in
does
that
work
thanks.
Kristen
is
nodding.
Yes,
sorry
giving
you
more
work,
yay.
B
So,
mr
chair,
we
mentioned
revisiting
a
straw
poll.
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
do
that.
It's
council
member
mono
suggested
to
shift
some
and
he
calculated
approximately
25
percent
of
groundskeepers
from
part-time
to
full-time
director.
Reicher
responded
that
we
could
use
a
placeholder
amount
and
she
would
return
to
the
council
with
exactly
how
many
people
that
would
convert,
but
that
you
could
put
in
any
number
there,
and
so
the
number
that
he
threw
out
was
six
hundred
thousand.
And
then
it
was
a
split
vote.
G
We
had
talked
about
the
two
parks
ftes
that
we
had
removed
and
combined
into
one-
and
I
was
thinking
about
how
you
were
talking
about.
The
pyramid
was
inverted
and
really,
I
think
the
best
way
to
build
the
base
of
that
pyramid
in
parks
is
to
get
our
groundskeepers
to
not
be
seasonal
and
to
become
full-time,
because
I'm
worried
that
that
used
to
be
a
really
attractive
job
for
people
entering
into
our
city
working
in
our
city,
but
now
that
it's
not
it's
still
seasonal,
we
still
don't
offer
benefits.
G
There
are
a
lot
of
other
entry-level
jobs
that
people
can
take
outside
of
the
city
that
I
I
don't
think
we're
getting
the
people
in
the
city.
So
I
want
to
work
towards
making
all
of
those
ground
groundskeepers
full-time
with
benefits,
just
like
the
rest
of
our
city,
family
is,
and
so
my
thought
was
in
the
budget
presentation.
G
Director
reicher
gave
us
a
figure
of
2.4
million
dollars
to
change
all
of
them
over.
So
I
just
divided
that
by
four
and
said,
with
six
hundred
thousand,
we
could
do
a
quarter
of
them.
I
don't
know
if
that
math
is
real
and
if
it
really
works
out
that
way
with
hr,
but
it
seems
close.
So
that
was
the
struggle.
A
G
A
Other
side
of
it
was
that,
though,
we
agree
that
we
want
to
make
sure
the
parks,
the
health
and
safety
and
the
maintenance
of
our
parks
is
good.
At
this
point
in
the
budget
and
this
point
of
the
future
budgets,
I
think
it'd
be
wise
for
us
to
look
at
that
in
in
the
future,
because
we
have
a
lot
of
funds
that
we
need
to
use
for
next
year
that
are
coming
out
of
fund
balance,
and
we
don't
want
to
burden
ourselves
with
additional
costs
that
we
don't
have
money
for
to
pay
for
the
future.
A
We
know
we
have
the
need,
but
let's
not
allocate
the
funds
for
those
that
those
extra
ftes
at
this
point,
let's
look
at
it
in
the
in
the
future,
when
we
may
have
some
more
money,
because,
right
now
our
revenue
is
short
for
the
future.
B
So,
let's
see
the
other
thing,
I
heard
the
other
idea
I
heard
aside
from
putting
all
of
this
money
into
fund
balance
is
adding
funding
for
auditing,
and
I
just
I
wanted
to
clarify.
We.
The
council
office
budget
does
have
an
existing
line
item
for
audits
and
we
actually
have
encumbrances
from
previous
years
for
audits,
and
so
I
think-
and
I
don't
want
to
speak
for
cindy
it's
accurate
to
say
we
could
start
that
process
without
necessarily
adding
money
into
our
budget
and
would
likely
not
be
able
to
so.
B
I
think
that
in
previous
years
the
council
has
decided
on
audits,
based
on
a
specific
topic
like
police
reform,
for
example,
or
business
licensing.
But
if
you
just
wanted
us
to
kind
of
systematically
go
through
the
departments
with
the
efficiency
lens,
I
think
we
could
start
doing
that
and
we
could
even
work
with
our
consultants
to
figure
out
an
efficient
way
to
do
that.
C
H
Just
speaking
in
terms
of
human
to
human
communications,
is
this
something
that
are
we
adding
to
over
taxed
departments,
an
onerous
burden?
That's
going
to
cause
them
to
cry?
Do
we
need
to
lay
some
groundwork
and.
C
Yeah,
I
think
I
mean
it.
I
think
we
would
come
back
to
you
with
some
possibilities.
It
would
it
wouldn't
be
like
instantaneous
or
anything
like
that,
but
and
then
we
we
could
coordinate
with
the
administration
on
no
one
has
extra
time,
but
there
may
be
some
that
could
get
done
sooner
and
others
that
should
wait
until
later.
B
H
C
B
C
And
it's
usually
a
collaborative
process,
and
it's
in
keeping
with
the
international
audit
best
practices
to
include
the
department
in
developing
the
scope
so
that
if
there
are
things
that
they
already
want
to
know,
it's
so
we're
not
imposing
it
on
them.
They
can
add
things
that
they
would
like
to
know.
I
have
a
question.
E
If
related
to
audits
is
the
audit
focus
on
efficiencies
of
staff
on
procedural
stuff
or
financial,
or
both,
it
could.
B
C
And-
and
there
are
times
when
it
isn't
practical
to
do
an
audit,
we
did
some
follow-up
work
with
the
building
and
permitting
group
and
on
an
audit
and
and
really
they
needed
to
focus
on
getting
the
permits
out
the
door,
so
they
they
did
not
have
time
to
I
mean
they
recognized
that
it
would
be
helpful
to
incorporate
some
efficiencies,
but
right
now
they
just
need
to
get
the
work
done.
So
we
have
to
just
be
aware
of
those
sort
of
things.
D
B
Think
we
would
need
to.
I
think
we
would
need
to
work
with
the
administration.
That
would
be
our
first
step
just
because
of
the
erp
taking
so
much
of
departments
times
right
now
and
and
to
figure
out
which
department
would
be
realistically
would
realistically
have
the
time
kind
of
like
cindy
mentioned
with
building
services.
We
might.
We
might
think
that
it
makes
sense
to
start
with.
B
You
know,
x
or
y
for
or
x
or
y
department,
but
if
they
don't
have
the
staff
capacity
to
be
helpful
in
the
audit
process,
then
it's
not
efficient
and
in
some.
C
C
C
Get
there
with
this
that
tool,
because
you
can't
achieve
you
can't
audit
the
int.
We
do
audit
the
entire
city
in
terms
of
the
the
federal
the
required
audit
and
that
kind
of
a
thing,
but
you
would
be
this
would
be
a
several
year
process
and
it
would
talk
about
best
practices
and
and
the
efficiencies
and
things
like
that.
We
wouldn't
be
able
to
audit
all
city
departments
in
we'd,
be
able
to
do
one
or
two
a
year.
So.
H
And
I
think
what
I'd
like
to
get
to
eventually
is
to
a
place
when
we
have
2.4
million,
that
we
can
play
with
we're,
responding
to
actual
priorities
that
we've
been
able
to
quantify
or
qualify
using
these
objective
standards
instead
of
surmising
that
maybe
this
would
be
the
best
way
to
use
money,
or
maybe
that
would
be
the
best
way,
I'm
all
for
pet
projects,
and
I
think
they
make
life
worth
living.
H
But
I'm
worried
that
we
potentially
are
missing
more
structural,
important
things,
especially
because,
right
now
our
city
is
in
such
a
growth
trajectory
and
we
are
in
such
a
state
that
we
haven't
ever
been
in
before
that.
The
only
way
to
navigate
this
to
me
is
to
have
that
objective
data
when
we're
when
we're
sitting
at
tables
like
this.
Having
conversations
like
this.
C
Yeah
and
one
of
the
things
and-
and
that
I
understand
the
thing
is:
that's
that
you
can
we
don't
want
to
do
that
to
the
extent
that
it
removes
your
judgment
as
elected
officials,
because
that's
the
whole
essence
of
the
system.
So
you
want
to
have
that
to
inform
your
decision,
but
you
may
not,
and-
and
you
may
see
that
there's
the
greatest
need
in
this
area,
but
it
really
isn't
the
priority
of
the
constituents.
So
then,
then
you
all
have
to
weigh
all
of
that.
K
I
appreciate
that
rachel
and
to
cindy's
point
too.
I
think
you
know
we
saw
the
in-depth
police
audit
because
we
needed
to,
and
I
think
right
we,
there
was
a
lot
of
things
happening
and
a
lot
of
call
from
constituents
on
both
sides,
and
I
think
when
we're
looking
at
audits,
they
are
helpful
and
and
sometimes
we've
done,
like
little
mini
audits
on
certain
things.
H
And
I
think-
and
I
think
my
response
is
that
there
there
is
that
element
right
like
there
are.
If
you
talk
to
any
builder
in
the
city,
they
contend
that
we
are
the
slowest
most
cumbersome
place
to
work.
I
contest
that
is
not
true.
That's
just
the
narrative
when
they're
talking
to
someone
representing
the
city,
but
we
are
in
a
new
paradigm.
We
added
electronic
things.
You
know
like
there
are
all
sorts
of
new
things
that
I
think
it
would
really
behoove
us.
H
A
I
think
I
I
welcome
the
discussion
councilman
or
cindy
go
ahead.
C
A
B
Don't
think
we
do
because
we
have
a
line
item
for
audits,
okay
in
the
budget
already
okay
in
our
council
office
budget.
It's
just
helpful
to
know
that
the
council
is
interested
in
doing
that.
So
we'll
come
back
with
more
information
on
how
to
proceed
in
conjunction
with
the
administration,
it
seems
like
people
might
need
a
little
more
time
to
think
about
how
to
allocate
this
extra
general
fund
money.
So
maybe
I
could
pivot
to
some
easy
things
that
the
council
could
weigh
in
on
about
the
library
and
governmental
immunity.
B
So,
let's
see
so
the
light,
in
addition
to
the
city
having
preliminary
data
for
new
growth,
there's
preliminary
data
for
the
library
fund
having
new
growth,
the
library
fund
did
pence,
have
a
placeholder
of
375
thousand
dollars
of
new
growth
in
their
budget,
the
actual
or
at
least
the
preliminary
actual
new
growth
for
the
library
is
746
000.
So
the
council
could
decide
to
either
have
that
extra.
B
What
is
it
three
hundred
and
fourteen
thousand
dollars
go
to
the
library
fund
balance
where,
let's
see,
actually
it's
371
thousand
dollars,
go
to
library,
fund
balance
or
reduce
the
proposed
tax
increase
for
the
library
by
that
amount
of
new
growth.
B
Right
and-
and
so
I
I
guess
we
would
say,
we
would
put
a
placeholder
that
whatever
the
actual
new
growth
is,
it
would
just
be
adjusted
by
that
amount.
B
Because
because
the
council
sets
the
tax
rate
for
the
library
fund,
that's
why
and
and
council
members
have
asked
quite
a
few
questions
about
the
library
tax
increase
and
impact
on
homeowners.
That's
why
we
flagged
that
as
an
option
right.
B
F
B
F
In
perpetuity,
no,
no
I'm
sorry
my
question's
kind
of
rhetorical,
oh
like
like!
Yes,
we
could
cut
that
amount
in
this
budget
and
then
come
back
in
like
what
one
year
two
years
and
have
to
to
do
another
increase,
because
when
we
should
have
captured
that
three
dollars
before
that
is
my
my
rhetorical
feeling
on
this.
D
B
C
D
A
And
we'll
know
that
this
line
comes
from
the
county,
also
just
like
our
property
tax
line
comes
from
the
county
too
right,
so
those
are
the
unknowns.
So
the
question
isn't
it
is
on
the
table.
Is
that
do
you
allocate
this
additional
money
and
fund
balance
into
fund
balance
or
into
the
property
tax?
The
fund.
K
I
think
it
should
go
into
the
fund
balance,
but
may
I
just
ask
that
we
be
sensitive
of
saying
you
know
it's
only
three
dollars
a
year
to
some
people
out
there
three
dollars
a
year
could
be
a
lot,
so
I
recognize
that
it's
only
three
dollars
a
year
coming
from
all
of
us
sitting
here
and
where
we're
at
so
I
I
do
think
in
this
case
that
it
could
go
to
the
library
general
fund
because
they
have
a
lot
of
projects
that
need
to
be
done,
but
I
would
just
ask
that
we'd
be
sensitive
of
how
we
address
that.
F
I
think
we
all
need
to
be
really
careful
about
the
language
that
we're
using,
because
I
think
with
this
with
the
discussions
that
we've
had
so
far
today
too
it.
It
almost
makes
the
impression
that
we
that
there
are
all
of
these
perceived
areas
where
we're
wasting
money
or
where
we're.
F
Where
we're
you
know
we're
spending
beyond
our
means
or
not
being
fiscally
responsible
or
all
that
all
of
those
things,
and
just
because
we're
having
to
have
a
conversation
about
raising
taxes
doesn't
mean
that
that
that
it's
because
of
inefficiency
in
the
government
or
it's
because
we're
trying
to
because
government's
getting
bloated-
and
so
I
think
I
have
I
agree
with
councilmember
fowler,
but
I
think
we
need
to
be
careful
on
the
other
side
too,
because
we
know
in
this
room.
F
You
know.
Maybe
we
know
those.
Those
of
us
on
this
council
know
better
than
anybody
else
in
the
public,
how
hard
our
city
employees
work
and
how?
How
excellent
our
bond
ratings
are.
Because
of
how
responsible
we
are.
We
have
been
fiscally
even
when
we're
trying
to
advance
policies
that
are
that
are
progressive.
F
We
are
incredibly
fiscally
responsible
and
I
don't
want
residents
to
listen
into
this
conversation
and
think
that
we're
not
being
careful
with
their
money
or
that
we
haven't
been
careful
with
their
money.
Leading
up
to
this
point.
K
I
will
I
would
pull
that
we
put
the
whatever
new
growth
above
the
proposed
tax
rate
go
into
the
library
fund,
unbalance,
which
is.
D
A
D
I'm
confused
okay
holds
up
going,
sorry,
put
it
back
yeah,
where
we're
putting
it
in
the
general
fund
balance
of
the
library.
Yes,.
B
J
D
B
Thank
you.
The
next
item
is
governmental
immunity.
The
state
law
sets
a
maximum
of
.0001
0.0001.
Yes,
all
right,
three
zeros
on
this
item,
and
so
with
the
total
taxable
value
in
our
city.
The
maximum
that
the
council
could
establish
this
fund
for
would
be
3.78
million,
not
the
4
million
proposed
by
the
mayor.
I've
checked
in
with
the
administration,
and
they
would
recommend
setting
the
budget
at
that
3.78
million
so
that
it
can
do
what
was
intended,
which
is
kind
of
build
up
an
insurance
fund
for
future
years.
B
To
3.7
right
and
the
recommended
expenditure
budget
is
3.1
million,
and
so
you
know
any
anything
above
that
because
anything
below
3.1
million
and
you
wouldn't
be
funding
it
enough,
and
I
I
believe
that
you
had.
The
council
had
taken
a
straw
poll
in
one
of
the
earlier
unresolved
issues,
discussion
that
you
did
support
funding
this
with
a
tax
line
item
and
that
you
wanted
to
come
back
once.
We
knew
the
exact
amounts,
and
so
that's
where
we
are.
A
So
the
maximum
tax
amount
comes
out
to
be
now
3.7,
some
odd
money
right,
I
know,
that's
the
staff
report
said
3.9,
but
so
that's
just
mathematics
on
that.
F
K
A
K
A
B
The
because
of
the
total
taxable
value
in
the
city,
the
maximum
that
the
rate
could
generate,
is
3.7
million.
B
A
A
B
D
E
D
Staff
that
may
have
an
accident
may
sue
the
city,
but
also
for
a
lot
of
lawsuits
that
we
get
because
of
the
police
department
and
so
those
ticket
items
if
the
public
has
been
following,
sometimes
have
been
really
large.
So
we
would
be
covering
some
of
those
as
well
with
this
money.
If
we
have
future
ones,
which
I
hope
we
don't
right.
G
K
I
A
Okay,
so
back
to
the
straw
poll-
and
I
got
I
have
six-
I
have.
D
B
Always
need
a
certain
budget
for
it.
There
are
nine
ftes
in
the
attorney's
office
relating
to
this
issue,
so
you
would
always
need
money
for
this
topic,
but
it
could
come
from
a
variety
of
sources.
Okay,.
J
A
J
B
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
So
let's
see
I
don't
know
if
council
member
petro,
eschler
or
council
members,
poi
or
wharton
can
join.
B
Maybe
then
will
you
text
me
yeah
hi,
chris
hi.
There.
F
B
You're
waiting
for
me,
maybe
in
the
meantime
we
can
clarify
the
next
steps
for
cip,
we'll
have
a
follow-up
discussion
to
the
extent
you
want
a
follow-up
discussion
on
tuesday.
B
I
just
want
to
make
it
really
clear
here
and
then
we'll
have
it
in
the
motion
sheet
as
well,
that
the
council
approving
the
budget
does
not
mean
that
the
council
is
approving
the
specific
projects
in
either
the
sales
tax
or
the
geo
bond
that
hopefully
the
council
will
figure
out
those
project
lists
relatively
soon,
but
they
are
not
part
of
they're,
not
necessarily
approved.
When
you
approve
the
proposed
budget.
K
Mr
chair,
may
I
I
want
to
just
apologize
that
I
kind
of
confused
that
at
the
formal
meeting
on
tuesday
but
wanted
to.
So
thank
you
for
that
clarification
because,
yes,
we
approved
that
part
of
the
budget,
but
not
the
specific
projects,
and
I
think
people
were
a
little
like
concerned
that
they
needed
to
advocate
for
their
specific
project
right
then,
and
there
so.
But
thank
you
for
reminding
me
and
on
tuesday
I'll
try
to
help
that
as
well.
So
and
it's.
B
B
Not
approved
there
are
specific
projects
that
will
be
approved.
There
are
specific
things
that
will
be
approved
as
part
of
the
budget.
One
is
the
required
debt
service
payments.
You
know
we
don't
want
to
be
laid
on
our
debt
service
payment
and
there
are
a
handful
of
others
that
have
unique
timing.
Things
like
the
handheld
radios
needs
to
be
the
purchase,
needs
to
start
at
the
beginning
of
the
fiscal
year.
B
The
two
million
dollars
for
insurance
payments
for
the
city
and
county
building
needs
to
happen,
and
so
that
those
will
be
part
of
the
annual
budget,
but
we've
we've
kept
all
the
others
that
are
discretionary
for
your
guys's
discussion
in
the
summer.
We
keep
giving
you
the
cip
geo
bond
sales
tax
bond
list
in
all
of
these
unresolved
issues.
B
Discussions
because
I
think
it
can
help
inform
your
decision,
whether
to
add
to
cip
or
cut
from
cip,
because
you
can
look
at
that
list
and
think
if
you
want
to
add
to
cip,
you
can
fund
some
of
the
projects
that
are
not
funded
or
vice
versa.
So,
anyway,
that's
why
we
keep
giving
you
the
cip
list,
but
this
budget
does
not
approve
that
list.
Necessarily
that's
later
in
the
summer.
B
So
back
to
the
unresolved
issues
spreadsheet,
let
me
share.
B
So
the
council
decided
on
governmental
immunity
and
on
the
library,
and
now
we
need
to
discuss
how
to
allocate
this
preliminary
information
about
new
growth.
B
A
K
I
do
have
some
questions.
I
can
ask
them
and
see
if
you
guys
have
the
answers.
Okay,
so
do
we
know
with
the
600
thousand
and
maybe
even
if
kristen's,
just
like
in
her
office,
that
or
something
if
you're
listening
kristen.
I
I
need
you,
but
how
many,
if
we
funded
this
at
that
25
sort
of
that
600
000,
how
many
employees
that
would
be.
B
So
in
the
earlier
discussion
she
said
that
she
would
have
to
come
back
to
the
council
because
it
would
depend
on
which
positions
made
sense
to
turn
into
full-time
positions.
So
she
didn't
necessarily
commit
that
it
would
be
25
of
the
employees
that
it
may
be
some
amount
less
than
that
and.
C
It
really
couldn't
possibly
be
because
25
percent
of
the
money
wouldn't
pay
for
full-time
for
25
of
the
workforce.
I
don't
think.
I
K
I
mean
that
seems
to
me
to
be
a
vital
question
in
that,
like
how
much
is
this
going
to
impact?
What
we
want
it
to
impact?
I
think
it's
a
good
idea.
I
just
I
I
kind
of
have
that
question
and
I
think
for
me.
K
Looking
at
600
000,
I
would
say
something
I
learned
my
first
budget
session
from
the
mayor
then
councilwoman
mendenhall
is,
if
you
add
something
you
got
to
take
something
away.
K
So
I
realized
that
we
have
this
sort
of
this
money
that
may
or
may
not
be
there,
but
we
also
added
two
new
ftes
for
traffic
calming
we
added.
How
much
did
we
add,
then
we
added
something
else
for
traffic
200.
K
And
I
know
how
things
are
and
sixty
thousand
for
their
street
racing
so
and
those
are
important
and
I'm
not
trying
to
take
them
away.
I'm
asking
which
is
more
important
like
we.
We
don't
have
the
the
credit
card's
gonna
run
out
and
I'm
just
like
what?
Where
do,
council
members
feel
that
there's
more
importance
on
these
things
or
you
know.
G
So
if
I
could
clarify
I'm,
I
realize
this
is
kind
of
coming
out
of
left
field
as
an
idea,
and
it
wasn't
the
budget
presentation.
We
talked
about
it,
but
I
realize
it's
not
something:
we've
really
discussed
less,
so
I
I'm
not
going
to
be
upset
if
it
fails,
that's
not
it,
but
when
we're
talking
about
what's
more
important
than
the
other,
the
reason
why
I
brought
it
up
is
because
we
had
said
okay,
we
reduced
the
fte
out
of
public
lands.
G
Do
we
want
to
put
it
back
and
for
me,
it's
more
important
to
make
these
seasonal
employees
full
time
with
benefits
than
it
is
to
add
higher
level
ftes
and
public
lands?
And
so
I
was
saying
no.
I
don't
want
to
bring
that
back,
but
if
we
are
talking
about
putting
money
back
into
public
lands,
this
is
where
I'd
like
to
put
it
so,
but
that
doesn't
mean
we
have
to
do
it
now,
but
I
think
in
future
budget
years
or
budget
amendments.
G
K
Kristen,
I
know,
but
I
think
you're,
okay
right
now
darren.
I
completely
agree
with
that,
and
it
is
something
that
we
have
been
talking
about
a
lot.
I
just
am
looking
from
the
standpoint
of
of
making
sure
that
we're
not
overspending
or
spending
money
we
don't
have
or
coming
back
with,
like
we
can't
do
that,
so
it
was
sort
of
like
again.
Like
I
said
it's
a
lesson.
I
learned
my
first
budget.
K
If
you
put
something
in
you,
got
to
take
something
out
and
that
sort
of
looking
at
what
the
council
has
already
added
was
where
I
started
in
saying:
if
we're
going
to
add
these
things,
then
are
we
going
to
take
out
these
other
things?
Do
we
have
the
capacity
to
do
all
of
it
kristin?
I
may
not
need
you,
but
I
appreciate
you
running
down
here.
K
I
was
just
I
jen
mentioned
that
you
didn't
know
exactly
how
like
how
many
employees
this
would
make
or
which
employees
would.
This
would
affect
right.
I
K
And
do
you
think-
and
I
I
I
do
again-
I
agree
on
having
the
seasonals
be
permanent
and
at
least
some
of
them.
You
know
councilmember.
If
we
brought
up
that
in
the
wintertime.
If
trees
branches
fall-
and
it's
not
like
a
significant
thing-
then
it's
difficult
for
parks
to
get
out
and
clean
it
up,
because
we
don't
mean
not
have
the
seasonal
workers
during
the
winter
time,
and
so
and-
and
I
just
want
to
support
our
employees
and
make
it
attractive
to
be
here.
I
Right
it
would,
it
would
definitely
affect
the
parks
districts,
so
we
have
four
well.
We
have
eight
park
districts,
but
really
the
city
is
divided
by
four
and
and
so
it
would
affect
those
staff,
and
we
would
you
know,
with
a
reduced
amount,
we'd
kind
of
have
to
look
at
it
again
like.
Would
we
just
try
it
like
as
a
pilot
in
one
district
to
move
all
of
them
to
full
time,
or
would
we
want
to
do
it
in
multiple
districts?
I
I
We
try
to
do
all
our
training
in
the
winter
time,
but
in
addition
to
that
you
know,
people
are
still
using
our
parks
as
as
much
as
ever,
especially
with
the
warmer
temperatures
and
the
nicer
weather
that
we've
had
even
in
the
winter
and
when
it's
snowing
and
they're
picking
up
branches
most
of
our
park
staff
are
also
clearing
walkways
and
and
doing
snow
removal
as
well
yeah.
K
And
I
didn't
I,
I
hope
my
comment
didn't
come
off
as
me
saying
that
there
wasn't
anything
being
done
in
the
winter
time
like
that,
I
definitely
see
everyone
out
there
working
it
was
more
wood.
A
full-time
staff
like
turning
somebody
from
seasonal
to
full-time
also
help
benefit
all
of
that
work
you're
doing
in
the
winter
time,
which
I
assume
it
would
because
you'd
have
more
people
working
in
the
wintertime
right
absolutely.
A
G
Should
I
repropose
the
straw
poll-
yes,
okay,
I'll
restate
the
straw
poll,
which
is
to
take
six
hundred
thousand
dollars
and
move
it
into
parks
to
convert
as
many
possible
seasonal
groundskeepers
to
full-time
okay.
A
A
So
we're
four
to
three,
not
in
favor,
okay,.
B
So
back
to
this
money,
I
don't
know
if
councilmember
fowler
wants
me
to
read
through
what
some
of
the
other
options
one
was
to
just
park
the
money,
essentially
in
fund
balance,
which
would
reduce
the
amount
of
fund
balance
being
used
to
balance
the
budget
this
year.
B
A
We
right
because
oh
that's
right,
because
we
straw
pulled
that,
but
we
didn't
have
council
member
fowlers
on
that
one
did
we.
A
Right,
so
this
would
actually
the
money
that
the
additional
new
growth
would
go
into
fund
balance
is
what
your
struggle
is.
Okay,
that
was
a.
G
A
A
Up,
I
got
six
thumbs
up.
H
B
So
we're
balanced
sorry.
D
G
B
That
vote
happens
on
tuesday,
okay,
great,
thank
you
and,
and
I
think
that
we've
been
proceeding
assuming
that,
because
council
members
didn't
raise
removing
that
tax
increase,
we're
percy
we're
proceeding
on
that
path.
If
you
want
to
stop
hole,
removing
that
tax
increase,
that's
a,
I
guess,
that's
a
different
option,
but
then
you'd
have
to
rebalance
the
budget.
B
B
A
I'm
with
you
I'm
with
you
amy,
that's
six
to
six
to
one
with
customer.
Baltimore
was
not
approving.
B
All
right,
so
we
can
pivot
from
unresolved
issues.
Just
so
new
council
members
understand
the
process.
Staff
will
begin
furiously,
preparing
all
of
the
documents
and
sort
of
background
paperwork
that
has
to
happen
in
order
to
adopt
the
budget
based
on
these
straw
polls.
So,
while
nothing
is
final
until
the
council
actually
votes
on
it
on
tuesday
is
really
really
difficult.
F
So
if
someone
wanted
to
propose
cuts
to
the
proposed
budget
to
like
lower
the
tax
rate
or
something
when
would
that
need
to
come
when
when
would
we
need
to
discuss
that,
that.
K
B
K
B
D
Sorry,
mr
chair,
I
think
I
would
rely
on
you
know
on
our
own,
our
staff
to
tell
us
okay,
so
we
can
do
us
is
or
we
can
take
these
things
out
like
and
and
that's
something
that
I've
been
asking
for
like.
But
I
have.
I
don't
have
that
information.
So
it's
hard
to
say,
because
I
just
been
frustrated
that
I
don't
feel
like.
We
really
have
looked
deeper
on
the
things
that
we
are
going
to
fund.
D
We,
I
don't
think
we
have
looked
deeper
on
this
whole
budget
that
we
could
have
removed
or
reduced.
Some
of
this
property
increases
that
ultimately
the
renters
and
you
know
preparers
will
have
to
pay
that
will
be
directly
to
sorry.
The
renters
will
end
up
paying.
So
it's
hard
to
say
yes
because
of
the
reality
in
salt
lake
city
is
rental
prices.
Housing
prices
are
ridiculous.
D
K
I
think
we
have
and
to
be
fair,
we
could
propose
to
cut
anything
you
want.
I
mean
if
there
is
something
in
the
budget
that
you're
like.
I
really
don't
want
this
thing.
I
think
that
we
we
as
the
council,
have
that
power
to
say
you
know
I
don't
want
a
new
mrt
in
sugar
house,
so
there
you
go.
Don't
say
that
because
I
won't
but
right
I
mean.
D
D
I
appreciate
it,
I
appreciate
it,
but
what
what
I
have
a
beef
with
is
exactly
what
you
said.
We're
voting.
You
know
on
something
that
you
and
I
and
another
council
member
didn't
agree
with
trying
to
balance
the
budget.
It
seems
like
we're
yeah.
Of
course
we
need
to
pay
for
labor
and
that's
okay,
but
then
maybe
you
know-
and
this
is
why
the
audits
are
good,
because
it's
to
me
in
my
mind,
I
don't
want
to
make
decisions
on
things
that
it's
just
maybe
a
perception.
Maybe
you
know
my
non-understanding.
D
I
want
to
understand
where
we
could
do
these
things.
That
makes
sense
understanding
that
labor.
I
don't
want
to
cut
people,
but
then
what
else?
If
we
take?
So
if
we
add
something
where
do
we
take
out?
That's
where
I'm
coming
from
and
I
don't
feel
like
I
have.
Maybe
it's
my
own
fault.
Maybe
it's!
It
doesn't
matter.
K
I
don't,
I
don't
disagree
with
you,
but
I
think
we
can't
go
back
in
time.
We
made
our
votes
last
year
and
we've
you
and
I
both
voted
no
on
certain
things,
but
it
still
passed.
And
now
we
we're
we're
where
we're
at
right-
and
I
think
one
of
the
suggestions
that
was
brought
up
in
the
beginning
of
the
budget
briefings
from
staff
is,
if
you
want
to
look
at
things,
really
we're
adding
a
bunch
of
new
programs
and
that's
the
other
option
to
to
cut
from.
K
But
we've
all
talked
about
those
and
said
that
those
are
priorities
to
us
right.
The
chat,
the
chat
team,
the
new
mrts,
the
social,
more
social
workers,
some
of
those
were
already
in
budget
amendments,
but
that
was
brought
up
at
the
very
beginning
of
the
briefings
when
we
first
started
this,
and
I
think
that
we've
done
a
good
job
at
looking
at
those
programs
and
deciding
if
they
were
a
priority
for
us.
K
So
certainly,
I
understand
the
frustration
and
I
feel
you
and
and
it's
all
there-
and
I
think
these
are
like
lessons
learned
for
the
future
and
future
budget
amendments
and
looking
at
where
the
money
is
coming
from,
so
that
we're
not
raising
taxes
every
year
on
and
on
and
on,
but
making
better
long-term
decisions
on
those
things.
But
we
made
these
decisions
last
year
and
now
we're
sort
of
paying
for
them,
which
we
knew
would
happen
and
we
we
said
it
was
going
to
happen
last
year
during
this
discussion.
G
G
I
I
guess
just
to
add
my
thoughts
to
the
conversation.
I
I
don't
think
there
are
huge
things
in
this
budget
that
we
can
get
rid
of,
because
they're
all
things
that
we've
talked
about
and
that
we
wanted-
and
I
know
that
the
public
lands
department
is
something
that
was
some
people
didn't
agree
with,
but
I
don't
think
it's
fair
to
say
that
we're
asking
our
residents
to
pay
more
and
they're
not
going
to
get
anything
more.
G
I
actually
there's
a
lot
of
new
things
in
this
budget
that
they're
going
to
get
including
all
of
the
alternative
response
models.
Of
course,
those
are
all
expensive
programs,
but
things
that
we
need,
and
then
I
I
think
the
investments
in
public
lands
are
beginning
to
pay
off
and
will
continue
to
to
pay
off
and-
and
we
know
that,
even
just
to
keep
a
base
level
of
maintenance
on
our
parks.
G
We
have
to
spend
more
money
because
a
people
cost
more
and
b
more
people
are
using
our
parks
since
2020.,
so
there's
more
use
on
that
park
and
the
people
to
maintain
the
park
costs
more.
So
we
can't
not
invest
in
that
and
expect
the
condition
to
not
deteriorate,
and
I
don't
want
our
parks
to
share
it.
I
want
them
to
get
better,
so
I
I
think
it's
I
I
feel
like
I
can
say.
G
F
F
F
That
is
the
only
split
vote
that
I
can
think
of
that
is
implicated
here
in
this
budget.
The
vast
majority
of
them
were
unanimous
votes,
and
you
know
what
were
what
we've
heard
over
the
last
you
know
number
of
years
is
you
know,
especially
in
the
in
the
sort
of
tumultuous
years
that
we've
had
and
the
two
most
previous
ones.
F
We've
heard
residents
telling
us
that
they
want
a
higher
level
of
service,
that
they
want
services
and
that
that
better
address
their
calls
and
their
complaints,
and
there's
no
other
way
to
do
that,
and
I
know
that
it,
I
think,
we're
also
creating
more
efficiency,
because
if
we
can
have
it,
we
can
have
alternative
response
teams.
F
You
know
those
are
those
are
the
biggest
parts
of
the
of
the
budget
other
than
the
staff
cost
of
living
increases
and
those
alternative
response
models
are
things
that
we
all
unanimously
supported
and
they're
things
that
overwhelmingly
the
public
on
on
all
sides
of
the
policing
issue
like
people
on
all
sides
of
the
policing
issue,
came
forward
and
said
that
they
wanted
even
our
police
they're
saying
we
can't.
We
can't
answer
all
of
these
calls.
F
We
can't
do
the
work
that
a
lot
of
these
calls
are
asking
us
to
do,
because
we're
just
police
officers
and
a
lot
of
these
calls
are
not
crimes,
so
it
was
like
I
was
trying
to
say
earlier
in
this
meeting,
like
those
calls
aren't
going
to
it's
not
like
we're
creating
this
new
government
program
to
accommodate
those
calls.
Those
calls
are
already
coming.
Those
calls
are
going
to
continue
to
come
and
the
only
way
that
we
can
better
respond
to.
F
Those
calls
is
by
adding
these
alternative
response
models
that
we've
that
we've
talked
about
and
the
ones
that
we're
adding
I'll
say
this
as
well.
A
lot
of
them
are
programs
they're,
not
exactly
new
they're
things
that
we've
been
working
on
in
the
city.
They
were,
they
were
evolving,
but
they
have
their
origins
before
2020,
and
so
these
are
programs
that
we've
grown
to
fit
the
changing
needs
of
salt
lake
city
and
we've
been
collecting
data
on
them
since
that
time,
the
ones
that
are
brand
new
are
yeah.
We
are
looking
at
making.
F
You
know
real
systemic
change
to
the
way
that
we
respond
to
emergencies,
which
I
think
is
our
our
number
one
charge
as
council
members
is
safety,
public
safety
and
to
answer
those
calls
both
literally
and
figuratively,
and
get
the
right
people
connected
to
the
right
emergency
to
solve
the
problem
and
and
both
in
the
short
term
and
the
long
term
get
those
people
connected
to
the
right
resources.
H
I've
talked
about
this
individually
with
most
of
you,
this
to
me,
isn't
a
tax
increase.
This
is
us
being
in
the
crosshairs
of
a
really
precarious
moment
in
our
shared
history,
where
we're
adjusting
and
doing
what
needs
to
be
done
to
maintain
the
reasonable
level
of
service.
For
this,
and
so
again,
I
am
a
single
mom
who
lives
paycheck
to
paycheck,
who
is
pricing
herself
out
of
a
housing
market.
So
none
of
this
is
abstract
or
or
hypothetical
to
me,
these
are
very
real
things.
H
My
constituents
seem
to
respond
to,
and
my
message
to
them
has
been
that,
whatever
trust
they
place
in
us,
as
symbolically
held
by
this,
this
tax
increase,
we
will
make
sure
every
dollar
does
the
work
that
it
is
supposed
to
do.
And
I
think
for
me,
that's
the
that's
the
line
and
that's
why
we
have
to
acknowledge
that
as
our
city
grows,
the
mechanism
of
our
government
has
to
grow.
To
respond
to
it.
A
E
Sorry,
it
took
me
a
second
to
click.
I
appreciate
you
recognizing
that
I
asked
for
time.
Sorry
it's
it's
hard
to
call
people's
attention
from
here,
but
again
it
is
not
it's
never
easy
to
to
to.
E
But
saying
no
to
the
tax
increase
again,
and
I'm
going
to
reiterate
this,
because
I
think
this
group
has
worked
on
this
council
staff
has
worked
very
hard
on
on
asking
the
hard
questions,
but
voting
not
supporting
this
tax
increase
means
not
supporting
our
city
employees.
It
means
no,
no
keeping
a
savings
account
for
our
lawsuits,
a
key.
It
means
no
supporting
our
deferred
maintenance
and
our
staff
with
with
the
with
the
extra
work
they're
doing
it
means
not
doing
traffic
mitigation.
E
It
means
not
supporting
our
ims
with
the
the
bigger
threat
of
of
cyber
attacks.
It
means
not
supporting
our
growing
city
with
more
firefighters.
It
also
means
not
supporting
our
victim
alternative
response
to
policing
and
our
you
know
all
the
other
amazing
work
that
this
council
has
done
before
I
join
in.
It
also
means
not
supporting
our
parks
and
our
open
space,
and
I
wish
I
could
find
the
millions
dollars
that
we
we
have
that
we
have
to
make.
E
But
you
know
I
I
haven't,
and
I
think
I
believe
that
this
is
a
solid
budget,
and
this
is
why
I
support
it
and
again,
like
cancer
member
peter
mentioned.
This
is
not
an
easy
thing
to
do,
but
our
neighbors
and
I
speak
for
for
the
neighbors
in
in
my
part
of
town,
want
the
city
more
visible
and
they
want
to
see
things
and
this
budget
does
that
it
keeps
up
with
the
growth
that
we're
seeing
and
it.
It
addresses
the
issues
that
they're
asking
me
to
do.
So.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
and
I
appreciate
everyone's
comments
on
this
issue
and
I
also
appreciate
the
staffs
24
hours
a
day
response
to
all
our
questions
and
concerns
and
issues.
So
heartfelt
thanks
for
you
guys
we're
going
to
continue
on
our
wherever
we
are
jennifer
all.
A
B
We
do,
and
you
know
we
can
spend
as
much
or
as
little
time
on
this
as
you
guys
want,
but
we
haven't
gotten
to
discuss
legislative
intents
yet,
and
staff
always
takes
a
crack
at
them
just
based
on
your
guys's
discussion.
But
obviously
the
final
wording
is
up
to
you
and
the
final
list
is
up
to
you,
and
so
I
don't
know
if
you
want
me
to
kind
of
go
through
them
and
just
say,
edits,
welcome
or.
A
Let's
go
through,
but
I
just
want
to
make
one
public
announcement
we're
going
to
have
a
close
session
after
this
discussion.
We
have
a
topic
to
discuss:
hey
yeah,
go
ahead,
jennifer
with
the
team
and.
B
B
So
the
first
legislative
intent
is
probably
the
biggest
one
evaluating
the
efficiencies
of
all
of
the
very
diversified
response
teams.
B
I
think
that
we've
discussed
this
ad
nauseam,
so
I
would
just
say:
let
us
know
if
this
wording
works
and
sorry
I
should
say
this
is
starting
on
page
five
of
the
staff
report
included
in
this
legislative
intent
is
asking
the
administration
to
provide
specific
information
at
six
months
and
at
one
year
so
that
the
council
can
evaluate,
and
it's
that
list
under
b,
so
clarifying
the
roles
of
each
team
and
how
call
for
services
routed
from
one
to
another
track
as
much
data
as
possible.
B
So
to
council
member
peter
eschler's
point
about
metrics.
We
don't
because
these
teams
are
are
literally
being
created
right
now.
I
think
that
it's
fair
to
say
that
we
don't
know
what
data
we
need,
and
so
I
threw
it
out
there
that
we
want
to
track
all
of
it
so
that
we
can
refine
in
future
years
what
metrics
make
sense
to
kind
of
continue
tracking
and
then
find
ways
to
share
this
data
with
the
public
and
council
in
a
coordinated
way
and
inform
the
public
and
other
levels
of
government.
B
As
these
programs
are
rolled
out.
One
of
the
things
that
I
think
we're
surprised
is
how
little
other
levels
of
government
the
state
the
county
especially
know
about
what
we're
doing,
because
we
don't
often
tell
our
story
and
so
just
making
that
a
concerted
effort.
So
if
council's
generally
good
with
that,
okay
great.
A
B
Sorry,
it's
because
I'm
sharing
the
screen.
Okay,
these
next
few
items
were
raised
in
recent
discussions,
and
so
this
is
just
sort
of
a
random
collection
of
legislative
intents.
One
is
for
free
fare
in
the
winter
months.
I
believe
this
was
councilmember,
dugan's
suggestion
and
maybe
I'll
just.
B
B
So,
free
fair
in
the
winter
months
asking
the
administration
to
build
on
the
success
of
last
year,
expediting
traffic,
calming
projects
asking
the
administration
to
evaluate
the
workflow,
among
can
and
public
services,
to
identify
bottlenecks
and
return
to
the
council
with
suggestions,
this
references,
the
sustainability
holding
account.
So
there
were
a
couple
of
items
that
the
council
wanted
to
have
additional
conversations
with
sustainability
before
releasing
funds,
and
this
kind
of
talks
about
that.
It
also
references
the
discussion
that
the
council
had
about
what
role
sustainability
plays
in
the
community.
B
The
next
one
came
up
recently
an
ombudsman
for
tenants
that
is
the
intent
of
the
council
to
ask
the
administration
to
display
explore
the
addition
of
a
tenants
ombudsman
in
the
good
landlord
program.
Given
the
increase
in
the
rental
renter
population
in
the
city,
it's
not
necessarily
committing
to
adding
it,
because,
obviously
that
would
mean
money
a
lot
more
money,
but
it
would
be
helpful
to
have
the
information.
B
And
I
should
say:
we've
asked
the
attorney's
office
for
kind
of
a
review
to
make
sure
we're
not
accidentally
stepping
over
the
line
of
administrative
authority.
So
most
of
these
are
requests
of
the
administration,
and
then
the
administration
will
either
come
back
to
us
with
information
or
a
response.
B
B
The
next
is
grants
and
ongoing
programs.
So
looking
at
the
extent
to
which
programs
in
the
past
have
been
created
with
grants
where
costs
have
continued
beyond
the
life
of
the
grant
to
inform
a
future
policy
for
evaluating
when
and
whether
it's
appropriate
for
the
city
to
create
new
programs
with
grants.
I
don't
know
if
that
captures
that.
G
I
have
a
question
on
this
one:
do
you
do
we
want
to
make
the
wording
even
stronger
and
say
that
the
legislative
intent
is
that
we
produce
an
ordinance
about?
Is
this
something
that
you
imagine
having
an
actual
ordinance
that
governs
when
grant
money
can
be
used
or.
C
It
gets
a
little
difficult
to
anticipate
things
in
an
ordinance,
so
it
might
be
end
up
to
be
like
policy
language
you
could
use
or
you
could
develop
it
later
into
an
ordinance.
You
could
do
a
resolution
so
first
looking
at
it
might
be
the.
F
K
Cindy
said
is
just
getting
that
information
and-
and
you
know
like
we
did
an
ordinance
about
one
of
the
grants
with
military
grade
equipment
right,
and
so
I
think,
if
it
seems
that
there
is
an
ordinance
that
could
develop
out
of
it.
Maybe
but
first
I
think
it's
just
really
it's
more
of
a
policy
discussion
for
me.
B
B
I
A
H
A
H
G
I
mean,
I
think
we
could
also
make
it
as
specific
as
just
we
want
somebody
to
go
through
and
look
at
the
whole
list
of
cip
projects
and
just
keep
it
to
cip
this
year
and
tell
us
which
ones
are
going
to
save
water
and
which
one
aren't.
My
thought
is
that
okay,
we're
moving
towards
this
program-based
budgeting
and
we
had
all
these
columns,
equity
and
air
quality.
G
I
think
water's
conservation
should
be
one
of
those
columns
in
the
program
based
budgeting
matrix,
but
we
don't
have
that
yet
for
everyone
in
the
city,
so
I
thought
was.
Maybe
we
just
do
that
for
the
cip,
but
that
was
really
more
connected
to
councilmember
pulley's
thoughts,
and
so
it's
a
little.
It.
C
They
may
be
doing
a
lot
already
and
they
may
be
planning
to
do
more,
and
so
it
you
know
certainly
you'd
want
to
know
that
it
wouldn't
probably
be
extra,
it's
possible,
it
wouldn't
be
extra
work
for
them.
It
might
be
just
something
that
they
can
share
with
you
and
it
might
inform
your
other
choices
that
you're
making.
So
it
can
be
a
little
bit
broad
and
then
the
administration
will
help
define
it
and
they
come
back
to
you
pretty
early
in
the
coming
year
to
say:
here's
what
we
understand
from
this
intent.
K
Can
I
add
something
to
you
sure
I
think
it's
important
and
I
just
for
maybe
some
of
the
newer
council
members
that
you
know
legislative
intents
are
not
binding
on
anything
and
that
we
can't
like
demand
that
they
do
what
we
say
in
a
legislative
intent.
K
The
administration
is
awesome
at
actually
following
through,
with
a
lot
of
our
legislative
intents
and
trying
them,
and
every
year
with
our
budget,
we
go
through
the
past
legislative
intents
to
modify
them,
keep
them
get
rid
of
them,
see
what
we've
done
with
them,
and
so
you
know
this
isn't
the
first
or
the
last
time
that
we
will
see
right
these
legislative
intents,
and
so
we
can
always.
You
know
it
doesn't
take
much
to
come
back
and
be
like
ooh.
That's
not
working
the
way.
I
thought
it
was
going
to
work.
B
Think
so
I
typed
I
figured
so.
A
B
A
B
B
Item
is
clarifying
the
role
of
community
and
neighborhoods
and
rda
as
it
relates
to
housing
and
land
development.
This
is
ongoing
work
and
I
know
the
departments
are
continuing
to
work
on
it.
The
next
is
transition
to
chemical
free
public
lands.
It
is
the
intent
of
the
council
to
ask
public
lands
and
golf
to
transition
to
chemical,
free
treatments
for
weeds
and
maintenance
in
future
years.
Acknowledging
that
this
may
include,
let's
see
I'll,
say
needed
budget
adjustments
see
I'm
editing
still.
B
B
Next
is
additional
information
and
metrics
on
police
response
and
governmental
immunity.
This
is
almost
one.
This
is
one
of
those
legislative.
Intents
that's
like
on
ourselves
to
keep
ourselves
remembering
what
we
said.
We
would
do
it's
the
intent
of
the
council
to
reengage
the
council's
consultant
on
police
to
see
if
there
are
ways
to
be
more
specific
about
minimum
performance
expectations,
particularly
as
it
relates
to
as
it
ties
to
the
city's
requirement
to
provide
legal
defense
for
employees.
B
Does
that
make
sense?
The
next
is
governmental
immunity
claims,
it's
the
intent
of
the
council
to
consider
retaining
a
consultant
to
examine
whether
and
how
other
cities
have
tied
legal
settlements,
to
departments
where
the
claim
originated,
and
the
purpose
would
be
to
inform
safety
programming
in
various
departments.
That's
what
that's!
What
kind
of
insurance
companies
would
do
right
is
use
those
experiences
to
inform
what
training
extra
training
might
be
needed.
B
The
next
are
there
were
a
couple
of
intents
that
related
to
the
fire
department,
so
I
grouped
those
asking
the
administration
to
evaluate
options
for
recouping
costs
for
calls
at
the
university
of
utah
understanding
that
the
administration
will
not
be
able
to
control
that
one
necessarily.
It
would
be
a
conversation
like
the
state
level,
but
just
putting
it
out
there
asking
the
administration
to
evaluate
the
city's
hazardous
materials,
ordinance
and
implementation
of
that
ordinance
to
capture
revenue
and
then
asking
the
administration
to
continue
evaluating
options
for
electrified
fire
vehicles.
B
This
is
actually
a
good
example
of
something
that
the
department
is
already
doing,
but
the
reason
it's
nice
to
have
it
in
a
legislative
intent
is
because
it
documents
that
it
sort
of
lends
extra
support
for
that
department
to
keep
doing
that.
That
the
council
is
in
fact
interested
in
understanding
how
you
can
do
that.
G
B
Would
be,
it
would
be
more
like
if
the
fire
department
responds
to
a
chemical
spill
at
a
business,
a
manufacturing
business,
making
sure
that
our
ordinance
is
implemented
to
recover
costs
from
that
business,
because
our
ordinance
allows
us
to
recover
costs.
C
And
also
there's
there's
in
the
past,
when
we've
looked
at
it,
there's
money
being
left
on
the
table,
because
that
could
go
to
defer
the
taxpayers
expense
because
a
lot
of
times
the
insurance
anticipates
covering
some
of
those
costs,
especially
if
in
certain
categories
of
expense,
so
so
the
city
could
be,
could
take
advantage
of
of
that.
G
C
B
The
next
item
is
asking
the
administration
for
a
time
frame
about
the
boarded
building
fee,
then
asking
the
administration
to
ensure
that
anytime,
the
city
is
loaning
or
granting
tax
dollars.
That
opmah
is
followed,
and
I
know
that
the
attorney's
office
and
recorder's
office
are
working
with
the
various
city
departments
on
this
anyway.
But
it's.
This
is
again
one
of
those
issues
to
just
document
that
it's
an
interest
and
to
continue
work
on
it.
B
Then
the
next
section
is
conditional
appropriations,
which
is
maybe
the
way
to
think
about.
It
is
like
one
step
stronger
than
a
legislative
intent,
because
it
means
that
money
does
not
get
released
until
the
condition
is
met.
Essentially,
so
the
first
line
item
is
relating
to
a
couple
of
sustainability
items,
which
is
that
funds
will
only
be
released
after
the
department
returns
with
rp
rfps
or
draft
scope
documents
to
the
council
and
that
departments.
B
B
I
think
that's
where
the
issue
is
raised,
so
maybe
we
can
clarify
if
it's
just
sustainability
or
all
departments.
B
Think
the
issue
with
making
it
all
departments,
though
sorry
just
thinking
of
it,
is
that
then
you
would
have
no
way
to
meet
the
condition
like
then
every
department's
money
would
all
be
held.
So
contingent
appropriations
are
just
more
difficult
because,
like
finance
needs
to
be
able
to
say
this
condition
is
met.
So
maybe
maybe
that's
a
legislative
intent.
C
Or
we
what
we?
Yes,
we
could
do
that
or
we
could
also
we've
been
thinking
of
coming
back
to
you
with
some
amendments
to
the
ordinance
that
requires
the
departments
to
check
in
on
master
plans.
C
B
B
The
next
item
is
any
appropriation
relating
to
capital
expenditure
for
the
airport.
Sorry,
I
should
say
any
appropriation
relating
to
capital
expenditures
on
parking
lot
is
contingent
upon
the
airport,
consulting
with
uta
and
reporting
back
to
the
council
on
expanding
transit
opportunities
in
lieu
of
creating
additional
employee
parking.
B
Right,
but
relating
to
capital
expenditures
on
and
I'm
going
to
add
the
word
employee
parking
lots
instead
of
just
parking
lots.
Okay
thanks!
I.
H
K
B
All
right,
then,
the
next
item-
and
I
realized
we
didn't-
have
a
chance
to
work
with
the
administration
on
this
yet
to
identify
which
specific
aspect
of
the
police
budget,
but
that
the
council
make
adoption
of
that
portion
of
the
police
budget
contingent
on
having
the
city's
crime
map
back
on
the
city's
website.
C
No,
I
think
we
would
need
to
coordinate
with
the
administration
on
that
it.
The
crime
map
that
shows
the
hot
spots
so
to
speak,
isn't
right
now
being
published
or
created.
Perhaps,
and
so
there
were
council
members
who
were
saying
they
really
would
like
that.
The
chief's
response
was
that
it
could
be
one
of
the
things
that
the
new
data
analyst
person
does,
but
but
there's
so
many
things
that
are
being
expected
of
that
person
and-
and
this
is
probably
a
pretty
quick
fix.
C
So
if
you
wanted
it
done
sooner
rather
than
later,
because
I
know
you
have
constituents
asking
for
it,
then
you
could
just
say
you
can't
access
this
little
piece
of
your
budget
unless
you
get
that
taken
care
of
one
is
contingent
on
the
other,
so
it
just
depends
how
strongly
you
feel
about
it.
If
you,
if
you
don't
feel
strongly
about
it,
then
you
wouldn't
need
to.
You
can
do
an
intent
instead
of
a
contingent
appropriation.
C
A
E
E
The
maps
are
very
useful
for
that
for
the
police
as
well
right
now,
we
only
have
a
list
of
calls
on
the
webs
and
the
police
website,
and
it's
also
about
transparency,
and
I
think
it's
a
duty
to
to
the
to
the
public
to
show
this.
I
feel
very
strongly
about
it
and
I
believe
the
chief
told
me
that
they're
gonna
do
it,
so
I
I
I
believe
to
it
would
be
good
to
add
a
contingency
and
I
I
don't
think
that
will
hurt
them
in
any
way.
B
Okay,
the
next
item:
I
stopped
sharing
the
screen,
because
this
contingency
has
appeared
every
year
that
the
council
has
done
funding
our
future
and
it's
just
to
essentially
commit
ourselves
to
the
thing
we
originally
told
the
public
that
we
would
do
comply
with
the
fiscal
procedures
act
be
transparent
with
the
data.
The
one
change
that
we
made
this
year
was
instead
of
saying
specifically
that
the
administration
can
only
spend
funds
in
the
four
critical
need
areas.
We
took
out
the
word
four,
because
now
there
are
five
and
it's
still
it.
B
I
think
that
the
the
first
year
that
this
contingency
was
adopted,
there
was
a
lot
of
unknowns
about
sort
of
what
the
administration
would
put
into
place
to
be
transparent,
and
I
think
it's
fair
to
say
that
the
staff
in
the
city
have
really
gone
above
and
beyond
in
terms
of
being
transparent
and
have
a
whole
dashboard
and
website
focused
on
this,
and
so
I
think
that
we're
in
decent
shape
on
this
one,
but
just
to
hold
ourselves
accountable
each
year
staff
recommends
that
we
adopt
this
contingency
each
year.
K
K
And
then
administration
will
sort
of
decide
the
percentage
it
gets
out
of
it
or
if
we're
whatever
projects,
as
that
continues
right
and.
B
And
there
are
known,
are,
none,
sorry,
are
no
percentages,
and
so
it's
kind
of
up
to
the
council
and
administration
each
year
sort
of
how
those
buckets
get
divvied.
A
B
We
we
listed
it
if
you
wanted
to
have
that
discussion.
Another
thing
on
that
agenda
is
previous
year's
legislative.
Intents
we've
listed
it
as
a
written
briefing
because
if
you
want
to
just
read
through
it
and
are
okay
with
staff's
recommendations
about
which
ones
to
keep
open,
which
ones
to
close
we're
happy
to
just
say,.
A
I
think
I'm
just
checking
the
swelling
in
the
brain,
yes
yeah.
I
think
this
would
be
a
good
time
to
take
a
ten
minute
break
and
then
come
back
for
the
closed
session.
At
that
point,
right
is
that
yeah?
We
should
do
that
now,
so
we
can
take
the
get
prepared
for
that.
So
mostly
for
this
closed
session.
Mr.
K
A
A
Yes
and
I'm
a
usf
passage
unanimously,
senator
zero,
we'll
come
back
in
at
three
o'clock.
B
And
for
council
members,
wharton
and
pui
just
plan
on
staying
on
this
same
webex
link.