>> GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME TO THE OCTOBER 22, 2025, MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION. MY NAME IS STEVE BRANDT AND I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD. BEFORE WE BEGIN THE MEETING, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE
CLERK TO READ THE REMINDER TO SPEAKERS REGARDING TREATING OUR CAPTIONERS WITH KINDNESS. >> BEFORE WE BEGIN THE MEETING, I WANT TO OFFER A FRIENDLY REMINDER TO ALL MEMBERS, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC THAT THESE MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE TO
ENABLE GREATER PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. THESE BROADCASTS INCLUDE REAL-TIME CAPTIONING AS A FURTHER METHOD TO INCREASE THE ACCESSIBILITY OF OUR PROCEEDINGS TO THE COMMUNITY. THEREFORE, ALL SPEAKERS NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF THE RATE OF THEIR SPEECH SO THAT OUR CAPTIONERS CAN FULLY CAPTURE
AND TRANSCRIBE ALL COMMENTS FOR THE BROADCAST. WE ASK ALL SPEAKERS TO MODERATE THE SPEED AND CLARITY OF THEIR COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU. WE'LL NOW ASK THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL TO ASCERTAIN THE PRESENCE OF A
QUORUM. >> MEMBER FREY IS ABSENT. ABENE. >> PRESENT. >> PAYNE. >> PRESENT. >> CHUGHTAI IS ABSENT. VICE PRESIDENT PREE-STINSON. >> PRESENT. >> PRESIDENT BRANDT. >> PRESENT. >> THERE ARE FOUR MEMBERS PRESENT.
>> LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE A QUORUM WITH US TODAY. I WILL NOW OFFER AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT WE MEET TODAY ON LAND OF THE DAKOTA AND OJIBWE. AND WE WILL NOW PROCEED TO OUR AGENDA, A COPY OF WHICH
WAS POSTED FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, WHICH IS AVAILABLE AT LIMS.MINNEAPOLISMN.GOV. BOARD
MEMBERS, THE AGENDA FOR TODAY'S MEETING IS BEFORE US. MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT. >> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> THOSE OPPOSED NAY. OKAY. NEXT
IS THE ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES FROM THE SEPTEMBER 17, 2025, MEETING. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES? >> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A PROPER MOTION BEFORE US. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE.
>> OPPOSED. OKAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MINUTES ARE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. WE'LL NOW PROCEED TO ITEM 4 ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS THE ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC COMMENT. AND WANTED TO CHECK WITH THE CLERK WHETHER WE HAVE
ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO TESTIFY TODAY ON AN ITEM BEFORE US ON THE AGENDA. AND IT APPEARS WE DO NOT. JUST WANT TO REMIND THE PUBLIC THAT ANY ITEM ON THE BOARD'S AGENDA FOR THAT DAY IS FAIR GAME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME DOWN TO THE
MEETING AND SIGN UP OR SEND US AN EMAIL. SO WE'LL CONTINUE WITH THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA WHICH IS ONE WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR FOR SOME TIME WITH GREAT ANTICIPATION, SPEAKING FOR MYSELF AT LEAST. IT'S THE
ALTERNATIVE REVENUES INVESTIGATION PRESENTATION. WE HAVE ANDREW HAWKINS, THE DIRECTOR OF THE LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT OFFICE OF THE COUNCIL OR CLERK TO GIVE THE PRESENTATION. PROCEED PLEASE,
MR. HAWKINS. WELCOME. >> THANK YOU. AND GOOD MORNING, PRESIDENT BRANDT, VICE PRESIDENT PREE-STINSON, AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND TAXATION. THIS IS MY FIRST OPPORTUNITY TO MEET AND SHARE THE WORK WITH YOU ALL. I'M EXCITED TO BE HERE AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. TODAY WE'RE GOING
TO COVER A REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF CITY REVENUES, NATIONAL LANDSCAPES, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES. THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE PRESENTATION THAT WAS GIVEN AND SHARED WITH THE BUDGET COMMITTEE ON MONDAY. HOWEVER, BASED ON SOME OF THE FEEDBACK ON THAT MEETING AND NOTES I MADE IN ADVANCE OF THAT
PRESENTATION, THIS ONE CONTAINS A LITTLE BIT OF THAT IS FOLDED IN. IT'S GOING TO GENERALLY BE COVERING THE SAME SCOPE. JUST WANTED TO EDIT FOR CONTENT AND CLARITY. SO TO START OFF WITH
LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND, AGAIN, FROM LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT, IT'S IMPORTANT TO US THAT EVERYBODY HAS A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT BROUGHT US HERE TODAY. OBVIOUSLY WITH CITY COUNCIL, STAFF DIRECTION THAT WE RECEIVED AT THE END OF 2024, THAT WAS WHEN WE WERE IN RESPONSE TO ON MONDAY. HOWEVER,
WHAT BRINGS US HERE TODAY IS THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION VERBAL CONVERSATIONS GOING BACK TO SEPTEMBER 18, 2024, WHERE THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE NEED TO EXPLORE ALTERNATIVE REVENUES AND IDENTIFY IF THERE WERE ESSENTIALLY ANY LEVERS THAT THE CITY WASN'T EXPLORING TO
BRING ANY ADDITIONAL REVENUE STREAMS AND PRODUCE ALLIANCE ON PROPERTY TAX ALONE. SO TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE CONTEXT FOR HOW THESE MATERIALS ARE BEING
DELIVERED, JUST TO HELP LEVEL SET TO MAKE SURE WE KNOW WHAT THE TIMELINE LOOKS GOING FORWARD. WHAT YOU'RE RECEIVING RIGHT NOW BOTH THIS PRESENTATION AND THE PRELIMINARY REPORT FROM GUIDEHOUSE ARE PART OF WHAT WE'RE CALLING PHASE ONE. THESE MATERIALS ARE BROKEN UP INTO TWO
DIFFERENT PHASES IN ORDER TO ALLOW LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT TO DELIVER CERTAIN PIECES AT AN EARLIER DATE. WITH THE IDEA BEING A, MORE IS ALWAYS BETTER. B, THAT WOULD ALLOW THE CITY COUNCIL AND BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION TO IDENTIFY ANY POTENTIAL FOCUS
PRIORITIES THAT THEY WANT TO SEE EXPANDED IN THE FINAL REPORT. RIGHT NOW WE'RE AIMING TO DELIVER IN NOVEMBER. SO WITH THAT SAID, THE PRIMARY FOCUS OF THIS PRESENTATION IS GOING TO BE AN OVERVIEW OF THE CITY TAX AND REVENUE LANDSCAPE, INCLUDING
PROPERTY TAX, TRANS AND ALLOCATIONS. LOOKING AT SOURCES OF REVENUE. UNDERSTANDING HOW DEPARTMENTS RECEIVE FUNDING THROUGH DIFFERENT REVENUE SOURCES. TALKING THROUGH THE CHALLENGES AND LIMITATIONS THAT THE CITY IS CURRENTLY FACING WITH REGARD TO REVENUE. GENERATION OF REVENUE AND HOW
REVENUE IS COLLECTED. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPARABLE CITIES TO IDENTIFY SIMILARITIES, DIFFERENCES AND OPPORTUNITIES. LOOKING AT HOW GEOGRAPHIC CITIES ARE USED TO STANDARDIZED THE
DATA SO THERE IS SOME DEGREE OF COMPARABILITY OVER TIME. THE CITY COULD CONSIDER THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN OPERATION BY SOME OF THESE COMPARABLE CITIES. LOOKING AT THE CHALLENGES AND BARRIERS TO SPECIFIC OPTIONS. SORRY. DOUBLE UP MYSELF THERE.
AGAIN, CHALLENGES AND BARRIERS, SPECIFIC OPTIONS, AND THEN RECOGNIZING THAT IN NOVEMBER, GUIDEHOUSE AND LRO ARE GOING TO BE PRODUCING A FINAL REPORT. SPEAKING TO THAT FINAL REPORT, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING -- WE
ARE CALLING PHASE 2. THIS IS KIND OF AN IDEA FOR WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW BASED ON CONVERSATIONS. EXPAND AN ANALYSIS OF PRIORITY OPTIONS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED EITHER THROUGH THE MEETING MONDAY, CONVERSATIONS THROUGH ELECTED OFFICIALS OR THE MEETING TODAY.
WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH THOSE OPTIONS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED IS TO DO A DEEPER DIVE ON ADDITIONAL DATA, FEASIBILITY, POTENTIAL IMPACT. WHETHER IT'S POSITIVE. MODELING WHAT THE IMPLEMENTATION STRUCTURE AND
TIMELINE FOR THOSE VARIOUS ITEMS SHOULD THE CITY WANT TO CONTINUE EXPLORATION ANY FURTHER. ADDITIONALLY, JUST BEING ABLE TO DO THOSE HIGH LEVEL ESTIMATES FOR WHAT THE ACTUAL MONETARY IMPACT WOULD BE FOR THE CITY FROM THE PRIORITIZED OPTIONS, AND THEN BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE A
CATEGORIZED BREAKDOWN. EXAMPLES FOR WHAT -- EASE OF FEASIBILITY. LOW HANGING FRUIT FIRST TO WHAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE US TO GO TO THE STATE AND CHANGES FROM
THE LEGISLATURE. TAX, FEE, FROM SOME OTHER KIND OF REVENUE STREAM. AND THEN THERE'S ALSO THE OPTION TO BE ABLE TO CATEGORIZE BY REVENUE GENERATION. DO WE WANT TO START WITH WHATEVER OUR BIGGEST REVENUE GENERATOR WOULD BE OR DO WE WANT TO START SMALL AND THEN
GO FROM THERE. AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PLENTY OF OPTIONS AND WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO BREAK THOSE OUT. ALL RIGHT. GETTING INTO THE PROPERTY TAX LANDSCAPE. WHILE THE FOCUS OF THIS
PRESENTATION IS ALMOST EXPLICITLY ON WHAT OTHER OPTIONS DO WE HAVE OUTSIDE OF PROPERTY TAX, I FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO COVER THIS IN SOME CAPACITY. IT'S OBVIOUSLY THE SUBJECT THAT'S BROUGHT US HERE. BUT I THINK UNDERSTANDING WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE AND HOW THIS IS
DISTRIBUTED IS STILL A VALUABLE ITEM OF INFORMATION TO COVER. WHAT MINNEAPOLIS IS EXPERIENCING RIGHT NOW WITH PROPERTY TAX, I THINK THE GENERAL INCREASE THAT WE'RE SEEING. OBVIOUSLY THE CHART ON THE RIGHT THAT'S PULLED
FROM THE BUDGET DIVISIONS 26CSL THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THIS BODY. PROJECTIONS HAVE INCREASING TO OVER 50% AND CONTINUING TO INCREASE OVER TIME. AS I MENTIONED, THAT'S THE TREND THAT WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT ALONE. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE SEEING
NATIONWIDE REGARDLESS OF THE STATE, LOCATION OR GEOGRAPHY. A LOT OF CITIES ARE RELIANT ON PROPERTY TAXES AS ONE OF THEIR PRIMARY SOURCES OF REVENUE. THESE INCREASES ARE BEING FELT ACROSS THE COUNTRY, ESPECIALLY RECOGNIZING OUR CURRENT
LANDSCAPE AS FUNDING IS BEING LIMITED OR CUT OFF AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. CITIES ARE BECOMING EVEN MORE RELIANT ON REVENUE STREAMS THAT THEY HAVE MORE CONTROL OVER. SO AGAIN, ANOTHER ISSUE FROM PROPERTY TAX AND JUST THE CONTINUED INCREASE
IS THAT CITIES NEED TO ACCOUNT FOR THE ADVERSE IMPACT. ESSENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, HOW HIGH CAN THINGS GO AND HOW MUCH REVENUE IS AVAILABLE TO BE COLLECTED BEFORE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME KIND OF TIPPING POINT. WHETHER THAT'S PROPERTY TAXES BECOME HIGH ENOUGH THAT INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE THE
MOBILITY TO DO SO WILL LOOK TO -- BEGIN LOOKING AT HOUSING ELSEWHERE. IT CREATES FINANCIAL ISSUES. THAT KIND OF CASCADING EFFECT IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE, YOU KNOW, I THINK IN THE, AT LEAST IN THE MINDS OF EVERYBODY AS WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT THIS TREND IS DOING GOING
INTO THE FUTURE. YEAH, LIKE I SAID, ABSENT ADDITIONAL REVENUE SOURCES, WE'RE LOOKING AT PROPERTY TAXES BEING THE BULK OF AT LEAST 50% OR MORE OF THE CITY'S OVERALL REVENUE. WHILE IT'S NOT UNIQUE, IT'S STILL SOMETHING THAT IS A GROWING
CONCERN THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED TO THE EXTENT WE'RE ABLE. LOOKING AT 2025 PROPERTY TAX LEVY BURDEN. I'M SURE WHILE YOU ALL ARE VERY, VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND WHAT THE BREAKDOWN OF PROPERTY TAXES LOOK LIKE. A LOT OF TIMES WHEN THEY GET THE BILL AND IT SHOWS MINNEAPOLIS SPECIFIC PROPERTY TAX, THE ASSUMPTION IS THAT'S JUST THE AMOUNT GOING TO THE CITY. HOWEVER, AGAIN, AS YOU KNOW, YOUR POSITION TO KNOW MORE
THAN MOST. IT'S BROKEN UP. 80% GOES TO CITY RESPONSIBLE ITEMS. 1776. IT GOES TO MINNEAPOLIS PARK BOARD. JUST UNDER 1% IS WITH THE PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY. 0.2% ACTUALLY GOES TO THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND
TAXATION, SO TO YOURSELVES. THE REASON IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THIS IS BECAUSE NOT ONLY ARE THERE MULTIPLE ENTITIES THAT ARE LEVYING, THAT ARE ABLE TO LEVY A PROPERTY TAX AGAINST RESIDENTS OR INDIVIDUALS VISITING THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, BUT EVEN
MINNEAPOLIS SPECIFIC PART OF PROPERTY TAX IS DIVIDED AMONGST AGENCIES. THERE'S OFTEN A COMPLEXITY TO THIS THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY RECOGNIZED. ALL RIGHT. NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE IN TO CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS
NON-PROPERTY TAX REVENUE. WE'LL START OFF WITH THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES. I BELIEVE THE COMPLEMENTARY REPORT FROM GUIDEHOUSE IDENTIFIED THIS AS WELL. BUT MINNEAPOLIS IS
EXTREMELY RELIANT ON INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES. THIS CAN INCLUDE FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL. FEDERAL ONE BECAUSE AS DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THOSE FUNDS ARE PROBABLY SOME OF THE MOST VOLATILE. TO THE DEGREE WE SEE
DECREASES, IT'S UNLIKELY WE'RE GOING TO SEE COMPLEMENTARY INCREASES BECAUSE THERE'S TRICKLE DOWN EFFECT. A LOT OF TIMES THE STATE CAN ACT AS A PASSTHROUGH. HIGHEST LEVEL EVERYBODY IS GOING TO NEED TO BE FILLING THEIR GAPS. MOVING INTO THE STATE, WE GET FAIRLY HIGH
VOLUME FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID IS OUR LARGEST AT $71 MILLION IN 2025. AND MUNICIPAL STATE AID $6 MILLION. IT'S NOT AN EXHAUSTIVE LIST, BUT JUST TO GIVE PEOPLE AN EXAMPLE OF SOME
OF THE BUCKETS BEING PULLED FROM. AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANTS. WE HAVE GRANTS THAT GO BACK AND FORTH WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY. $10 MILLION IN COUNTY GRANTS FROM HENNEPIN. MOVING IN
TO AGAIN ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF REVENUE OUTSIDE OF MONEY THAT'S COMING IN FROM THE STATE AND PROPERTY TAXES. THIS IS ONE OF THE FEW AREAS WHERE WE ACTUALLY DO HAVE SOMETHING WE'RE ABLE TO LEVERAGE. SPECIAL USE TAXES IN MINNEAPOLIS. MINNEAPOLIS
ENTERTAINMENT TAX. 3% TAX CITY WIDE. $26.9 MILLION. THIS COVERS THINGS LIKE ADMISSION FEES, LODGING, SALES DURING EVENTS. I FOUND THE CATEGORIES INTERESTING WHETHER OR NOT EVERYBODY ELSE DOES IS GOING TO BE SUBJECTIVE.
THIS IS AGAIN SPORTING EVENTS, CONCERTS, MOVIE THEATERS, PUB GAMES. SOMEHOW DARTS AND
BILL-YARDS ARE TAXES. I'M NOT SURE HOW. -- ATHLETIC HEALTH AND GOLF CLUBS, BOTH THE FEES AND I BELIEVE MEMBERSHIP FEES ARE EXEMPTED/NOT COVERED BY THIS
TAX. NEXT WE GET INTO MINNEAPOLIS LODGING TAXES. CITY WIDE. $8.6 MILLION IN THE 2025 BUDGET WAS A PROJECTION. FLAT 3% ON ROOM RENTAL EXPENSES. ALSO AT THE STATE LEVEL, THE CITY IS
LIMITED TO 6.5%. THE REASON THAT'S NOTED IS FOR THE NEXT SLIDE. THE MAP YOU SEE TO THE RIGHT IS MINNEAPOLIS DOWNTOWN
TAXING AREA. SO ABBREVIATED DTA, 3% TAX THAT APPLIES ON SPECIFIC RESTAURANT OR LIQUOR TAXES WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA CIRCLED IN RED. IN 2025, THE BUDGET PROJECTION FOR THE
RESTAURANT SPECIFIC TAX IS $10.5 MILLION, AND THE LIQUOR TAX WAS 4.5. 3% TAX. RESTAURANTS, 3% ON LIQUOR. IT INCLUDES ALL THE STADIUMS DOWNTOWN. CONVENTION CENTER, US BANK STADIUM. ON THE RIGHT SIDE,
AND I COVERED THIS ON MONDAY AS WELL, WHEN THIS I BELIEVE IT'S A RESULT OF WHEN THIS MAP WAS DRAWN, THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS HAS CONTINUED TO EVOLVE AND CHANGE. ONE OF THE AREAS THAT CONSISTS OF A VERY HIGH
CONGREGATION, I GUESS, HIGH CLUSTERING OF ENTERTAINMENT ENTITIES THAT WOULD BE THE DIRECT SUBJECT OF THIS TAX EXISTS OUTSIDE OF THE BOUNDARIES. AND THAT'S THE NORTH LOOP. AND SO ONE OF THE ISSUES OF THAT CAN POTENTIALLY CREATE OUTSIDE EVEN JUST A REDUCTION IN THE TAXABLE BASE IS THAT IT CAN
CREATE SOME INEQUITIES AS FAR AS HOW BUSINESSES ARE ABLE TO OPERATE OUTSIDE THIS IDENTIFIED AREA. I BELIEVE AGAIN IN RECENT YEARS WE'VE EVEN HAD THEATERS OR MUSIC VENUES OPEN UP OUTSIDE OF
THIS THAT ARE ABLE TO OPERATE AT 3% TAX. HENNEPIN, FIRST AVE ARE ALL GOING TO FALL UNDER THIS. THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF DISPARITY THERE BASED ON WHAT'S HAPPENED SINCE THIS BOUNDARY WAS
DRAWN. LICENSE AND FEE REVENUE. SO THIS IS ONE OF OUR BIGGEST BUCKETS. I THINK PART OF THE REASON IT'S OUR BIGGEST BUCKET IS IT'S ONE OF OUR OWN OPTION. THIS IS SOMETHING WE SEE ACROSS ALMOST ALL CITIES. THE AMOUNT
THEY'RE BRINGING IN IS GOING TO VARY. THIS IS VERY TRADITIONAL CITY DELIVERY OF SERVICES. WE'VE GOT SEWER, WATER WASTE, UTILITIES. ASPHALT MIXES, MATERIALS. LOOKING AT LICENSING AND PERMITS. CITY HAS OVER 600
LICENSES, I BELIEVE. A RANGE OF THINGS FROM NON-BUSINESS LICENSING AND PERMITS. BUILDING, PLANNING, PLUMBING, TO BUSINESS LICENSES WHICH WOULD BE RENTAL HOUSING, LIQUOR, FOOD, BUSINESSES AND AMUSEMENT.
ASSESSMENTS AT $34 MILLION. REPLACEMENT OF WATER LINES. ANY KIND OF IMPROVEMENT THAT BRINGS AN INCREASE TO THE PROPERTY VALUE GENERALLY FALLS UNDER THE CATEGORY OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. ALL RIGHT. GETTING INTO THE FEE
SCHEDULE. ON THE RIGHT, PROPOSED 2026 LICENSE FEE REVISIONS. EVERY YEAR THE CITY GOES THROUGH OUR LICENSE FEES TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT ANYTHING NEEDS TO BE REVISITED, INCREASED, REDUCED. YOU KNOW, BASED ON A COMPARISON OF AGAIN APPLICABLE EXAMPLES. SO THIS WILL GO
THROUGH, AGAIN, A MYRIAD OF BUCKETS. BUT WE HAVE SERVICES AND SALES WHICH YOU KNOW, ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL, INSPECTIONS, TOLLING, LICENSING AND PERMITTING WHICH WILL BE A PLANNED EXAMINATION, PCAR
RELATED FEES. RENTAL HOUSING LICENSING. AND THEN THE ONE I THINK MOST PEOPLE ARE GENERALLY MILIAR WITH IS OUR PARKING LOTS. PARKING LOTS, METERS, PARKING RAMPS, AND THE FEES WE SET FOR THOSE AT A DAILY,
MONTHLY AND EVENT RATE. FOR THIS ONE, I KNOW THIS WAS A SPECIFIC PART OF THE ASK FROM COUNCIL. I DON'T HAVE TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON IT. BUT THE ASK WAS ESSENTIALLY TO IDENTIFY WHAT CITY DEPARTMENTS OR PROGRAMS
WERE FUNDED. WERE IN PART FUNDED BY PROGRAMS, FEES, ADDITIONAL REVENUE SOURCES. THE EASIEST WAY TO DO THAT WAS GOING TO THE BUDGET BOOK AND DEPARTMENTS ON THE GENERAL FUND ONLY. AS YOU CAN SEE AGAIN IT'S ONLY A
HANDFUL NOT RELYING ON SOME KIND OF ADDITIONAL FUND SOURCE, PROPRIETARY FUND. THE ONE CAVEAT I WILL NOTE ON THIS IS ALL THINGS ARE NOT CREATED EQUALLY. FUNDS SPREAD ACROSS, IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE ALL PULLING AT THE
SAME RATE DUE TO FACTORS LIKE PROGRAM SPECIFIC FUNDS GENERATED BY THE CITY'S DEPARTMENTS. THERE ARE CERTAIN DEPARTMENTS AND PROGRAMS THAT CERTAINLY ARE PULLING AT MUCH HIGHER VOLUMES FROM THIS. I KNOW I SPOKE WITH THE CITY CLERK ABOUT THIS WHEN I WAS SURPRISED THAT IT WAS ONE OF
THE ONES ON HERE. I BELIEVE ONE OF THE ONES IT RECEIVES IS THE PRINTING OFFICE FOR CITY HALL LIKE $10,000 OR SO. BUT OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE MUCH BIGGER PROGRAMS IN OPERATION THAT ARE GOING TO BE REFLECTED THE SAME WAY ON THIS CHART. FROM THERE,
WE MOVE INTO THE NATIONAL LANDSCAPE. IF THE FOLLOWING, AGAIN, THREE CITY COMPARISON LOOKS CONFUSING, THAT'S BY
DESIGN. THAT WAS SORT OF MY INTENT. AGAIN, I PROMISE I'LL EXPLAIN IT NOW SO THAT IT ALL MAKES SENSE. BUT THE IDEA BEHIND THIS IS JUST TO SHOW HOW CHALLENGING IT IS TO COMPARE CITIES ACROSS OTHER CITIES AS FAR AS WHERE THEIR REVENUE STREAMS ARE, WHAT FUNDS ARE MOST RELIANT ON BECAUSE THE STRUCTURE
ON THESE CITIES IS FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT. YOU HAVE DIFFERENT REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES AT THE STATE LEVEL. YOU HAVE CITIES THAT ARE COUNTIES. YOU HAVE CITIES THAT HAVE DIFFERENT AUTHORITIES AND DIFFERENT APARTMENTS THAN WE DO IN MINNEAPOLIS. TRYING TO GET A
CLEAR PICTURE OF WHERE WE STACK UP AGAINST OTHER CITIES IS EXTREMELY HARD UNLESS YOU'RE ABLE TO STANDARDIZE THAT DATA IN SOME WAY SHAPE OR FORM. LOOKING AT THIS ONE, THERE'S SOME CATEGORIES THAT DO ALIGN.
LODGING TAX AT $8.6 MILLION. KANSAS CITY HAS THEIR HOTEL TAX AT $36 MILLION. WITH THAT ONE IT JUMPS OUT. OBVIOUSLY THERE'S MORE AT PLAY THERE THAN LOOKING AT IT AS AN APPLES TO APPLES THING. SOMETIMES THERE ARE EXAMPLES YOU CAN PULL OUT THAT
ARE WORTH ADDITIONAL EXPLANATION. KANSAS CITY IS THE 1% CITY EARNINGS TAX. $371 MILLION. YOU WON'T SEE ANYTHING SIMILAR REFLECTED IN OUR SIDE. MOVING OVER TO BOSTON. NET STATE AID. THEY'RE RELIANT ON THAT JUST LIKE WE ARE. ROOM
OCCUPANCY, WHICH I THINK IS THE SAME AS OUR LODGING TAX. $139 MILLION. MOTOR VEHICLE TAX. THAT'S ESSENTIALLY A PASSTHROUGH TAX FROM THE STATE IN LIEU OF PROPERTY TAX. $25 FOR EVERY
$1,000 VALUATION OF VEHICLE THAT'S OWNED AND KEPT IN THE CITY OF BOSTON. ADDITIONALLY LOGAN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT IS WITHIN THE BOSTON CITY LIMITS SO THEY RECEIVE AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX OF $40 MILLION. WHICH IS SOMETHING WE'RE NOT PRIVY TOO.
LASTLY I'LL NOTE THE PILOT PAYMENT. I'LL GET INTO MORE ABOUT WHAT THAT PROGRAM LOOKS LIKE LATER. BOSTON REALIZED JUST ABOUT A DECADE AGO THAT, THEY DIDN'T REALIZE IT, BUT THEY REALIZED THEY NEEDED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. 50% OF THE TAXABLE PROPERTY IN BOSTON WAS
TAX EXEMPT EITHER BECAUSE IT WAS OPERATED BY NONPROFIT OR GOVERNMENT ENTITY. WAITED TO COLLECT SOME REVENUE FROM THOSE ENTITIES THAT ARE EXEMPT FROM TAXES BUT ARE STILL USING CITY
SERVICES. TO GIVE A LITTLE EXPLANATION TO THE NATIONAL LANDSCAPE COMPARISON, AGAIN, THIS ONE A LITTLE COMPLICATED TO DO. I TRIED TO ADD CONTEXT TO IT. YOU HAVE TWO REPORTS. ONE
FROM US, ONE FROM GUIDEHOUSE. I WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK FIRST HAND ABOUT THEIR WORK WHEN THEY COME BACK, WHEN WE DELIVER THEIR REPORT IN NOVEMBER. THAT'S A BIG PART OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT GOING FORWARD. GUIDEHOUSE
REVIEWED. THEY HAVE A LIST OF 10 COMPARABLE CITY, IT INCLUDES MINNEAPOLIS, SO IT'S NINE. LOOK AT OPPORTUNITIES, WHAT DO THE REVENUE SOURCES LOOK LIKE. I MENTIONED ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE.
THE BEST WAY TO KIND OF CONCEPTUALIZE WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE IN CASE PEOPLE HAVEN'T FIGURED IT OUT ALREADY IT'S LOOKING AT GEOGRAPHICAL CITIES. WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE WHEN IT LOOKS AT MINNEAPOLIS, GEOGRAPHIC CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. NOT EXCLUSIVELY MINNEAPOLIS. JUST LIKE WHEN THEY
LOOK AT NEW YORK, IT'S THE GEOGRAPHIC CITY OF NEW YORK, SEATTLE. THE REASON FOR DOING THIS JUST THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT PIECES THAT IN SOME STATES IT WILL BE THE CITY, AND SOME STATES IT WILL BE THE COUNTY. IN OTHER EXAMPLES IT WILL BE THE MET COUNCIL IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR TRANSIT. WHEREAS KANSAS CITY HAS A TRANSIT TAX BECAUSE SOME OF IT FALLS UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE CITY. THE IDEA IS IT ALLOWS YOU TO ACTUALLY MEASURE CITIES BETTER AT LEAST AGAINST EACH OTHER. I THINK THE OTHER REAL VALUE THAT THIS ADDS IS THAT NONE OF THIS
HAPPENS IN A VACUUM. OBVIOUSLY, THIS BOARD, CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AS A WHOLE, ONLY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO IMPACT THE REVENUE COLLECTION AND ANY INCREASES TO THE LEVY ON ITS END. THE ABILITY TO SEE WHETHER
OR NOT IN AREAS, YOU KNOW, AS A WHOLE IS OVERLY RELIANT ON ANY SOURCE OF REVENUE IS SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER BECAUSE WHAT WE DO CAN BE IMPACTED BY WHAT HENNEPIN COUNTY DOES. I THINK THIS DOES GIVE US A BETTER UNDERSTANDING FOR WHERE THOSE MOVING PIECES ARE. WHERE
THEY HAVE ACCESS TO REVENUE THAT WE DON'T. WHILE ALL OF THOSE ARE DIFFERENT ENTITIES THAT HAVE THEIR OWN SCOPE OF CONTROL, GENERALLY THE WAY THAT REVENUES AND TAXES ARE GOING TO WORK, THE POOL THAT THEY'RE PULLING FROM IS GOING TO BE THE SAME. RESIDENTS OF MINNEAPOLIS.
INDIVIDUALS COMING DOWNTOWN FOR SHOWS AND THEATER AND CONCERTS. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT GROUP IS GOING TO DIFFERENTIATE WHERE THE SOURCE IS COMING FROM AS MUCH AS WE ALL MIGHT DIFFERENTIATE WHERE THE SCOPE OF AUTHORITY IS. ALL
RIGHT. JUST TO START BY SUMMARIZING SOME OF THE FINDINGS IN GUIDEHOUSE'S PRELIMINARY REPORT. MINNEAPOLIS IS MORE INDEPENDENT ON INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE AS A SHARE OF ITS TOTAL REVENUE. BUT IT GENERATES
REVENUE PER CAPITA. SINGLE SOURCE REVENUE AS IN REVENUE THE CITY IS IN MORE CONTROL OF. MINNEAPOLIS CAN INCREASE REVENUE GENERATION BY IMPLEMENTING NEW STRATEGIES INSPIRED BY THESE PEER CITIES OR BY ADJUSTING OUR
EXISTING SOURCES. LOOKING AT PROGRAMS THAT MIGHT BE MIRRORED ELSEWHERE AND POTENTIALLY IMPLEMENT ON OUR END. LEADING EXAMPLES OF REVENUE GENERATION STRATEGIES THAT WERE FOUND INCLUDE VARIATIONS OF LAND TRANSFER TAX, INCOME TAX, BUSINESS TAX, CONGESTION
PRICING, EXCISE TAX, PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES AND SERVICE FEES. LASTLY, MINNEAPOLIS IS -- I'M GOING TO EDITORIALIZE -- EXTREMELY DEPENDENT ON PROPERTY TAX REVENUE -- WITHIN THE LIMITS
OF THE STATE LAW. >> [ OFF-MIC COMMENTS ]. >> YEAH. >> FIRST BULLET POINT THERE. >> YEAH. >> WHEN YOU SAY MINNEAPOLIS GENERATES LESS REVENUE PER CAPITA PER ITS PEERS. WAS THAT
FOR -- >> THAT ONE IS FROM THE CITY'S -- I BELIEVE FROM TAXES AND SERVICES AND FEES. I THINK I CAN SPEAK TO IT ON THE NEXT SLIDE. >> GREAT. THANK YOU. >> YUP. ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. SO HIGHLIGHT EXAMPLES OF HOW MINNEAPOLIS IS POSITIONED ACROSS
COMPARABLE CITIES. SO I THINK IT'S THIS FIRST ONE IS PROBABLY GOING TO START TO GET INTO THAT. OF THE 10 CITIES REVIEWED, THE POTENTIAL EXPLANATIONS FOR THIS -- GUIDEHOUSE AND MY CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM AND
RESEARCH ON THE TOPICS ARE GOING TO BE THE POTENTIAL EXPLANATIONS BELOW. ALL OF THOSE ARE GOING TO HAVE THEIR OWN, LEAD TO THEIR OWN SUBSEQUENT QUESTIONS. SO I WANTED TO GIVE AS MUCH CONTEXT AS I COULD HERE. AGAIN, THE RANKING OF NINE SHOULDN'T BE
RECEIVE OR REFLECTED AS BAD. THIS ISN'T A CONTEST TO BE ON THE TOP. POTENTIAL SCOMPLAINTIONS ARE THE NUMBER OF AVAILABLE TAX CATEGORIES IS ONE. THE REASON WE'RE NOT GENERATED AS MUCH REVENUE AS COMPARABLE CITIES, I SAID POTENTIAL, BUT
THIS ONE IS PROBABLY MORE OF CONCRETE. WE JUST HAVE ACCESS TO FEWER REVENUE STREAMS THAN OTHER CITIES DO. IF PROPERTY TAX IS YOUR ONLY TOOL, WE DON'T HAVE INCOME TAX. WE DON'T HAVE LAND TRANSFER TAX. IT'S GOING TO GENERATE LESS REVENUE. AVERAGE PROPERTY VALUES AND INCOME ARE
ALSO GOING TO PLAY A ROLE. IF YOUR INCOME IS LOWER, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT WHAT'S COMING IN. SIMILARLY PROPERTY TAX. IF YOU HAVE EXTREME HIGH PROPERTY VALUE, YOU CAN HAVE MUCH LOWER PERCENTAGE TAX AND YOU'RE GOING TO BRING IN MORE REVENUE PER CAPITA. THERE'S A
LOT THAT CAN COMPLICATE WHAT THAT ACTUALLY IS TELLING US. BUT IT AT LEAST INDICATES BY COMPARISON AND BREAKING IT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO PER CAPITA, CLEARLY THERE'S NOT AS MANY AVENUES THAT WE HAVE TO PURSUE.
GOING TO THE NEXT ONE, MINNEAPOLIS RANKED 10TH IN PER CAPITA REVENUE GENERATED FROM TAXES ALONE. MINNEAPOLIS HAS EXTREMELY LIMITED TAX CATEGORIES AND SOURCES. LIKE WHAT SOME OF THESE OTHER MUNICIPALITIES HAVE
AT THEIR DISPOSAL IS GOING TO BE FAR GREATER THAN THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. UNLESS WE WANT TO INCREASE OUR PROPERTY TAXES TO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW. TRIPLE. WE'RE NOT GOING TO START TO APPROACH WHAT SOME OF THESE CITIES DO BECAUSE WE'RE RELYING
ON THAT SINGLE SOURCE OF TAXES. IT STANDS TO REASON, I ALMOST VIEW THE RANKED 10TH AS IT'S TOUGH TO COMPETE WITH SOME OF THESE CITIES WITH WHAT WE HAVE. WE'RE PLAYING WITH OUR HAND BEHIND OUR BACK. MINNEAPOLIS HAS RELATIVELY HIGHER PROPERTY TAX
RATES COMPARED TO PEER CITIES, WE'RE THIRD OUT OF 10. IN CASE I'M STARTING TO SOUND LIKE A BROKEN RECORD IT'S BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE. PROPERTY TAXES ARE ONE OF OUR FEW TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX. AGAIN, IF YOUR ONLY TOOL IS A HAMMER,
EVERYTHING STARTS TO LOOK LIKE A NAIL. FOR ADDITIONAL CONTEXT AS WELL, JUST TO KIND OF SHOW THERE IS SOME COMPLEXITY TO THIS. BASED ON PROPERTY VALUES, THIS IS WHERE CITIES WITH A LOWER RATE MAY STILL HAVE A HIGHER PROPERTY TAX BILL. SEATTLE'S
RATE OF -- I THINK OURS IS 1.25. SEATTLE'S IS 0.77. IT PRODUCED 6,898 DOLLARS AS A TAX BILL ON A MEDIUM PRICED HOME. THAT
COMPARES WITH MINNEAPOLIS, 4,445 DOLLARS. LOOKING AT THE LEVEL OF THE RATE DOES NOT TELL YOU THE FULL STORY. MINNEAPOLIS WAS FOURTH OUT OF 10 IN PER CAPITA FOR CHARGES FROM PUBLIC SERVICES. ONE OF LARGEST SOURCES
OF REVENUE. -- FEE REVENUES AS ONE OF THE ONLY OTHER REVENUE GENERATING STREAMS THE CITY HAS ACCESS TO OR CONTROL OVER. NEXT,
JUST LOOKING AT THE REVENUE REPORT. WANTED TO PULL OUT SOME OF THE EXAMPLE REVENUE BY GUIDEHOUSE. TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES OF WHAT THOSE LOOK LIKE. THE FIRST BEING TAXES. EXCISE TAX, BUSINESS, LAND
TRANSFER, PILOT, EMPTY HOMES. THERE'S DEFINITELY A RANGE ACROSS. NINE OTHER CITIES THAT WE LOOKED AT. THERE'S NO SHORTAGE OF OPTIONS OUT THERE. JUST TO KIND OF GO INTO EXAMPLES OF THESE. KANSAS CITY HAS 1% EARNING TAX. ANYBODY THAT IS
EMPLOYED AND OPERATES IN THE CITY OF KANSAS CITY. THAT GENERATED $613 PER CAPITA. PHILADELPHIA TRANSFER TAX OF 3.578. THE SALE OF ANY PROPERTIES IN THE MUNICIPALITY
OF PHILADELPHIA. $169 PER CAPITA. DENVER'S 10% FACILITIES EMISSION TAX. I NOTE THAT ONE BECAUSE WE HAVE SOMETHING SIMILAR WITH OUR ENTERTAINMENT TAX. THERE ARE PERCENTAGE TAXES ON EMISSIONS IN OTHER CITIES THAT ARE OPERATING AT A MUCH
HIGHER RATE THAN THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. NEXT WE HAVE CHARGES. EXAMPLES WOULD BE ASSET MONETIZATION. NEW YORK RECENTLY IN SERVICE AND SERVICE FEES. VERY SIMPLE EXAMPLE OF THIS, DENVER INCREASED PARKING METER
FEES FROM $1 TO $2 PER HOUR WHICH BROUGHT IN $11 PER CAPITA. MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE. BOSTON'S TAXES. SO THAT REVENUE WAS $94
PER CAPITA. ESSENTIALLY THE WAY THIS WAS DEVELOPED OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT WERE TAX EXEMPT. SO THE WAY THAT BOSTON AT A VERY HIGH LEVEL, THE WAY THIS WAS IMPLEMENTED WAS TO IDENTIFY THE POTENTIAL TAX LIABILITY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN
DUE HAD THESE INSTITUTIONS OR BUSINESSES NOT BEEN EXEMPT. AND THEN THEY HAVE A FORMULA TO DETERMINE THE PUBLIC BENEFIT. THERE'S A GREAT BENEFIT TO THE EXISTENCE AND OPERATIONS OF HOSPITALS, SCHOOLS, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. SO THEY DIDN'T
WANT TO MAKE ANY -- IMPLEMENT ANYTHING THAT SEEMED TOO PUNITIVE OR SEEM THAT WAS MISSING OUT ON. THE FACT THAT THEY WERE EXEMPT -- WITH THAT CALCULATION THEY'RE ABLE TO TAKE THE PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION. DEDUCT
THAT FROM THE TAX CALCULATION AND THAT LEAVES THEM WITH THEIR PILOT PAYMENT. THE WAY THIS OPERATES, IT'S NOT A TAX BECAUSE IT'S VOLUNTARY. SO THEY MAINTAIN A PUBLIC FACING DASHBOARD THAT SHOWS ALL INSTITUTIONS,
AGENCIES, AND PROGRAMS. WHAT PERCENTAGE OF PAYMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND WHAT PERCENTAGE OF PAYMENT IS OUTSTANDING. I BELIEVE IT COVERS EVERYTHING FROM SCHOOLS, COLLEGES, UNIVERSITIES IN BOSTON. HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS. IT ALSO
COVERS HOSPITALS. I BELIEVE THE BOSTON PHILHARMONIC AND OTHER GROUPS LIKE THAT. PARKS LOCAL OPTION LEVY. THIS WAS 80 CENTS PER $1,000 OF ASSESSED VALUE OF A PROPERTY. THE REVENUE FROM
THAT WAS $82 PER CAPITA. THAT WAS INTENDED TO PROVIDE FOR SPECIFIC PARK IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF PORTLAND. ALL RIGHT.
LASTLY, THE CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES. I NEED TO GET A LITTLE MORE INFLECTION IN MY VOICE BECAUSE I DON'T WANT IT TO FEEL AS NEGATIVE AS IT PROBABLY DID. OUR BIGGEST CHALLENGE IS STATE LAW AND REGULATION. RIGHT NOW ANYTHING THAT BEGINS TO LOOK
LIKE A TAX BECOMES A BIG ISSUE AT THE STATE LEVEL. THE CITY, IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK NEEDS TO CONTINUE TO BE DISCUSSED AND CONSIDERED AS YOU'VE SEEN FROM THESE OTHER EXAMPLES, YOU KNOW. WHILE THE CONCERNS AROUND INCREASING PROPERTY TAX ARE SOMETHING THAT ARE MORE OF A SHARED NATIONWIDE
CONCERN, THE EXTREME LIMITATIONS ON REVENUE SOURCES FOR MUNICIPALITIES, IT'S NOT A DIRECT CORRELATION WITH THE VOLUME OF CITIES. I WOULD SAY THAT'S THEIR MAIN CONCERN. PROPERTY TAX IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE A CONCERN EVEN THOUGH YOU
HAVE MORE RESIDENT SOURCES. HOW THE STATE REGULATES, AGAIN, WHETHER IT'S CANNABIS REVENUE. THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATION THAT THAT SEEMS TO BE VERY VALID IN THIS AREA. CAPACITY AND STRUCTURE. THAT'S NOTED. I MEAN,
WE CAN VIEW IT AS AN OPTIMISTIC WAY. WHAT IS OUR CAPACITY AND STRUCTURE TO TAKE ON NEW SOURCES OF REVENUE. OBVIOUSLY, FOR PILOT IN BOSTON THEY HAVE TO HAVE AN ENTITY THAT'S RESPONSIBLE FOR OVERSEEING THE PROGRAM, FOR COLLECTING THE REVENUE. IF IT'S
SOMETHING WE DON'T HAVE, THAT'S AN IMPORTANT CALCULATION TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S OUR OPPORTUNITY COST PURSUING THESE FROM AN ORGANIZATIONAL STANDPOINT. IF IT'S GOING TO COST US TO STAND UP FOR A GROUP WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A TAX THAT BRINGS IN $150, IT
MIGHT NOT BE WORTH PURSUING. LASTLY, WE HAVE ADVERSE IMPACT. AS I TALKED ABOUT IN PREVIOUS SLIDE, THERE'S TIPPING POINTS ON ALL OF THIS. WHETHER IT'S PROPERTY TAX, WHETHER IT'S SERVICE FEES, BE THAT TOWING,
OUR FINES AND FEE SCHEDULES. HOW THOSE ARE GOING TO HIT PEOPLE. THEIR OWN REALITIES ARE GOING TO BE DIFFERENT ACROSS THE CITY. DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS AND EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. ESPECIALLY WITH FINES AND FEES SINCE THAT'S
GENERALLY A FLAT SCHEDULE, WHAT THE IMPACT OF THOSE FINES AND FEES LOOKS LIKE TO THE INDIVIDUAL IS GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN, YOU KNOW, THE COMPLEXITY OF THE FINE AND FEE SCHEDULE ITSELF. SO JUST NOTING THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED. THAT THIS IS NOT AN UNLIMITED.
WE CAN'T TURN UP THE SPIGOT AND HAVE MORE MONEY COMING OUT WITHOUT POTENTIAL IMPACT. THERE'S ALWAYS SOMETHING UNDER THE SURFACE THAT'S WORTH AT A MINIMUM A QUICK LOOK. MOVING INTO OPPORTUNITIES. AGAIN, SILVER LINING. THERE ARE SOME
OPTIONS. I WANT TO BE CLEAR. THAT ARE NOT SUBJECT TO RESTRICTIONS ON TAXES. SERVICE CHARGES AND FEES, LIKE I JUST MENTIONED, WE HAVE A LOT MORE CONTROL OVER THOSE. IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE NEED TO BE DELIBERATE ABOUT HOW WE CONSIDER THOSE AND WHAT THE MEASURABLE
IMPACT IS GOING TO BE TO THE COMMUNITY. EXAMPLE, THE PILOT PROGRAMS BECAUSE OF THE VOLUNTARY NATURE OF THEM, THEY SEEM VERY MUCH LIKE A TAX. THE VOLUNTARY TAX, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY THEM IF YOU DON'T WANT TO.
PURSUING THOSE TYPES OF PROGRAMS. ADDITIONALLY THE FACT THEY DON'T NEED TO BE FRAMED UP AS THIS PUNITIVE. ULTIMATELY ESPECIALLY IN TIMES WHERE OTHER REVENUE SOURCES ARE SHUTTING OFF AS A WAY TO HELP CONTRIBUTE TO
THE COMMUNITY. JUST THAT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THEY ARE RECEIVING EMERGENCY SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE. IT DOES HAVE TO BE VIEWED MORE AND PURSUED IN THE EVENT THAT IT IS PURSUED AS A PARTNERSHIP. LEVERAGING
ONGOING RESEARCH, PROVIDING ADDITIONAL DATA AND CONTEXT TO MINNEAPOLIS SPECIFIC LANDSCAPE. I SAY THAT NOT AS A METHOD OF SELF-PROMOTION, UNDERSTANDING I'M HERE PROVIDING RESEARCH AS WELL. THE MORE THIS IS LOOKED AT AND THE MORE THAT WE KNOW I THINK THE STRONGER OUR ARGUMENTS BECOME ABOUT WHY WE WANT TO LOOK
AT CERTAIN AREAS. AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN AROUND MINNEAPOLIS, AGAIN, SOME OF THE LIMITATIONS WITH THE STATE LAWS AND EVERYTHING, THEY'VE BEEN A WELL KNOWN ISSUE THAT WE FACE. HOWEVER, THE EXTENT OF THE IMPACT OR WHAT OPTIONS ARE WE
FOREGOING, I THINK THE MORE WE KNOW AND COME TO THE TABLE SHOWING WHAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE IN THE EVENT THAT WE'RE ALLOWED TO PURSUE DIFFERENT AVENUES LIKE SOME OF THESE DIFFERENT CITIES, WILL THAT BE THE CHANGE THAT GETS SOME OF THIS ACROSS THE
FINISH LINE? I DON'T KNOW. IT NEVER HURTS TO COME WITH THE INFORMATION YOU COULD POSSIBLY HAVE. THE INCREASING FOCUS ON THIS ISSUE BOTH FROM THE FEDERAL LEVEL BUT JUST EVEN OUTSIDE OF THAT, THE PROPERTY TAXES AND MUNICIPAL FUNDING ISSUES, THERE'S A GROWING CONCERN ACROSS
THE ENTIRE COUNTRY ABOUT CITIES HAVING TO CUT AND TIGHTEN. SEVERE RESTRICTIONS AT THE STATE LEVEL, DECREASING LEVELS, PROPERTY VALUES. IT'S DRIVING BOTH THE URGENCY OF THIS ISSUE BUT ALSO THE INNOVATION. MUCH
LIKE WE'RE STANDING HERE TODAY. OTHER CITIES ARE ABSOLUTELY BEGINNING TO LOOK AT WHAT OTHER OPTIONS THEY MIGHT HAVE. WHAT OTHER REVENUES THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO LEVERAGE AND HOW THEY CAN BRING IN ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO THE CITY. JUST CONTINUING TO INCREASE THE RESOURCES THEY HAVE AVAILABLE
TODAY. AND LASTLY, NEXT STEPS. THE FIRST IDENTIFIED POTENTIAL HIGH PRIORITY OPTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL REVIEW IN THE FINAL REPORT. I PUT OUT THE SAME ASK TO THE COUNCIL, IF THERE'S ANY OPTIONS THAT JUMPED OUT TO ANYBODY, FEEL FREE TO LET ME
KNOW AND WE CAN ADD THOSE TO ESSENTIALLY THE DEEPER DIVE. WE'RE GOING TO ALSO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RESEARCH THAT WILL BE PART OF THAT FINAL REPORT. NEXT, CONSIDER THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES AND POTENTIAL REVISIONS NEEDED TO PURSUE ANY REVENUE OPTIONS. EVEN WITHOUT
HAVING A FINAL REPORT, IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THERE ARE SOME CONSISTENT THEMES HERE. LIKE TO THE EXTENT THE CITY WANTS TO LOOK AT WHAT IT'S LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES ARE AND SHUFFLE THOSE AROUND BASED ON ANY OF THESE REVENUE NEEDS IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED. AND
LASTLY, MODERATED RELATED WORK. THERE'S AN ONGOING FEE STUDY CURRENTLY BEING CONDUCTED BY THE ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENTS RIGHT NOW. I DON'T KNOW THE RETURN DATE ON IT BUT I KNOW THEY HAVE A VENDOR THAT'S CURRENTLY CONDUCTING THE WORK. THE REASON I WAS ABLE TO LINK TO THE CITY AUDITOR'S ONE IT WAS PRESENTED
AS PART OF THE CITY AUDITOR'S UPDATE ON MONDAY'S MEETING. BENCHMARKING STUDY. HIGH LEVEL IS LOOKING ACROSS THE ENTERPRISE AT THE WORK WE'RE DOING AND HOW WE'RE STRUCTURING THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AND HOW THAT COMPARES TO COMPARABLE CITIES.
HOW MANY PEOPLE FILL POT HOLES HERE VERSUS HOW MANY FILL POT HOLES IN PORTLAND. I CAN'T PROMISE THAT WILL BE IN THE REPORT BUT I FEEL LIKE POT HOLES HAVE A WAY OF SHOWING UP. THAT WASN'T MEANT TO BE A JOKE BUT YOU CAN TAKE IT AS ONE. AND
LASTLY, STATE CANNABIS REGULATION AND REVENUE COLLECTION. THIS IS ANOTHER ONE THAT'S A GROWING POINT OF INTEREST ACROSS CITIES NATIONALLY AS WE'RE SEEING MORE LEGALIZATION EFFORTS. IT WAS IN
THE BOSTON SLIDE. I THINK BOSTON WAS SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER. I THINK KANSAS CITY, THERE'S SOME STATES THAT ALLOW TO KEEP SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE REVENUE. IT'S BASED ON SALES. THERE'S OTHER STATES WHERE THEY DIVVY IT UP
EQUALLY ACROSS COUNTIES. I KNOW THE STATE ITSELF, THIS HAS BEEN A HEATED POINT OF DISCUSSION. BUT I KNOW THE TAX IS STARTING TO BE COLLECTED ON A PORTION OF THAT LEGALIZATION EFFORT. WHAT
THAT LOOKS LIKE COMPARATIVELY TO SOME OF THESE OTHER JURISDICTIONS. SOMETHING WE CAN ADD AS A LEGISLATIVE PRIORITY. WITH THAT, I CONCLUDE MY
PRESENTATION AND I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> YOU'RE NOT PLANNING TO PRESENT THE SECOND DOCUMENT?
>> THE GUIDEHOUSE'S ONE? I WANTED THAT TO PRIMARILY STAND ON ITS OWN JUST BECAUSE I WANTED THEM TO SPEAK TO IT. I'M HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS FROM IT. SOME ADDITIONAL CONTEXT AND INFORMATION. BUT AGAIN, I WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO PRESENT IN
ITS ENTIRETY. THAT'S THE ONE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD OUT ON THEIR SIDE AND I'LL HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ON IT, I KNOW IT'S ATTACHED TO THE LIMS FILE. I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO SPEAK TO THOSE. >> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THERE. JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF MY
COLLEAGUES, I DID GO THROUGH THE PER CAPITA FIGURES FOR THE VARIOUS OPTIONS THAT ARE USED BY VARIOUS CITIES, AND THE MINIMUM AND THE MAXIMUM. PUT SOME DOLLAR FIGURES TO THE PER CAPITA FIGURES THAT ARE BASED ON
MINNEAPOLIS POPULATION. NOW THAT'S A VERY, VERY ROUGH CALCULATION. I'LL TRY AND SUMMARIZE THAT IN A MEMO AND CIRCULATE THAT TO YOU AND TO COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND ADDITIONALLY, I KNOW THAT MR.
HAWKINS HAS DONE SOME WORK, FOR EXAMPLE, ON ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES. SO I WILL DEFER ON THAT. AND WHAT QUESTIONS DO MY
COLLEAGUES HAVE? COMMISSIONER ABENE. >> THANK YOU. THAT PRESENTATION WAS INTERESTING. AND I READ THE OTHER DOCUMENT THAT WAS IN THE PACKET. SO WE'RE NOT HAVING A PRESENTATION ON THAT OR THAT'S COMING TO A LATER DATE?
>> THAT'S WHY I TRIED TO PULL A LITTLE BIT. I DIDN'T WANT TO GIVE EVERYBODY THAT AND NOT SPEAK TO IT AT ALL. I HAD A COUPLE OF SLIDES WHERE WE DID THE HIGHLIGHTS. BUT THE IDEA WAS TO MAKE THAT AVAILABLE SO PEOPLE CAN SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A
DEEP DIVE TO SOME EXAMPLES THEY GAVE. WITH THE GOAL WE WANT TO IDENTIFY THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A REALLY BIG RANGE. WE CAN'T NECESSARILY DIVE INTO ALL 40 EXAMPLES THEY HAD. IT WAS USING THAT TO PROMPT EVERYBODY TO IDENTIFY HERE'S THE 10 THAT WE'D
REALLY LIKE TO LEARN MORE ABOUT IN THAT NEXT REPORT THAT COMES UP. >> OKAY. SO THERE WILL BE A REPORT IN NOVEMBER, I THINK I HEARD. >> YEAH. THE FINAL REPORT WILL BE DELIVERED IN NOVEMBER. I'VE WORKED WITH THEM ON ALL OF THAT AND I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS.
>> I COULDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. SO A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS. ONE IS, ACTUALLY I JUST HEARD A COWORKER OF MINE SAID 52% OF THE LAND IN SAINT PAUL, HE LIVES IN SAINT PAUL, IS TAX EXEMPT. DO WE HAVE THAT NUMBER FOR MINNEAPOLIS?
>> THAT'S ONE I WANT TO GET. I LOOKED TO COUNCIL. I HAD A SIMILAR QUESTION. IT WAS COMING FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE. IT'S PUBLIC DATA. SO I'D WT TO WORK WITH OUR ASSESSOR'S OFFICE AND MAKE SURE IT WAS BEING INTERPRETED CORRECTLY. THE
AMOUNT WE HAVE IS NOT NE GLIJIBLE. THEY PUT A TAX INCREASE OR LEVY INCREASE. PART OF THE REASON TO JUSTIFY THAT INCREASE, SIMILARLY, THEY HAVE A HIGH VOLUME BECAUSE OF THE STATE
GOVERNMENT. STATE GOVERNMENT PART, YOU KNOW, LIKE OTHER GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS, EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS, MUSEUMS. THEY HAVE THAT SAME ISSUE WHERE THEY HAVE A LOT OF PROPERTIES THAT THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO OPERATE FROM A TAX
STANDPOINT. THEY ENDED UP INCREASING THEIR LEVY WHICH IS AN OPTION. WITH THAT RECOGNITION OF THE ISSUE, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE SEEING IT AT THE MUNICIPAL LEVEL. THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO. IT'S GOING TO BE OUTSIDE OF OUR SCOPE SO LET'S JUST INCREASE THE LEVY.
>> OKAY. I'M CAREFUL ABOUT MENTIONING THIS, BUT I WORK AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, I KNOW THE UNIVERSITY MAKES CONTRIBUTIONS FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. SO THAT'S ALREADY SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS. I DON'T KNOW IF THE OTHER INSTITUTIONS DO THAT IN THE CITY. THE OTHER
THING IS A COUPLE OTHER THINGS CAUGHT MY EYE. IT'S AN INTERESTING, IT'S JUST AN INTERESTING NUMBER TO SEE SEATTLE THERE. THEIR PROPERTY TAX RATE IS -- THEY CAN COLLECT A HIGHER RATE PER PROPERTY OR
MEDIAN PRICE. IT'S BECAUSE THEY HAVE MORE VALUABLE LAND PORTFOLIO. THE OTHER THING TO KNOW JUST FOR AWARENESS, I THINK THAT WAS THE ONLY THING ON THE LIST THAT'S IN A NON-INCOME TAX STATE. SO WASHINGTON HAS NO INCOME TAX. THAT'S WHY FEES ARE SO HIGH ON THAT ITEM. I LIVED
OUT THERE FOR A WHILE AND YOU GET FEED LIKE CRAZY. AND I DON'T THINK FEEING IS PROGRESSIVE. ONE MORE THING CAUGHT MY EYE AND THAT'S THE BETTERMENT LEVELLY E
-- LEVY REGARDING PARKS. THE PARK BOARD HAS DONE RESEARCH ON ELWELL LAW. I'M SEEING NODDING BEHIND YOU. IT ACTUALLY I THINK STIFLED THE DEVELOPMENT OF PARKS IN NORTHEAST MINNEAPOLIS BECAUSE
THE IDEA WAS THAT IT WAS HARDER TO TAX A CERTAIN SUBSET OF PROPERTIES FOR THIS BETTERMENT. SO WE'VE BEEN THERE. WE'VE DONE THAT. BEFORE YOU SPEND A LOT OF TIME LOOKING AT THAT, I JUST THREW THAT ON THE TABLE. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAD TO SAY. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER
ABENE. I APPRECIATE THAT. I WILL SAY, I CAN'T REMEMBER IF I NOTED THIS ALREADY. KIND OF UNDER THE UMBRELLA, ANY OF THAT PILOT STUFF YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S BEING DONE IN PARTNERSHIP NOT
EXCLUDING FEDERAL GRANT. HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS -- FEDERAL LEVEL. JUST THE COMPLEXITIES OF THE CITY, THAT'S NOT OUTSIDE OF IT EITHER. THERE'S SO MANY FACTORS THAT WE WANT TO BE AWARE OF ABOUT OF WE CHARGE INTO SOMETHING.
>> ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. I'LL DIVE IN THEN. FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE WORK THAT COMMISSIONER PAYNE DID TO GET THIS RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THIS STUDY THROUGH. AND OF COURSE, IT
RISES IN COMMISSIONER CHUGHTAI'S COMMITTEE AND WILL BE FURTHER DISCUSSED THERE I'M SURE. AND OF COURSE COUNCIL MEMBER WONSLEY ALSO HAS PLAYED A ROLE HERE. AND
WE'RE SORT OF IN, I WOULD SAY FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, MAYBE SPEAKING MORE FOR MYSELF AND COMMISSIONER PREE-STINSON IN A CHEERLEADER ROLE HERE. WE HAVE NO FORMAL ROLE. WE SEE THE PROBLEM EVERY YEAR WHEN WE VOTE ON INCREASING PROPERTY TAXES AND HEAR FROM PEOPLE ABOUT THE
IMPACT OF THAT. BUT WE HAVE NO FORMAL ROLE IN THE DELIBERATIONS HERE. I WOULD OFFER ANY HELP THAT I CAN PROVIDE AS BET CHAIR, AND IF YOU NEED IT DOWN THE ROAD
IN PURSUING LEGISLATION. I WOULD ALSO OFFER STAFF TIME IF THE BOARD IS AGREEABLE TO PROVIDE ANY RESEARCH ASSISTANCE THAT YOU MIGHT FIND HELPFUL AS YOU PROCEED. AND I WOULD LIKE TO
JUST ASK SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS HERE. THE PROPERTY TAX PROJECTIONS OUT INTO THE FUTURE FOR MINNEAPOLIS AND INCREASING PERCENTAGE, ARE THOSE PRETTY MUCH BASED OFF OF THE FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL DIRECTION? >> PRESIDENT BRANDT, YES, THOSE ARE PULLED FROM THE PRESENTATION
THAT THE BUDGET DIRECTOR HAD GIVEN. WHEN I SPOKE ABOUT THIS TO CONFIRM, THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT'S THE PROJECTION BASED ON EVERYTHING REMAINING THE SAME. >> OKAY. AND I'M WONDERING FOR THE VARIOUS SPECIAL TAXES, ASIDE
FROM THE -- NOT INCLUDING THE SALES TAX, ARE THERE PERCENTAGES EXCEPT FOR THE 6.5 OVERALL LIMIT ON LODGING TAX, ARE THE INDIVIDUAL PERCENTAGES, THE 3%, ARE THOSE SET BY THE -- AND THE SAME THING FOR LIQUOR AND
RESTAURANT -- ARE THOSE NUMBERS, THOSE PERCENTAGES SET AT IN LEGISLATION AT THE STATE LEVEL OR ARE THEY WITHIN THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY COUNCIL? >> I WILL ULTIMATELY DEFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR ANY MORE DETAILED ANSWER. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT FOR THOSE
TAXES JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE IT'S NOT SIMPLY ALLOWING US TO DO THE TAX AS WE SEE FIT, THOSE ARE CURRENTLY LOCKED IN. THE SAME GOES FOR THE MINNEAPOLIS DOWNTOWN TAXING AREAS. WHAT WE
DEFINE AS DOWNTOWN IS SUBJECT TO THE MINNESOTA LEGISLATURE. >> THAT APPLIES TO THE BOUNDARIES AS I UNDERSTAND IT FOR THE DOWNTOWN TAXING AREA. WHICH SEEMS CUMBERSOME, LET'S
PUT IT THAT WAY. AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S BEEN SOME RESISTANCE AT THE STATE LEVEL TO ADJUSTING THE BOUNDARIES AND THERE WILL BE CHANGES IN RETIREMENTS AS THE LEGISLATURES COMPOSITION ADVANCES IN THE
COMING YEARS. MAYBE SOME OF THAT WILL GET A DIFFERENT LOOK. >> PRESIDENT BRANDT, IF I MAY, AGAIN, I SAID THIS TO COUNCIL, SO I'M IN FOR A PENNY. WITHOUT EDITORIALIZING TOO MUCH, I UNDERSTAND WHAT IT TAKES TO GO
TO THE LEGISLATURE. WE NEED ANOTHER PERCENT OR TWO BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS OR THIS. THE DOWNTOWN TAXING AREA FEELS DIFFERENT TO ME. IT'S ONE THING TO RESTRICT A CITY'S ABILITY TO LEVY TAXES AGAINST ITS RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES. IT'S ANOTHER TO
DEFINE WHAT'S DOWNTOWN. AND SO THE FACT THAT THE CITY ITSELF CAN'T DEFINE WHAT IT CONSIDERS TO BE ITS OWN BOUNDARIES, I BELIEVE MY STATEMENT TO COUNCIL AGAIN WAS BUDGET COMMITTEE. IF ALL THREE OF YOU DREW A MAP, I DON'T THINK ALL -- TO WHATEVER
DEGREE THAT GIVES A LITTLE BIT MORE, YOU KNOW, OOMPH TO AN ARGUMENT ABOUT PLEASE LET US GET SOME MORE CONTROL BACK OVER THIS. THIS ONE SEEMS LIKE A LOGICAL ONE. I DON'T THINK ANY
MINNEAPOLITANS AGREE. >> I AGREE WITH THAT POINT. BUT EXPERIENCE HAS TAUGHT US SO FAR OTHERWISE. BUT IT WOULD BE NICE TO DEVOLVE THAT AUTHORITY TO THE LOCAL LEVEL. I WOULD SEE WHY THE STATE WOULD WANT TO KEEP AN UPPER LIMIT ON PERCENTAGES.
COMMISSIONER PREE-STINSON, DID YOU HAVE AN ADDITIONAL COMMENT? ALL RIGHT. THAT I THINK PRETTY MUCH EXHAUSTS WHAT I HAD TO ASK. ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? OKAY. SEEING NO MORE QUESTIONS, I'LL ASK THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE PRESENTATION. AND THANK YOU FOR
IT. AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO NOVEMBER. >> ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. AND I CAN ACTUALLY -- WILL GO AHEAD AND PUBLICLY PROMISE WHEN WE'LL HAVE THAT PRESENTATION WHEN THAT COMES BACK. TO THE EXTENT WE'RE ABLE TO I'D LOVE TO AT A MINIMUM
GIVE EVERYBODY THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONNECT WITH GUIDEHOUSE TO SPEAK TO THEIR WORK DIRECTLY AS WELL. WHETHER IT'S THROUGH MEETINGS, JOINT MEETING, WHETHER IT'S THIS MEETING. WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT. >> AND PERHAPS I SHOULD JUST INQUIRE OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PAYNE. WOULD BUDGET CHAIR BE THE APPROPRIATE BODY WITH COUNCIL TO ADDRESS ANY COMMENTS ON THE FINDINGS SO FAR? >> THAT SOUNDS APPROPRIATE. >> FROM AN OUTSIDER LIKE ME. >> YEAH. THAT SOUNDS APPROPRIATE. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT, NUMBER SEVEN IS A DISCUSSION, OR RATHER A PRESENTATION FROM CHRISTINA KEIDERLING, OUR SENIOR ADVISOR. THE BET STAFF UPDATE, WHICH I
THINK WE'RE ALL LOOKING FORWARD TO. AND SHE IS IN THE PROCESS OF
MAKING HER WAY FORWARD. THANK
YOU. >> GOOD EVENING, BOARD. MY NAME IS CHRISTINA KEIDERLING, AND I'M
YOUR SENIOR ADVISOR. I'M HERE TO OFFER A BRIEF UPDATE AND LET YOU KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT WITH A FEW DIFFERENT MEASURES THAT YOU TASKED ME WITH. FIRST, WE'LL COVER MORE ADMINISTRATIVE TOPICS. FIRST IS AN ONBOARDING
PROCESS FOR BET OFFICIALS. I WORKED DIRECTLY WITH THE BOARD'S VICE PRESIDENT AS WELL AS SOME PEOPLE IN THE ADMINISTRATION INCLUDING THE CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, AND THE DEPUTY CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CITY CLERK TO COME UP WITH A LIVING DOCUMENT THAT WILL REALLY
HELP AND ASSESS WITH ONBOARDING FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS WITH THE BET. THE REASON IS THERE'S USUALLY QUITE A BIT OF ONBOARDING, BUT THE BET HAS BEEN A BIT MORE OF A MONOLITH AND WE DON'T HAVE NECESSARILY A LOT OF STUFF IN WRITING. THERE'S BEEN A
COUPLE OF DIFFERENT EFFORTS TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES AND MAKE IT A LITTLE MORE STREAMLINE SO IT'S EASIER FOR FUTURE BOARDS TO HAVE THAT HISTORIC KNOWLEDGE FROM TERM TO TERM AND KNOW WHERE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO TERM IF THEY HAVE QUESTIONS OR NEED A CONTACT
AND THINGS LIKE THAT. FIRST THING IS THE SHAREPOINT, WHICH YOU ALL HAVE ACCESS TO. THAT IS WHERE YOU CAN FIND THIS BET ELECTED OFFICIALS GUIDE. IF YOU WANT TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL INSIGHT, IF YOU THINK THERE'S ANYTHING IN THERE THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL OR YOU JUST WANT TO REVIEW IT, I KEEP A MOST UP TO
DATE VERSION ON THAT SHAREPOINT. WHICH AGAIN, YOU ALL HAVE ACCESS TO. I DIDN'T INCLUDE IT HERE JUST BECAUSE IT'S AN INTERNAL TRAINING DOCUMENT. BUT IF YOU WANT TO GO SEE IT, JUST GO TO THAT SHAREPOINT LIKE WE DISCUSSED BEFORE, YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK AT IT. THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO CHANGE AS I MEET WITH
ADDITIONAL MEMBERS OF THE CITY AND I FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THEIR ONBOARDING. BUT IT'S IN PROGRESS AND WE'VE MADE GREAT STRIDES WITH IT. JUST TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THAT. VERY, VERY HAPPY
WITH THAT. THE SECOND THING THAT'S BEEN GOING ON AS FAR AS MY DAY TO DAY IS WORK PROCESS AND DEPARTMENTAL RELATIONSHIPS UPDATE. I HAVE MET AND FOSTERED RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS TO BETTER DEFINE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, INCLUDING BRINGING BACK TASKS
THAT WERE AT ONE POINT WITH THE BET STAFFER AND MOVED AWAY WHEN YOU GUYS WERE NOT FULLY STAFFED. SO I HAVE BROUGHT SOME OF THOSE BACK. I'VE SET UP QUARTERLY MEETING WITH ACCOUNTING AND BUDGET WHERE I AS THE SENIOR
ADVISOR WILL HAVE REPORTS FOR DISCUSSION. I'M ACTUALLY THE PERSON MONITORING YOUR BUDGET NOW AND SEEING EXPENSES AS THEY COME IN AND FLAGGING ANYTHING THAT LOOKS UNUSUAL AND MAKING SURE YOU'RE YEAR-TO-DATE EXPENSES ARE ABOUT WHERE THEY SHOULD BE. I HAVE QUARTERLY
MEETINGS WITH BUDGET FROM TI-- WE'RE CLOSER TO OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT ACCOUNTING DOES FOR EVERY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENT. WHEN I REACHED OUT TO THEM THEY WERE CAUGHT OFF GUARD BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T REALIZE BET HAD STAFFER AND THEY'D NEVER CHECKED IN BEFORE
ABOUT THE BET'S BUDGET. I WILL CHECK IN WITH REPORTS BUT ACCOUNTING WILL BE THERE IF ANYTHING LOOKS WEIRD. THEY'LL NEED TO DO THE ACTUAL MOVING OF FUNDS FOR ME. BUDGET WILL MAKE SURE BUDGET AND I ARE IN LOCKSTEP ABOUT WHAT WE THINK ABOUT THE BET BUDGET. ARE WE
BRINGING IN REVENUES LIKE WE EXPECTED. ARE WE EXPECTING ANY CHANGE FOR BET THE FOLLOWING YEAR. JUST TO MAKE SURE FINANCE AND I ARE ON THE SAME PAGE. ADDITIONALLY TO THAT, THE SENIOR ADVISOR WILL BOTH BE DRAFTING THE ANNUAL LEVY RESOLUTION WITH
THE LEVY TABLES PROVIDED BY FINANCE, AND THE BET'S -- IF YOU REMEMBER THIS YEAR GETTING A COPY OF THAT FINAL RESOLUTION WAS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A LITTLE CONFUSING. WE WERE WAITING TO SEE IS IT COMING FROM THE CLERKS, IS IT COMING FROM
FINANCE. IT'S GOING TO COME FROM ME IN THE FUTURE. I WAS ACTUALLY REQUESTED BY -- IT WAS SUGGESTED BY SOMEONE WITHIN THE FINANCE ORGANIZATION IF I WAS WILLING TO TAKE IT. I SAID ABSOLUTELY. SO I WILL BE TAKING THAT ROLE BACK AND PROVIDING IT MYSELF SO WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY
MOVING FORWARD. JUST AS NOTE, NONE OF THAT HAS BEEN CONTENTIOUS WHATSOEVER. IT WAS SUGGESTED BY SOMEONE IN FINANCE THAT I DO THAT AND I WAS MORE THAN ENTHUSIASTIC TO DO SO. THESE ARE ALL VERY GOOD RELATIONSHIPS. IT'S NOT BEEN GIVE ME THAT DUTY BACK. WE HAVE
A WONDERFUL WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH ALL THESE DEPARTMENTS I'VE MENTIONED. NEXT, WE ARE GETTING A PURCHASE CARD FOR THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION. RIGHT NOW WE DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO A PURCHASE CARD. WE COULD GO THROUGH THE CLERK'S OFFICE WHO HAS KINDLY OFFERED TO HELP ME
MAKE PURCHASES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT WE DON'T HAVE OUR OWN PURCHASE CARD. THAT'S GOING TO BE CHANGING. I WILL BE TAKING THAT TRAINING SO I CAN BE A PURCHASE CARD HOLDER. THE APPROVER HAS TO BE SOMEONE
WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION WHO IS SPECIALLY TRAINED TO DO THAT. AND THE CLERK'S OFFICE ONCE AGAIN STEPPED UP AND VERY KINDLY OFFERED TO DO THAT SO WE CAN PURSUE GETTING A PURCHASE CARD. FINALLY, THE TRAINING, THE IN-PERSON VERSION HAPPENED
TODAY. SO I REALLY HOPE FOR THOSE WHO ATTENDED IT WAS HELPFUL AND YOU GOT SOMETHING OUT OF IT. SECURITY SERVICES HAS BEEN WONDERFUL TO WORK WITH. WE ARE GOING TO SEND OUT ELECTRONIC RESOURCES SO THOSE WHO WEREN'T ABLE TO GO TODAY CAN SEE
RESOURCES OFFERED THROUGH SECURITY SERVICES. IF AT ANY POINT ANY ELECTED OFFICIAL HAS ANY QUESTIONS OR THEY NEED REFRESHER TRAINING, I PLAN TO MAKE THIS PART OF THE ONBOARDING FOR THE NEXT ROUND OF ELECTED OFFICIALS WHEN THEY COME IN JUST SO THEY CAN GET IT AT THE START
OF THEIR TERM AS WELL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, FEEL FREE TO ROUTE IT THROUGH ME OR SECURITY SERVICES. THEY'RE ALWAYS THERE TO HELP. IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THOSE TOPICS, YOU JUST LET ME KNOW. ALL RIGHTY. AND THEN THE
PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED NEAR AND FAR TERM. THIS PAGE IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE THE SAME PAGE I KEEP PRESENTING TO YOU BECAUSE IT WAS THE SAME PAGE I WAS GIVEN AS PART OF THE WORK PLAN AND I'M JUST GIVING YOU UPDATES AS THEY HAPPEN. OF COURSE THE NEAR TERM
ALTERNATIVE SOURCES OF REVENUE. YOU JUST HEARD FROM MR. HAWKINS, THAT IS GOING TO BE A PROJECT BECAUSE THEY'RE COMING BACK IN NOVEMBER. HE SAID THAT HE EXPECTS THERE TO ALSO BE OFFSHOOTS OF WORK. AND BECAUSE YOU KINDLY PARTNERED WITH THE
CITY COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY TO ALLOW ME TO WORK ON THAT, IT'S SOMETHING I'M VERY MUCH LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING WITH LRO TO DECIDE HOW WE'RE GOING TO DISTRIBUTE THAT WORK. SO IT'S SOMETHING I'M VERY EXCITED TO BE PART OF. IF THERE'S ANYTHING SPECIFICALLY THIS BOARD WOULD LIKE INVESTIGATED, I KNOW THAT
DIRECTOR HAWKINS SPOKE TO IT, PLEASE LET US KNOW THAT. BUT I'M VERY EXCITED AND I HOPE WE CAN KEEP THIS INFORMAL ENOUGH THAT I CAN HELP WITH THESE RESEARCH PROJECTS OR THESE INVESTIGATIVE LINE ITEMS AS THEY COME UP WITHOUT BORING YOU WITH
NITTY-GRITTY DETAILS. IT'S MORE OF A HOLISTIC WHAT IS YOUR OBJECTIVE HERE. I APPRECIATE THAT PARTNERSHIP AND I THINK IT WILL CERTAINLY INCREASE MY WORK LOAD AS WE MOVE ON. FOR FAR TERM, THE GEOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS AND MAPPING OF DOLLAR FLOWS THAT
IS STILL IN PROGRESS WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE. IT IS QUITE THE INFORMATION REQUEST. I'M CONTINUING TO WORK WITH FINANCE. AS I UPDATED YOU LAST TIME, I TOOK THE SPECIALIZED INFORMATION DISCLOSURE TRAINING REQUIRED BY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE. UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S JUST A
REQUEST THAT'S GOING TO TAKE A BIT OF TIME. SO WHAT I WOULD ASK OF THE BOARD IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THOSE TWO ITEMS, SEE IF EITHER OF THEM YOU WANT TWEAKED BASED ON WHAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE THEN. BECAUSE I KNOW WHEN THIS WORK PLAN WAS DISCUSSED THAT WAS SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, AND NOW
WE'VE HAD SO MUCH HAPPEN WITH ALTERN ALTERNATIVE REVENUES AND WE HAVE A NEW BUDGET PROPOSAL, YOU MIGHT NOT BE AS SET ON THOSE ITEM AS
PREVIOUSLY. LET ME KNOW THAT SO I KNOW -- I THINK THIS MIGHT BE ABLE TO BE WELL TWEAKED BASED ON OTHER INVESTIGATIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING WITHIN THE CITY. AS DIRECTOR HAWKINS BROUGHT UP, AUDIT IS DOING THEIR OWN INVESTIGATION ABOUT OUR CAPABILITIES. THERE'S GOING TO
BE A LOT OF DIFFERENT INVESTIGATIONS COMING THROUGH LRO. IT'S GOING TO BE GOOD TO KEEP ABREAST OF THOSE AND WHAT WE WANT TO TWEAK DEPENDING ON WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE CITY AT THAT TIME. FINALLY, YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME QUESTIONS TO THIS. I
KNOW THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION. THERE WAS A PROPOSAL THAT WE HAVE A ANALYSES OF MAJOR COST DRIVERS PERHAPS SUPPLEMENTED BY PANELED -- I WORKED WITH PRESIDENT BRANDT CLOSELY ON
THIS. PRESIDENT BRANDT, I KNOW YOU HAD A SPECIFIC VISION. WHEN I MET THEY WERE PERCEPTIVE. PER THE GUIDANCE, THE BET DOES NOT HAVE THE CHARTERED AUTHORITY TO CREATE A BOARD, COMMISSION, WORK GROUP, INVESTIGATIVE GROUP,
ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT CAN ONLY COME THROUGH THE CITY COUNCIL. SO I THINK THAT THIS BULLET POINT COULD CHANGE IF YOU WANTED ME TO INVESTIGATE A DIFFERENT PART SPECIFICALLY OF THE BUDGET GROWTH. BUT AS FAR AS CREATING LIKE AN OUTSIDE GROUP OF
CITIZENS OR INDIVIDUALS, THAT THE BET REALLY DOES NOT HAVE THE INDEPENDENT AUTHORITY TO DO SO. IF YOU HAVE ANY FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS ON THAT, I KNOW OUR CITY ATTORNEY CAN CERTAINLY SPEAK TO IT. >> ALL RIGHT. IS THAT THE END OF YOUR PRESENTATION?
>> YES, SIR. I WOULD HAVE GIVEN YOU A LIST OF PROPOSALS. -- TO WHAT YOU WANT ME TO INVESTIGATE. I STAND FOR THE BOARD TO HEAR
WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE IN THE FUTURE. >> I HAVE SOME -- EXCUSE ME, COMMISSIONER PREE-STINSON. >> YOU CAN PROCEED WITH ASKING MR. HAMMER QUESTIONS. I HAD DIFFERENT QUESTIONS ON WHAT WAS PRESENTED. >> GO AHEAD.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL, AMAZING WORK. YOU'RE DOING EXACTLY WHAT WE HIRED YOU TO DO. IT IS BEAUTIFUL TO SEE. WONDERFUL, FANTASTIC, THANK YOU. WHAT I DID WANT TO CIRCLE BACK TO IS I WOULD SUGGEST WE TALKED ABOUT THE WORK PLAN BEFORE AND
WE'RE, HOW WOULD I WORD THIS, A LITTLE LOOSY GOOSY. WE'RE THUMBS UP. WE'RE GOOD. I THINK WE NEED TO APPROVE WHAT IS ON THAT WORK PLAN, WE NEED TO FORMALIZE THAT AND IT NEEDS TO BE VOTED ON MOVING FORWARD. THE JOB DESCRIPTION IS GENERAL BUCKETS.
THE WORK PLAN IS SPECIFIC. IT SAYS THE WHAT. HOW SHE GOES ABOUT THE WORK IS IN HER JOB SCOPE. IN ORDER FOR HER TO HAVE THAT, WE CAN'T BE FAST AND LOOSE
WITH THAT WORK PLAN. I'M SEEING OUR CLERK NODDING IN AGREEMENT. IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE FURTHER REMARKS, I'M SURE HE WOULD BE HAPPY TO GIVE THEM. BUT WE SHOULD BE VERY FORMAL. AT ANY POINT IN TIME, WE CAN VOTE ON IT AGAIN, FORMALIZE IT AND HAVE IT
THERE. BUT THAT IS THE PROCESS THAT I RECOMMEND. AND OUR CLERK IS NODDING YES THAT WE SHOULD BE FOLLOWING INSTEAD OF A THUMBS UP WE'RE GOOD. JUST TO MAKE SURE WE ARE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THAT WORK PLAN IS AND WE DON'T ACCIDENTALLY END UP DOING THE THING THAT WE EXHAUSTIVELY
TALKED ABOUT BEFORE BRINGING ON MS. KEIDERLING AND AFTER WHICH IS ONE OF US DIRECTS HER TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS NOT BEEN VOTED ON BY THIS BODY. THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. OTHER QUESTIONS? I
HAD QUESTIONS JUST ABOUT A FEW AREAS WHERE I'M HOPING YOU CAN PROVIDE SOME CLARITY AND MAYBE A COUPLE OF SUGGESTIONS FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER WHEN WE NEXT ADDRESS WHAT SHOULD BE IN THE WORK PLAN. WHICH PERHAPS SHOULD BE AT OUR NEXT MEETING. WHERE
DOES A MATTER, CLARIFYING WITH BERA, WHERE WE STAND ON THE PENSION ISSUE. HAS THAT BEEN RESOLVED AT THIS POINT? >> NO, SIR. I'M SORRY, MA'AM, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO IT? >> I SUPPOSE I COULD SPEAK TO
IT. SINCE IT'S ME, IT'S WEIRD TO BE TALKED ABOUT. >> YES, MA'AM. >> WHERE THAT STANDS IS WE'RE WAITING FOR THE INVOICE FROM THE STATE FOR THE CURRENT YEAR. IT HAS STARTED TO BE DEDUCTED. SO FOR THE CURRENT YEAR, THAT'S HAPPENING. AND THEN FOR THE PREVIOUS YEARS, WE STILL HAVE
NOT RECEIVED A RESPONSE YET FROM THE STATE LEGAL TEAM. BUT IT IS MY INTENTION TO PUT FORTH TO WHAT'S THE RIGHT WORD FOR THAT THAT WE TALKED ABOUT? MR. HAMMER, HELP ME OUT. WHAT'S THE
SUBMISSIONS THAT I NEED TO PUT FORWARD ABOUT WHAT I'M ASKING FOR. IT'S NOT -- >> THE CLAIM. >> THE CLAIMS. SO I PLANNED TO PUT FORTH TWO CLAIMS. THE REASON I SAY THAT IS EVEN IF THE STATE COMES BACK AND SAYS WE CAN'T DO
ANYTHING ABOUT THE PAST THREE YEARS, IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT I WAS ROBBED OF SOMETHING I SHOULD HAVE HAD AND I'LL BE REQUESTING THAT MONEY TO BE RETURNED TO ME IN ADDITION TO LOOKING AT BASED ON HOW MY MONEY WAS DIVERSIFIED. YOU CAN GO
BACK, THERE'S A WAY TO CALCULATE THAT FROM AN INVESTMENT STANDPOINT ON HOW MUCH MONEY WAS LOST BY THAT MONEY NOT BEING INVESTED IN BY THAT PERIOD OF TIME. THERE WILL BE A SECOND CLAIM. I'M WAITING FOR THE SECOND CLAIM TO FIND OUT FROM
LEGAL. THE FIRST CLAIM I HAVEN'T SUBMITTED BECAUSE I'M STILL WAITING ON THAT INVOICE. I WILL ALSO SAY, IT CAN MOVE AS FAST AS IT'S GOING TO MOVE. I WOULD GREATLY HOPE THAT THIS IS DONE AND I'M NOT THE OTHER END OF THE
DAIS OR ON THE OTHER END COMING IN A DIFFERENT CAPACITY AFTER MY TERM IS DONE. I WOULD GREATLY HOPE WE COULD HAVE THIS SHORED UP BEFORE MY TERM IS OVER IS MY HOPE. IS THERE ANYTHING I MISSED ON THAT UPDATE, MS. KEIDERLING. >> NO, MA'AM. I DID REACH OUT TO
PARTIES INVOLVED AS RECENT AS THIS WEEK. WE'RE STILL WAITING FOR AN UPDATE. I'M SURE THEY'RE GETTING SICK OF ME. BUT WE ARE ASKING FOR UPDATES. >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT ITEM I HAD WAS IN ADDITION TO ONBOARDING THE INCOMING BOARD, I
CAN'T REMEMBER IF WE INCLUDED IN THE ONBOARDING TRYING TO RATIONALIZE OUR ONBOARDING PROCESS TO ALSO PUT TOGETHER A PROTOCOL FOR WHEN MS. KEIDERLING
EVENTUALLY FINDS, YOU KNOW, A DEPARTMENT HEAD JOB AT THE STATE OR SOMETHING OF THAT SORT, AND WE NEED TO HIRE SOMEBODY NEW. WAS THAT PART OF THE WORK PLAN? I HAVE A VAGUE RECOLLECTION THAT
IT WAS. >> I DON'T EVEN WANT TO SAY LOOSELY, I THINK THAT WE WILL RECREATE THE PROCESS THAT WE DID BEFORE. I THINK THAT SOLIDIFIED. WE KNOW WE HAVE A FULL-TIME STAFFER THAT'S ALREADY SAID AND DONE. IN THE EVENT THAT THERE WAS A RESIGNATION OR WHATEVER
REASON WE WERE LOSING OUR STAFFER, WE WOULD PROCEED AS BEFORE. THIS TIME, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE THE LENGTH WE HAD BECAUSE THE RFQ IS ALREADY DONE. WE PUT UP A POSTING THROUGH HR FOR THE
HIRING AND PICKING UP THAT PIECE WITHOUT ALL THE BEGINNING THAT DRAGGED OUT FOR A YEAR AND A HALF JUST TRYING TO GET THE RFQ PORTION. THAT WORK HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE. >> OKAY. COMMISSIONER
PREE-STINSON, I WAS THINKING NOT SO MUCH OF THE PRE-HIRING, BUT THE PROCESS OF BRINGING ON THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY THAT YOU STEPPED IN AND DID YEOMAN WORK
ON. >> CORRECT. IN THE NEXT PORTION OF OUR AGENDA WE'LL GET INTO MORE OF THAT ACTUALLY. BUT YES, THAT HAS BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR. >> OKAY. ONE OTHER THING, COULD YOU PLEASE SEND ME AN EMAIL AND
MAYBE COPY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS JUST FOR THE ANTICIPATED TIMING OF YOUR UPCOMING LEAVE JUST SO WE HAVE THAT TOP OF MIND WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FUTURE TASKS. >> YES, SIR.
>> IN YOUR JOB DESCRIPTION THERE WAS I BELIEVE DISCUSSION OF THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY SERVING ON THE CITY'S DEBT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE. AND I WONDERED IF
THAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE YOU -- I THINK WE'VE SOLD BONDS SINCE YOU STARTED WITH US. HAVE YOU HAD ANYBODY REACH OUT FROM FINANCE ON THAT SCORE? >> ABSOLUTELY, SIR. SO I GET UPDATES FROM ALLEN HOPPY ON WHEN
BONDS ARE GOING FOR SALE. AS FAR AS THE COMMITTEE WHERE I PHYSICALLY GO AND SIT ON IT, NO, THAT HASN'T HAPPENED. I CAN CERTAINLY REACH OUT TO FINANCE AND ASK. MY GUESS IS THAT THAT PROCESS MIGHT HAVE CHANGED TO WHAT THE CURRENT PROCESS IS. BUT
IF THERE IS SOMETHING I'M MISSING THAT I'M NOT RECEIVING BY EMAIL AND THERE'S A DISCUSSION PORTION OF IT I SHOULD BE A PART OF, I WILL FOLLOW UP AND LET YOU KNOW. >> I THINK THERE WAS AN EXPLICIT STATEMENT FROM FINANCE THAT THEY WOULD WANT YOU TO BE PART OF
THAT. PRECEDED THE ADOPTION OF A WORK PLAN. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO GET YOU IN ON THAT AS OUR REPRESENTATIVE SINCE WE'RE THE ONES THAT AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS EVEN THOUGH THE CITY ISSUES THEM.
ANOTHER ROLE THAT IS POTENTIAL AND WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT IT IN CONNECTION WITH THE WORK PLAN, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE PREVIOUSLY BY YOUR PREDECESSOR AS THE LAST FULL TIME EXECUTIVE SECRETARY WAS
CALCULATIONS ON PROPERTY TAX IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET WHICH IS CURRENTLY BEING DONE BY THE ASSESSOR. >> ASSESSOR, YES. >> AND IF THERE'S -- I DON'T KNOW HER FEELINGS. I'M SURE SHE
FELT PLENTY BUSY BEFORE THEY TOOK ON THAT TASK BUT WE FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT HAPPEN. AND IT DID HAPPEN. BUT MAYBE WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT WHETHER WE WANT THAT TO COME BACK INTO THE WORK PLAN FOR YOU OR FOR YOU TO ASSIST THEM. AND
THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DEFER UNTIL WE TALK ABOUT THE WORK PLAN. UNLESS YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO CONTRIBUTE ON THAT. >> NO, SIR. I'D WANT TO REACH OUT TO THE ASSESSOR AND SEE IF THERE'S SOME WAY I CAN OPEN UP
RELATIONS WITH THEM. THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE IS WHO I HAVE NOT REACHED OUT YET. THE ONGOING RELATIONSHIP I HAVE WITH FINANCE, I'D LIKE TO DO THE SAME WITH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME KNOW AND I WILL REACH OUT AND LET YOU
KNOW WHAT I FIND OUT. >> TALK ABOUT WHETHER IT SHOULD BE A PART OF YOUR WORK PLAN. AND YOU NOTED AND I HAVE HEEDED THE ADVICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT THE BET DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY OUT OF THE CHARTER TO CREATE A WORKING GROUP, WHICH IS
WHAT I WAS ENVISIONING. AND PERHAPS IT WOULD BE TIME FOR ME TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH ONE OR TWO OF MY COLLEAGUES ON THE COUNCIL ABOUT WHETHER THEY WOULD FIND THAT SORT OF ANALYSIS HELPFUL AND WE COULD REQUEST
THAT THEY DO THAT. AND IF THEY'RE WILLING TO HAVE YOU ASSIST IN THAT PROCESS, AND AUTHORIZE US TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT AGAIN, THAT'S PROBABLY A DISCUSSION FOR THE WORK PLAN AFTER SOME FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH MY COLLEAGUES ON THE COUNCIL. ALL RIGHT. ANY
OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. OKAY. WE WILL ASK THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE THIS UPDATE. AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO DISCUSSION ITEM SEVEN, WHICH IS THE OUTCOME OF THE SUPERVISION SYSTEM AND ONBOARDING ANALYSIS,
AND VICE PRESIDENT PREE-STINSON, WITH CASEY JOE CARL. >> I'VE GOT SOME REMARKS TOGETHER SO I CAN STAY ON POINT. FOR CLARITY AND CONTEXT ABOUT THIS MOTION, THIS MOTION DOES NOT TAKE AWAY OUR CHARTER THAT IS RIGHT TO HAVE A STAFFER. WHAT
IT DOES DO IS PUTS IN PLACE OPERATIONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT THAT IS NECESSARY FROM ONBOARDING THROUGH THE ENTIRE LIFE SPAN OF FULL-TIME STAFFER. IT ENSURES COORDINATION BETWEEN THE BET, OUR POLICY GROUP, COUNCIL OFFICES. IT STRENGTHENS
THE SUPPORT FOR OUR BOARD. IT PROVIDES GREATER ACCESS TO RESOURCES, SYSTEMS AND DATA THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS BUT WE REALLY DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO. IMPORTANTLY, IT GUARANTEES THAT
CURRENT AND FUTURE STAFFERS RECEIVE BENEFIT SUPPORT TO INCLUDE SIGNING UP ON TIME WHICH IS WILDLY IMPORTANT. THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT. AND THAT COORDINATION AND SUPPORT REALLY COMES FROM THE CLERK'S OFFICE, WHICH I'LL GET TO. IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT OUR
STAFFER SUPPORTS THIS MOTION. I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT. AND ALSO MAKE SPACE IF SHE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT AT ANY POINT. HER OPINION ABSOLUTELY DOES MATTER ON THIS. SHE IS THE ONE THAT IS MANAGING OUR DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS. AND SHE KNOWS BETTER THAN ANY OF US
WHAT SYSTEMS AND SUPPORTS ARE NEEDED TO DO THIS EFFECTIVELY TO CARRY OUT OUR JOB. ANOTHER KEY CORRECTION THAT WE'LL GET TO ACTUALLY IN DISCUSSION ITEM 8 IS ALSO TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING
THAT WAS MISSED IN NOT HAVING WHAT I'M PROPOSING IN THIS MOTION TODAY. BECAUSE THERE WASN'T ANYBODY STEERING THE SHIP, IF YOU WILL, THERE WAS NEVER ANY DISCUSSION BY ANY OF US BOARD MEMBERS ABOUT WHAT LEVEL OF PAY SHE SHOULD START AT
SO IT DEFAULTED TO A STEP ONE. I SAY THAT AS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING THAT WAS LOST BY NOT FORMALIZING SOMETHING. WHICH IS WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IN THIS MOTION. AND ALSO, I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THIS MOTION, AGAIN,
IN NO WAY MINIMIZES OR JEOPARDIZES -- IN FACT, IT ALSO AS A BYPRODUCT, IF YOU WILL, CREATES A COST SAVINGS FOR THE BET WHILE ALIGNING OUR OPERATIONS WITH BEST PRACTICES ACROSS OUR CITY ENTERPRISE. AS YOU KNOW, WE CHANGED OUR GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE. WE EXIST
IN THE VISUAL OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. BUT WE DIDN'T REALLY TAKE ANY FORMAL STEPS IN WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE WHICH IS WHAT THIS MOTION ALSO CORRECTS FOR. THERE ARE FUNCTIONS TO THAT POINT THAT ELECTED OFFICIALS SIMPLY CANNOT
PERFORM. SUCH AS BADGE LEVELS FOR SOMEONE TO GET A BADGE, MEANING OUR STAFFER. OR NEW BET MEMBERS OR MANAGING HALOGEN PERMISSIONS. FUNCTIONS ARE PROPERLY SUPPORTED AND COMPLIANT
AND ABLE TO BE CARRIED OUT. I DO ALSO WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO APOLOGIZE TO OUR STAFFER. WHILE I DID SHOW UP EVERY DAY DURING HER ONBOARDING AND DID WHAT WAS BEST -- THIS ISN'T THE
EXPERIENCE THAT ANYONE WANTED HER TO HAVE CLEARLY. WE WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE AND GRACE. AND I ALSO WANT TO EXPRESS DEEP GRATITUDE TO OUR CLERK'S OFFICE, ESPECIALLY TO CASEY AND KELLY WHO IMMEDIATELY STEPPED IN WHEN I WENT TO FIND
THEM, AS I USUALLY DO, TO PROVIDE THE BASICS OF A WORK SPACE, TO HAVE A PLACE TO BE, BUT ALSO BUILD WITH HER COLLEAGUES. COLLABORATIVE
ENTERPRISE, A RESPONSIVE ENTERPRISE AND ONE DEEPLY COMMITTED. I SUPPORT THAT WORK WITHIN OUR ENTERPRISE. FINALLY, I WANT TO THANK OUR EXECUTIVE TEAM LED BY MARGARET ANDERSON KELLIHER. WE DID PUT A LOT OF
WORK AND TIME TO ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE, MEETING WITH ONE ANOTHER, HAVING INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS. I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE, TO INCLUDE OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WHO DRAFTED THE RESOLUTION BEFORE WE MOVE TO ADO
ADOPT. BY SUPPORTING THIS MOTION TODAY, WE UNBURDEN THE BET -- INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, THIS MOTION WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN DONE ALREADY AND ALLOW THEIR FOR THEM TO HAVE A FRESH SUPPORTED
START FROM THE BEGINNING. THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS ABOUT THE MOTION WE WILL GET TO. IF MR. CARL HAS ADDITIONAL REMARKS HERE, JUST SOME SPECIFICS HERE. WITH YOUR APPROVAL, I WOULD LIKE TO PASS THE MIC OVER TO MR. CARL. MR.
CARL. >> THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. MY NAME IS CASEY CARL. MOST OF YOU KNOW I HAVE THE PRIVILEGE AS SERVING AS THE CLERK. BUT I ALSO HAVE THE PRIVILEGE -- THERE IS A FORMAL
RELATIONSHIP THAT HAS EXISTED AND CONTINUES TO EXIST BETWEEN THE CLERK'S OFFICE AND THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION, WHICH I BELIEVE AND CLAIM HAS BEEN A PRODUCTIVE ONE THAT HAS BEEN TO THE BENEFIT OF THIS BODY OVER THE YEARS. IT'S IN THAT SAME SPIRIT OF COLLABORATION, AS YOU
SAID, VICE PRESIDENT PREE-STINSON, THAT WE ARE BRINGING FORWARD A PROPOSAL THAT WOULD REPLACE THE BET SENIOR ADVISOR WITHIN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATIONAL SUPPORT. CENTER OF SUPPORT BOTH FOR THIS BODY, THE
BET, OR BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION, GENERALLY, BUT ALSO SPECIFICALLY FOR ITS STAFF POSITION MORE SPECIFICALLY ON A GO FORWARD BASIS. AS DETAILED IN THE RESOLUTION, YOU CAN SEE THAT MEANS THE CLERK'S OFFICE WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING THE BET AND ITS SENIOR ADVISOR WITH SUPPORT SERVICES THAT INCLUDE
BUDGET, ACCOUNTING, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION, INCLUDING PAYROLL, PROCESSING, TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT, FACILITIES, AND JUST GENERAL OPERATIONAL MATTERS. BY WAY OF THE COMPARISON TO YOUR POINT ABOUT INDEPENDENCE, I
WOULD NOTE THAT AS PART OF OUR CONSOLIDATED LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT UNDER THE NEW GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE, THE CLERK'S OFFICE ALSO PROVIDES THESE EXACT SAME TYPES OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES TO OUR INDEPENDENT OFFICE OF CITY AUDITOR. AND WE ALSO ACT AS CLERK TO THE INDEPENDENT AUDIT COMMITTEE. SO I THINK THERE IS A
VERY CLOSE PARALLEL BETWEEN THE WORK THAT THE CLERK'S OFFICE DOES AND THE SUPPORT SERVICES WE PROVIDE TO ANOTHER INDEPENDENT OFFICE OR BODY I SHOULD SAY THAT'S CREATED IN THE CITY CHARTER. THE DRAFT RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU ALSO AUTHORIZES THE
BET SENIOR ADVISOR WHEN NOT OCCUPIED WITH WORK SPECIFIC TO THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION TO WORK AS PART OF OUR NEWLY ESTABLISHED LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT DIVISION IN THE LEGISLATIVE DEPTARTMENT. WE HAD AN EXPERIENCE OF THAT
TONIGHT WITH MR. HAWKINS PRESENTING ON REVENUE STREAMS. -- WHICH WE BELIEVE PROVIDES A VERY NATURAL SIRN SYNERGY TO THE WORK. POLICY
REVIEW, BUDGET ANALYSIS, AND SIMILAR MATTERS. SO THE LRO DIVISION HAS TWO PRIMARY UNITS. ONE ARE POLICY AND RESEARCH UCHBT -- PROVIDE AN EXCELLENT HOME BASE FOR THE BET SENIOR ADVISOR PROVIDING THEM WITH A
TEAM OF SIMILAR ANALYSTS AND ADVISORS. YOU SAID COMMUNITY, A GROUP OF COLLEAGUES WORKING ON SHARED INTERESTS AND PROJECTS THAT BENEFIT THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AT LARGE. THE COUNCIL, THE BOARD OF TAXATION, AND COMMUNITY AT LARGE AS I SAID. I'M HAPPY TO REPORT THAT
THE COUNCIL'S COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE CONSIDERED THIS SAME RESOLUTION YESTERDAY AT ITS MEETING AND UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THAT. IT GOES TO THE FULL COUNCIL FOR FINAL ACTION TOMORROW AT ITS REGULAR MEETING. IN CLOSING, I WANT TO PRESENT MY
APPRECIATION TO MS. KEIDERLING WHO HAS BEEN VERY PATIENT AND COOPERATIVE AS WE HAVE WORKED OVER THE PAST MANY MONTHS AND ENABLE HER TO MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS AND SUPPORT TO THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION. SO WITH THAT, IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS SPECIFIC ABOUT THE RESOLUTION I
CAN ANSWER, I'M HAPPY TO STAND FOR THEM. -- MORE EFFECTIVELY IN AN OFFICIAL CAPACITY. >> THERE'S ONE MORE THING THAT I LEFT OUT FOR CLARITY HERE. WE'RE NOT DOING THIS BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH WORK FOR HER TO DO.
AND I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT. THIS ISN'T SOME SMOKEY BACK ROOM MEASURE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO CORRECT FOR SOMETHING THAT WE THOUGHT WAS FULL TIME AND IT WASN'T. I DON'T LIKE AMBIGUITY AND I DON'T LIKE WHISPER CAMPAIGNS. SO I JUST
WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT THIS MOVE IS NOT TO ADJUST FOR THE FACT THAT THIS WORK ISN'T FULL TIME. IT IS VERY MUCH FULL TIME. SHE HAS BEEN PERFORMING THAT. WE HEAR THESE UPDATES. THESE BODIES OF WORK ARE QUITE LARGE AND 100%
FULL TIME. THE CLERK HAS ALSO STATED IN SUPPORT. THIS IS OPERATIONALIZIN OPERATIONALIZING. THIS IS SUPPORT AND PROVIDES THAT HOME BASE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL CLEAR THERE. YOU HEARD IT FROM ME AND I WANTED TO BE VERY
CLEAR ABOUT THAT. >> COMMISSIONER ABENE. >> THANK YOU, PRESIDENT BRANDT. JUST A COUPLE OF CLARIFYING THINGS. YOU SAID THAT THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE YESTERDAY APPROVED THIS. BECAUSE THIS WOULD BE A PERSON FROM A
DIFFERENT -- AN INDEPENDENT BODY COMING IN THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH. IS THAT WHY? >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, COMMISSIONER ABENE, YES. THE BEST WAY OF FORMALIZING THIS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION AND CITY COUNCIL IS THROUGH JOINT
RESOLUTIONS. SO THE EXACT SAME RESOLUTION, SAME LANGUAGE IN TOTAL IS GOING THROUGH THE COUNCIL'S PROCESS FOR A FINAL VOTE TOMORROW. IN THE SAME RESOLUTION. BUT THE BET RESOLUTION IS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT. >> OKAY. THAT'S HELPFUL. I READ
THE RESOLUTION IN THE PACKET. WE DON'T HAVE IT AT THE DAIS HERE. AT THAT TIME I WAS PICKING UP MORE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STUFF. I THINK THE OTHER PIECE WAS IN THERE AS WELL. I SEE THIS AS TWO SEPARATE THINGS. THE ADMINISTRATIVE HOME FOR THE BET
WONDERFUL PERSON. BUT I ALSO SEE THEN MAYBE JUST WHILE THE WORK CYCLES FOR THE BET, YOU KNOW, THERE WILL BE TIMES WHERE IT'S WAY MORE DEMANDING THAN OTHER TIMES. THAT THERE'S NOW POTENTIALLY ASSIGNMENTS THAT COULD BE MADE. SO IS THE
CONCERN -- TWO MORE THINGS ABOUT THAT. IS THERE A CONCERN THEN ABOUT THE BET BEING PART OF THE LEGISLATIVE WORK, YOU KNOW, WORK? AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HEARD I THINK MAYBE
IN VICE PRESIDENT PREE-STINSON'S COMMENTS, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, MARGARET ANDERSON KELLIHER, WAS SHE AWARE OF ALL ASPECTS OF THIS AT THE TIME. >> IF I MAY. >> YEAH. >> DURING THAT MEETING IT WAS REALLY TO TALK ABOUT THE EXPERIENCE OF WHAT WAS THE
EXPERIENCE FROM ONBOARDING. THAT PORTION OF THAT WORK. BUT ALSO JUST TO TALK ABOUT HOW THE WORK IS KIND OF PLAYING OUT. SO WE HAD A LARGER DISCUSSION. AND THEN IDENTIFYING WHAT ARE WE ACTUALLY TRYING TO SOLVE FOR SO WE'RE NOT CREATING A NEW PROBLEM TO SOLVE FOR. SHE WAS AWARE OF
THE ENTIRETY. AND DURING THAT MEETING, THE DEPUTY WAS THERE WHO IS ALSO OVER HR, AND A COUPLE OF OTHER COMPLEMENTARY DEPARTMENTS SUCH AS IT AND COMMUNICATIONS, IS THAT CORRECT? >> AND FINANCE. >> OKAY. AND FINANCE. THAT MAKES
SENSE. AND COO, AND CLERK AS WELL. YOU HAVE A GOOD PORTION OF THAT TEAM THAT REPRESENTS THE ENTIRETY OF THAT WORK TO UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE INPUTS AND OUTPUTS AND IMPACTS WE'VE HAD AND THE POTENTIAL OUTCOMES BY DOING THIS. I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE FROM THE WORK THAT WE HEARD
ABOUT EARLIER. THERE'S NOW CONTINUING WORK, RIGHT, WITH THIS ALTERNATIVE TAX FINANCING. SO LET'S JUST SAY WE DIDN'T DO THIS, IT KINDA WOULD LEAVE CHRISTINA AS AN OUTLIER WITHOUT
ANYTHING FORMAL. IT IS ALLOWS HER TO PICK UP THAT WORK BUT SHE'S PART OF THAT TEAM AS WELL. I DON'T SEE IT HAS GOING BACK TO SOMETHING ELSE THAT WAS SAID, WHEN SHE'S NOT WORKING ON BET THINGS. I DON'T THINK THAT'S ACCURATE. AT WORK, I HAVE ABOUT
20 DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS THAT I DO, ON ANY GIVEN DAY I ONLY DO ABOUT TWO OF THEM. I MIGHT DO 20 OF THEM BUT I'M PRIORITIZING MY DAY. IT'S THE SAME FOR HER. IT IS A BODY OF WORK. SHE'S PRIORITIZING WHAT GETS DONE IN
WHAT ORDER BASED ON WHAT'S COMING IN AND WHAT TIMELINES AND DEADLINES ARE. I THINK THAT'S A MORE ACCURATE WAY TO DEPICT THAT RATHER THAN SAYING WHEN SHE'S NOT WORK OG BET FUNCTIONS. >> MADAM VICE PRESIDENT, I AGREE WITH OUR STATEMENT. I WOULD ALSO CLARIFY FOR US IT WAS IMPORTANT
TO SAY THAT AS THAT BODY OF WORK IS BEING CONSIDERED BECAUSE CHRISTINA KEIDERLING IS THE STAFFER TO THE BET, THAT WORK IS PRIORITIZED. IF SHE IS HELPING TO WORK ON A JOINT PROJECT THAT WOULD INVOLVE THE LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT TIME, WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE ARE NO CONFLICTS BETWEEN THAT SCOPE OF WORK THAT ANYTHING COMING FROM THE BET THROUGH A FORMAL WORK PLAN VOTED ON BY THIS BODY IS TOP PRIORITY. >> HENCE THE VOTING. SO THAT COMMENT THAT I MADE ABOUT THE
FORMAL VOTING, THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL REASON WHY I STATED THAT SPECIFIC TO THAT POINT. >> OKAY. JUST ONE MORE THOUGHT. I'M BACK ON THE AUDIT COMMITTEE. I KNOW IT'S VERY EXCITING. I WAS ON THAT FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS. AND SO I HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE THERE. I TOTALLY GET
THAT RELATIONSHIP. THAT IS ANOTHER ENTITY THAT'S JUST KIND OF OUT THERE. BUT THEY ONLY FOCUS ON AUDIT WORK. THEY DON'T HAVE THAT SECONDARY PIECE, I'LL CALL IT. SO THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT GIVES ME SOME CONCERN. OTHERWISE, I DO THINK IT'S A GREAT COMPARABLE. SO
MAYBE HOPEFULLY THERE WILL BE SOME OTHER DISCUSSION HERE ABOUT THIS. >> I'D LIKE TO REITERATE SUPPORT FOR THE IDEA THE CLERK'S OFFICE BEING THE ADMINISTRATIVE HOME FOR THE BET. I THINK THAT MAKES
ALL KINDS OF SENSE. THERE'S NO REASON FOR MS. KEIDERLING TO REINVENT THE WHEEL ON THE VARIOUS ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS OF THE CITY. I DO HAVE A LITTLE
BIT OF CONCERN ABOUT MAYBE THE LOOSENESS OF THE SECOND RESOLVING CLAUSE TO THE EXTENT IT TALKS ABOUT SIMILAR MATTERS AS ASSIGNED WHILE LEAVING OPEN THE QUESTION OF WHO ASSIGNS THEM. AND I WONDERED IF,
COMMISSIONER PREE-STINSON, HOW OPEN YOU WOULD BE TO BENDING THAT TO SAY SOMETHING SIMILAR ORDERS AS ASSIGNED WITH CONCURRENCE OF THE BET PRESIDENT IN FURTHERANCE OF THE BET WORK PLAN. I MEAN, JUST SO WE HAVE
THAT CHECK ON MS. KEIDERLING'S DIRECTION. >> MR. CLERK, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT THE WORK PLAN CONTAINS THE ENTIRETY OF THE WORK. WE'RE NOT TALKING ONE HAND DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THE OTHER ONE
IS DOING. THAT'S THE WAY I SEE IT. I WOULD BE AMENABLE. I THINK THE WAY THAT IT'S READ ISN'T THE WAY IT'S BEING APPLIED. THE WAY I'M READING IT. I'D BE CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT THE CLERK THINKS ABOUT THAT. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, VICE.
PREE-STINSON, SO I WILL ACTUALLY ASK IF MR. HAWKINS WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS. MR. HAWKINS MAINTAINS A WORK PLAN, IF I CAN USE THAT TERM, WHICH IS PUBLIC. IT'S DIRECTED BY THE COUNCIL WHEN THEY VOTE ON PROJECTS THAT GO TO LRO, TO LEGISLATIVE
RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT, SO THAT THERE IS A PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY. AND THIS IS THE WORK THAT IS BEING DONE. THIS IS THE STATUS. HERE'S WHERE IT'S AT. HERE'S WHO BROUGHT IT FORWARD. WE THREE HAVE TALKED,
MS. KEIDERLING, MR. HAWKINS AND I. IT WOULD BE -- BET SENIOR ADVISOR SUCH AS LOOKING AT THE BET SENIOR ADVISOR'S WORK PLAN OR WORK LOAD AND THE PROJECTS BEING UNDERTAKEN AND THE SAME
PROJECTS BEING DONE BY LRO AND COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE TWO. I DON'T CREATE THAT WORK. SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM MR. HAWKINS ON THAT, I THINK THAT
WOULD BE HELPFUL. >> I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO SPEAK TO THAT. PRESIDENT BRANDT, VICE PRESIDENT PREE-STINSON. ONE OF THE THINGS I CAN POINT PEOPLE TO, WE HAVE A PUBLIC DASHBOARD.
IT'S UNDER OUR WEBSITE ON THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AS LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT. IF ANYBODY HAS THE ELECTRONIC VERSION OF ANY OF THE REPORTS, WE LINK YOU TO IT. I BELIEVE WE UPDATED IT. BUT THE REASON THAT WE MAINTAIN THAT,
THERE'S NOT AN INTERNAL FACING VERSION. THERE'S JUST ONE VERSION AVAILABLE TO EVERYBODY AND THE PUBLIC. IT DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T DO INTERNAL VERSION. BUT WHAT THAT REFLECTS EVERYTHING THAT WE CURRENTLY ARE WORKING ON. WE PUT THE EXPECTED
RETURN DATES. THE DATES IT WAS REQUESTED. LINK TO YOU THE LEGISLATIVE FILE FOR ALL OF THAT. YOU SAW WHEN I CAME BEFORE YOU TODAY, I REFERENCED AGAIN ANY TIME THAT WE COME BEFORE ANY ELECTED BODY, WE WANT TO MAKE IT
CLEAR WHY IT'S THERE. WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO SHOW YOU THEY DIRECTED US TO DO THE FOLLOWING. THAT'S WHY WE'RE NOT CLOSING THE LOOP. I REFERENCED THIS WHEN IT CAME UP. THE VERBAL AGREEMENT 2024 WITH BET AS WELL AS ACTIONS
THAT LED TO THE PRODUCTION OF THE MUNICIPAL REVENUE WORK. WE PRESENTED ON, WE HAD A POLICY BRIEFING ON SOCIAL HOUSING YESTERDAY TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. SIMILARLY THAT ONE WAS UNIQUE. THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME WE HAD AN ITEM THAT CAME OUT OF THE CITY BUDGET. WE
REFERENCED THAT SPECIFIC PART OF THE BUDGET AS TO THE REASON WHY THIS REPORT HAD BEEN CREATED. I DO WANT TO STRESS THAT WITH ANYTHING THAT WE'RE DOING, OUR GOAL IS TO OPERATE IT MAKES LIFE EASIER, NUMBER ONE. IF NOT THE
MOST, IT BETTER BE ONE OF THE MOST TRANSPARENT GROUPS IN THE CITY. THAT HAVE AN ENTIRE ACCOUNTING OF THE WORK THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON THAT'S AVAILABLE TO ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC AT ANY GIVEN TIME TO FOLLOW ALONG WITH AND ASK QUESTIONS FOR. SO THAT IS
SOMETHING AS FAR AS APPLYING IT HERE, I WOULD THINK THAT MORE THAN HAPPY TO FACILITATE A BUILD OUT IF THE BET WANTED TO MAINTAIN THEIR OWN ACCOUNTING OF SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT'S SPECIFIC TO THE BET. THERE'S AN INFINITE
NUMBER OF WAYS. ENSURING WE'RE OPERATING AS TRANSPARENTLY AS WE CAN BE. ONE OF THE CORE I THINK FOUNDATIONAL PIECES THAT I WANTED TO LIFT UP AS WE WERE BUILDING SUCH WHEN WE STARTED BUILDING THIS GROUP IN AUDIT.
THE OTHER THING I'D SAY TOO IS JUST FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE. EVEN WHEN YOU'RE NOT WORKING ON OTHER THINGS, THERE STILL IS SOMETHING TO BE SAID. PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO CALL IT OSMOSIS. WORKING AROUND OUR TEAM AND THE COLLECTIVE STUFF WE'RE WORKING
ON. THE BASIC KNOWLEDGE I HAVE TODAY, JUST FROM BEING AROUND THOSE -- I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES FROM BEING KIND OF ENGAGED WITH PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING ADJACENT WORK ON SIMILAR ITEMS. YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY END UP BENEFITING WHETHER IT WAS UNRELATED TO WORK
THAT WAS FROM THE BET THAT WERE TALKING TO COLLEAGUES ABOUT. SO I THINK ECONOMIES OF SCALE OF KNOWLEDGE TO THE EXTENT THAT'S A THING. SO I WANT TO -- ALWAYS GOING TO BE HAPPY TO ANSWER WHATEVER I CAN. >> PRESIDENT BRANDT, IF I COULD ADD ONE MORE PIECE TO SOMETHING
THAT THE VICE PRESIDENT MENTIONED, AND AS MR. HAWKINS WAS SPEAKING, IT OCCURRED TO ME. MS. KEIDERLING IS CURRENTLY A SINGLE POSITION. HOUSING HER WITH MR. HAWKINS UNIT GIVES HER
A COMMUNITY TO SPEAK, BUT I ALSO THINK IT HAS A BENEFIT TO THIS BODY. THERE ARE RESOURCES AND TOOLS, INCLUDING ACCESS TO RESEARCH SITES AND SERVICES THAT WE'VE GIVEN TO OUR LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT TEAM THAT MS. KEIDERLING DOESN'T HAVE. SHE WOULD BENEFIT FROM HAVING ACCESS
TO THOSE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES AND TOOLS. BUT ALSO, THERE'S A BENEFIT TO THIS BODY IN THAT IF SHE'S GONE, FOR EXAMPLE ON A LEAVE OR A VACATION OR SHE HAPPENS TO GET THAT DEPARTMENT HEAD JOB AT THE STATE THAT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A BODY OF PEOPLE WHO
UNDERSTAND HER WORK AND ARE ABLE TO FILL IN ON A TEMPORARY BASIS SO THIS BODY DOESN'T BECOME UNSTAFFED. WHICH WOULD BE THE CONSEQUENCE OF NOT HAVING COMMUNITY SUPPORT. I THINK THOSE ARE THE BETTER BENEFITS THAT
VICE PRESIDENT YOU WERE MENTIONING THAT I DIDN'T SPEAK TO DIRECTLY. THOSE ARE WAYS THAT THIS PROPOSAL BRINGS THOSE SYNERGIES BETWEEN MS. KEIDERLING'S POSITION AND DIVISION TOGETHER. >> I GUESS I'M WILLING TO GIVE THIS A TRY. WE CAN ALWAYS AMEND
IT DOWN THE ROAD IF WE PERCEIVE THAT WE'RE NOT GETTING THE VALUE WE HAD HOPED FOR IN TERMS OF GETTING THE WORK PLAN DONE. AND I THINK THAT THE IDEA OF A DASHBOARD FOR THE BET'S WORK IS
APPROPRIATE AND IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE REST OF THE CITY, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE INDEPENDENT. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER ABENE. >> YEAH. I THINK A COUPLE OF THINGS. I THINK THIS DEPARTMENT, THAT DEPARTMENT DIDN'T EXIST UNDER THE PREVIOUS FULL-TIME STAFFER FROM FOUR YEARS AGO OR
WHATEVER. WAS THIS -- I KNOW WE HAD A DIFFERENT GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURE THEN TOO. SO MANY THINGS HAVE CHANGED. THAT INDIVIDUAL, I'M SORRY I DON'T KNOW HIS NAME. >> JACK. >> THANK YOU. IS THERE A UNIT IN
THE CITY THAT IS MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THAT WORK PIECE? NOT THE HOMING. BUT LIKE THE FINANCE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. OKAY. I SEE AN ANSWER IS EMERGING FROM OUR VICE PRESIDENT. THERE WE GO. >> I WASN'T GOING TO SPEAK TO THIS POINT BUT IT WAS BROUGHT UP
SO I WILL. I ALLUDED TO IT IN MY COMMENTS. YOU'LL NOTICE THAT I MENTIONED MANY DEPARTMENTS AND HAD MANY THINGS. THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT I DON'T THINK FINANCE. BUT HAVEN'T HAD THE WILLINGNESS TO PARTNERSHIP. TO INCLUDE JUST HAVING HER HAVE A DESK THERE. TO INCLUDE SOME OF THE FUNCTIONS
THAT DID USED TO HAPPEN UNDER A DIFFERENT ITERATION. I'M NOT CALLING THEM OUT AND SAYING THEY COULDN'T DO SOMETHING LATER. BUT ALL I'M SAYING IS THE PERSON WHO IS THE BOSS OF THE CFO IS IN THAT BUILDING, IF THERE WAS A DIFFERENT STRUCTURE THAT WOULD
HAVE BEEN AN ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL THAT WE WOULD HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD. BUT IT DOESN'T EXIST. THIS IS THE THING. MM-HMM. >> HELPFUL. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE'LL MOVE -- IS THERE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE
RESOLUTION 2025009? >> I WOULD LIKE TO -- THAT'S MY MOTION SO MAYBE I SHOULDN'T. >> I'LL MOVE THE MOTION. >> SECOND. >> OKAY. A PROPER MOTION IS BEFORE US. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OR ANY AMENDMENTS? OKAY. SEEING NONE, I'LL ASK THE
CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL ON THE MOTION TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION. >> COMMISSIONER ABENE. >> AYE. >> CHUGHTAI. >> AYE. >> VICE PRESIDENT PREE-STINSON.
>> AYE. >> PRESIDENT BRANDT. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE FOUR AYES. >> ALL RIGHT. THAT MATTER IS ADOPTED. AND I WILL NOW ASK US TO MOVE ON TO DISCUSSION ITEM 8. >> PRESIDENT BRANDT, BEFORE YOU
DO, I WANT TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION. THE COMMENT YOU MADE IS WE CAN TRY THIS AND IF IT DOESN'T WORK, WE CAN ALWAYS CHANGE IT. I AGREE. I HOPE WE COME BACK AND SAY THIS
WAS THE BEST BY THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION. >> THANK YOU. I'LL ASK VICE PRESIDENT PREE-STINSON TO LEAD THIS ITEM. >> IT'S A HOT NIGHT FOR ME HERE. FOR OUR LAST ITEM, I WANT TO ASK MS. KEIDERLING, IT CAN BE
STRANGE TO SIT AND LISTEN TO WHAT LIKELY IS A BRIEF DISCUSSION ABOUT PAY. BUT IF YOU DID WANT TO STEP OUT TO NOT HAVE TO HEAR US DEBATE, YOU ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO DO THAT. OTHERWISE, YOU'RE WELCOME TO SIT. ALL RIGHT. I WILL PROCEED. OKAY. SO I ALLUDED TO THIS
EARLIER FOR THE REASONS THAT I ALREADY NAMED. NONE OF US ACTUALLY WEIGHED IN ON WHAT LEVEL OF PAY SHE SHOULD BE. THERE ARE EIGHT STEPS. BASED ON HER RESUME AND WHAT SHE'S ALREADY DONE, IT IS MY PERSONAL BELIEF THAT WE SHOULD HAVE
BROUGHT HER IN AT A TWO. NEXT YEAR IS COMING. WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS ACTUALLY SUGGEST THAT SHE IS A STEP 3. MOVING FORWARD INTO THE NEW YEAR. I AM ALSO OPEN FOR DISCUSSION. IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THOUGHT ABOUT ACTUALLY ON THE WAY OVER. WE CAN ALSO DISCUSS
WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD TAKE AN ACTION NOW TO PUT HER AT STEP 2. WE COULD HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION ON WHETHER WE THINK IT SHOULD GO BACK TO THE DATE OF HER HIRE. THAT IS A DISCUSSION WE SHOULD HAVE BUT I'M OPEN TO THAT DISCUSSION. I WANTED TO START
WITH FISCAL YEAR 2026 A STEP 3 FOR THE REASONS I NAMED ALREADY FOR WHY WE WOULD GO FROM A 1 TO A 3. AND TURN IT OVER TO THE PRESIDENT FOR DISCUSSION. >> ALL RIGHT. IS THERE DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER CHUGHTAI. >> YEAH, THANK YOU, MR.
PRESIDENT. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD, VICE PRESIDENT PREE-STINSON. I WOULD SUPPORT VERY STRONGLY THAT AT THE BEGINNING OF 2026 ON JANUARY 1ST, THAT WE MOVE OUR EXECUTIVE SECRETARY UP TO A STEP 3. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS. FIRST ONE IS FOR THE ATTORNEY. MR. HAMMER, DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO RETROACTIVELY ADJUST TO A STEP 2? FOR MS. KEIDERLING.
>> PRESIDENT -- >> IS THAT SOMETHING THAT -- >> PRESIDENT BRANDT, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. IT MAY BE DEPENDENT ON HOW MUCH MONEY IS AVAILABLE IN THE BOARD'S BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR. SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AHEAD TO NEXT YEAR, THAT ITEM IS GOING TO COME
BEFORE THE BOARD, YOU KNOW, USUALLY IN DECEMBER. AND SO WHEN THE COMPENSATION IS SET FOR 2026, OBVIOUSLY, THAT'S GOING TO BE IN THE 2026 BUDGET. BUT THE 2025 BUDGET HAS ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED, SO IT'S GOING TO BE
SETTING ASIDE THE HR QUESTIONS THERE, I ALSO THINK THERE'S A FINANCE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THERE'S SUFFICIENT FUNDS BASED ON THE LEVY TO DO THAT. >> I THINK GIVEN THE STATUS OF OUR BUDGET RESERVE, WE COULD ADOPT THE MOTION TO AMEND THE
BUDGET IF IT'S REQUIRED. I WAS MORE CONCERNED ABOUT WHETHER WE, UNDER CITY'S HR POLICIES AND WHETHER WE'RE BOUND BY THEM OR NOT GIVEN OUR INDEPENDENCE, I'M NOT SURE WHETHER WE COULD DO THE
RETRO ACTIVITY. I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH HOW THE CITY'S STEP SYSTEM IS IMPLEMENTED. DO STEPS GENERALLY CHANGE ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE HIRE DATE OR AT THE BEGINNING OF A YEAR? THE CITY'S FISCAL YEAR. >> I COULD ACTUALLY SPEAK TO
THAT, SIR. SO THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT PAY INCREASES THAT CITY STAFFERS USUALLY GET FROM MY UNDERSTANDING. CLERK CARL, YOU CAN PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. COST OF LIVING TYPICALLY GIVEN IN JANUARY. THERE IS ON YOUR ANNIVERSARY DATE, YOU GO UP TO YOUR NEXT STEP. I HAVE BEEN
TOLD AND I AM ABSOLUTELY NOT AN UNBIASED SOURCE HERE SO I SAY THIS AS A CAVEAT THAT I AM NOT UNBIASED. I HAVE BEEN TOLD FOR TYPICALLY FOR MORE OF AN ENTRY LEVEL, YOU'RE LOOKING AT THOSE 1-3 STEPS. AND THAT IT'S
NEGOTIABLE FOR ADVANCED EXPERIENCE TO START HIGHER. I COULD BE WRONG. THAT'S JUST WHAT I HEARD. >> I'M NOT DISPUTING THAT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE STARTED YOU AT A HIGHER STEP THAN WHERE WE STARTED YOU. JUST
WONDERING ABOUT THE MECHANISM FOR DOING THAT. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, COMMISSIONER PREE-STINSON, ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT WE GO TO TWO NOW AND A THREE ON JANUARY 1ST OR ON HER ANNIVERSARY DATE? >> I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO SEE,
AND THERE'S PRECEDENCE, I CAN SPEAK TO THAT IF NEEDED. BUT WHAT I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO SEE IS TO GO TO A STEP 2 EFFECTIVE NEXT PAY PERIOD. AND A STEP THREE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR AND NOT WAITING UNTIL THE
ANNIVERSARY DATE IS WHAT I'M SUGGESTING. >> OKAY. AND IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THE PRECEDENT, I WOULD BE GRATEFUL. >> THE PRECEDENT IS MYSELF. >> OKAY. >> LET ME QUICKLY SHORE UP WHAT A SUMMARY IS HERE. SUMMARY IS MY
COUNCIL MEMBER, MY BOSS AT THE TIME WAS MISINTERPRETED SOME INFORMATION THAT THEY WERE GIVEN. I CHALLENGED THE STEP THAT I WAS AT. I WAS ABLE TO MOVE UP. I WAS NOT ABLE TO GO BACK RETROACTIVE. I DON'T THINK BECAUSE IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO DO SO. WE COULD AMEND THE BUDGET,
ET CETERA. SO THAT WASN'T IN THE CARDS. BUT I WAS ABLE TO MOVE UP TO THE NEXT STEP AT THE NEXT PAY PERIOD. SO I DO KNOW THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN HAPPEN FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE BACK IN 2018. >> AND THAT WAS -- I WAS THINKING MORE ABOUT THE OTHER PART OF THAT, DOING IT
JANUARY 1ST RATHER THAN THE ANNIVERSARY DATE FOR THE THIRD STEP. >> AND I THINK OUR CLERK HAS SOME ADDITIONAL INFO THAT HE'S ABOUT TO SHARE WITH US. BUT THAT'S MY MOTION THAT I WOULD LO
LIKE TO BRING TODAY. MOVE UP TO STEP THREE AT THE BEGINNING OF FISCAL YEAR OF 2026, NOT THE ANNIVERSARY DATE OF 2026 FOR STEP 3. >> OKAY. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR DOES MR. CARL HAVE
ANYTHING TO CONTRIBUTE? >> PRESIDENT BRANDT, JUST FOR FURTHER AWARENESS. I THINK THAT THE INSTANCE THAT VICE PRESIDENT PREE-STINSON CITED TO PUT THAT IN CONTEXT THOUGH, THE MAYORAL AND COUNCIL MEMBER AIDES ARE POLITICALLY APPOINTED POSITIONS
AND ARE SUBJECT TO DIFFERENT POLICIES THAN WOULD BE MS. KEIDERLING. SO WHAT WAS ALLOWED FOR COUNCIL MEMBER AIDE WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE ALLOWED FOR DIFFERENT POSITION. THOSE POLITICALLY APPOINTED POSITIONS ARE IN A SEPARATE CATEGORY UNDER
OUR HR POLICIES AND THEY'RE NOT SUBJECT TO CIVIL SERVICE REGULATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THAT EXPERIENCE FOR YOU WOULD BE UNIQUE TO MAYORAL AND COUNCIL AIDES ONLY, AND WOULD ONLY APPLY TO THAT LIMITED NUMBER OF 30 POSITIONS OUT OF
THE 4,000 ACROSS THE ENTERPRISE. I THINK I HEARD WHAT YOUR INTENTION WAS TO DO. I THINK MR. HAMMER HEARD THAT. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE SINCE WE AREN'T ABLE TONIGHT TO GIVE YOU CLEAR CONFIRMATION OF WHAT CAN AND CAN'T BE DONE IS THAT YOU
DIRECT THE STAFF TO -- ACHIEVE WHAT YOU ASKED FOR SO WE CAN COME BACK AND GIVE YOU DEFINITIVE ANSWERS OF WHAT WE CAN DO, WE CAN'T DO OR HERE'S A MIDDLE GROUND. -- THAT WOULD BE
FRUSTRATING FOR MS. KEIDERLING, IT WOULD BE FRUSTRATING FOR THIS BOARD TO SAY YOU TOOK AN ACTION WE WEREN'T READY TO ANSWER THAT. I KNOW THAT PUTS A LITTLE BIT OF A DAMPER IN TERMS OF TIMELINES BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE A SMARTER APPROACH. INSTEAD YOU
DIRECT US, STAFF, TO PURSUE THIS UNDERSTANDING WITH HR AND FINANCE TO THE EXTENT THAT MONIES ARE AT ISSUE. BUT I THINK RATHER THAN THE MONIES, THE BIGGER ISSUE HERE IS WHAT IS ALLOWED UNDER THE HUMAN RESOURCE POLICIES THAT DO APPLY TO MS. KEIDERLING, AND THEN THE MONEY
IS A SECONDARY ISSUE. SO IF THAT WOULD BE YOUR MOTION, I THINK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE COULD CARRY OUT FOR YOU. >> YOU TOOK THE THOUGHTS OUT OF MY HEAD. SO THANK YOU. SO I WOULD LIKE TO DO A STAFF DIRECTIVE THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE POINTED TOWARDS HR. >> I CAN TAKE IT.
>> OR THE CLERK. AND FURTHER CLARIFICATION FROM LEGAL. >> YUP. >> ON SPECIFICALLY ALSO FOR PROCESS ON WHAT IS THE PROCESS IF WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS ABLE TO BE ACHIEVABLE OR REPORT BACK ON WHY NOT. AND THEN WE HAVE OUR INFORMATION TO MAKE A DECISION
AT THE FOLLOWING MEETING. SO A STAFF DIRECTIVE WOULD BE WHAT MY MOTION IS THAT I'M BRINGING FORWARD SPECIFIC TO WHAT I JUST STATED. >> COMMISSIONER PREE-STINSON, JUST TO CLARIFY, WOULD THAT BE GOING TO STEP 2 NOW OR GOING TO STEP 2 RETROACTIVELY AND WHETHER
TO DO STEP 3 ON JANUARY 1ST OR THE ANNIVERSARY DATE, ESSENTIALLY. >> CORRECT. INVESTIGATION FOR THAT DIRECTIVE FOR BOTH FOR WHETHER WE CAN MOVE SOMEBODY INTO ANOTHER STEP NOW AND ADDITIONALLY, CAN WE MOVE THEM INTO YET ANOTHER STEP AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR RATHER
THAN WAIT UNTIL THE ANNIVERSARY DATE IS THE DIRECTIVE TO FIND OUT WHETHER THOSE THINGS ARE POSSIBLE PROCESS WISE, AND IF SO, WHAT IS THE PROCESS. IF NOT, WE'LL COME BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND WE'LL MAKE WHATEVER DECISION WE'RE ABLE TO MAKE. I WILL MAKE THAT MOTION AT THAT TIME. >> AND DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON A
STAFF DIRECTION? ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE HEARD THE STAFF DIRECTION. DOES IT NEED TO BE IN WRITING OR SINCE IT'S NOT A RESOLUTION -- >> MR. PRESIDENT, I THINK WE HAVE WHAT WE NEED TO FORMALLY DRAFT IT IN THE MINUTES. >> VERY GOOD. YOU'VE HEARD THE STAFF DIRECTION AS ENUNCIATED BY
COMMISSIONER PREE-STINSON. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER -- NO. OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. THE STAFF DIRECTION IS PASSED. AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR AGENDA FOR TONIGHT. UNLESS THERE ARE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS THAT I'M NOT AWARE
OF. OKAY. WITH THAT, WE WILL ADJOURN.