Put put this here. Okay, I think we'll go ahead and get the meeting started. Um, I'm going to call the City of Scottsdale Budget Review Commission special meeting uh for December 8th, 2025 to order. Can we
start with a roll call? Vice Chair Schwiker >> here. >> Commissioner Carla >> here. >> Commissioner Latiri >> here. >> Commissioner Newman. >> Commissioner Stevens >> here. >> Commissioner Baten
>> here. >> Okay. We'll start with public comment. Citizens may address members of the budget review commission during public comment regarding regarding non-aggendaized items. and on the agendaized items when the item is presented. Arizona law prohibits the
commission from discussing or taking action on an item that is not on the prepared agenda. Citizens may submit one request to speak a public comment card per meeting to the city staff. Public testimony is limited to three minutes per speaker. Written
public comment cards can be submitted to city staff at any time for items on the agenda or not agenda items. Cards submitted after the public comment has begun begun for the item will be provided to the commission at the conclusion of the public comment for
that item. Do we have any public comments? Okay, without that we will go on to approval of minutes. Uh there's a request for approval of the minutes for the November 18th, 2025 regular commission meeting.
>> Does anyone have any additions or corrections on the minutes? Otherwise, the chair would entertain entertain a motion for approval. >> I move. >> We have a second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say I. I.
>> I. >> Motion carries. Item number two, discussion of focus areas and work of the commission. Um I'll turn this over to Sonia right now. >> Thank you, Chair Schwiker. Thank you, commissioners.
So, at the last um budget review commission meeting, the commission decided to submit for each of the commission members to submit um up to three focus areas that the commissioners would like to see the commission um work
on this year in addition to reviewing the proposed budget. And in your packet there is a um spreadsheet that each of the commissioners um submissions are included in your packet and I kind of summarize them in a spreadsheet that's
in your packet to show the different submissions and um categorize them into the different um main categories.
So as you can see um there is uh the financial health metrics and sustainability a structural balance interest in that. There's also capital improvement plan interest in reviewing certain aspects of our capital improvement plan. There's also interest
in looking at our revenues and um specific interests in areas of the proposed budget and um reviewing budget variances above a certain threshold and so and there were a couple others submitted like looking at cash
management or funds transfers. So what I did was I summarized sort of the common themes into a couple slides. So if you want to can you pull up the slides? Um
so these were the common themes that I saw from all the submission again. Um the financial health metrics and sustainability, the capital project estimates and variances, revenue projections and analysis, budget to actual variances above a certain
threshold. So those were the common themes coming from um the submissions that were received from the commissioners. So with these common themes, the next slide please. I would recommend that if the commission um you know I'm going to turn it over for you
all to discuss your the areas of focus and what uh you'd like to um focus on. But if these common themes are the ones, this is how we can address them. on December 18th, the budget review commission meeting, we can share the
financial health metrics and discuss sustainability. Um, we have planned on doing that and sharing the uh financial conditions report that we've been working on. We were also planning on sharing with the commission the historical revenue trends, our major
revenue trends. Um the January 22nd meeting we had planned on uh sharing with the commission the prop a preliminary capital improvement plan. At that meeting we can also address specific capital project estimates and variances for revenue projections and
analysis. We planned on doing that December um March 9th and December 18th. We can certainly share the um historical trends to help the commission understand our major revenue trends. And on March
9th, we plan to present the projected um revenues for our fiscal year 2627 budget. And then for the uh budget to actual for the interest for looking at budget to actual variances, we currently produce a quarterly budget to actual
variance report for all our major funds and we basically put that on the council consent agenda every quarter. We can certainly present that to the commission and go over the major variances and I would suggest that we can do that on
December 18th for the first quarter of the year that's already gone to council. We can look at that and help the commission understand the major budget to actual variances. We can do that on the March 22nd meeting and then um you know we don't have a May and August
meeting identified in the budget uh in the uh commission calendar but we can certainly also continue looking at quarterly budget to actual reports throughout the year and um for the reviewing of the proposed budget that is still planned for the meetings in April.
So that is all my presentation summarizing the uh focus areas that were submitted by the commission and and some of the common themes that emerged from that and how we as staff think that we can address those common themes based on
the meetings that's um that's um uh uh approved or adopted by the commission. >> Thank you Sonia. Um, I'd like to open this up for discussion among the uh commission members as to their opinions on this or any additions or subtractions
that they'd be interested in. >> I just I have one quick clarifying question, Sonia. How many years back will the historical trends go? >> Um, we can provide up to 10 years if you want or even further back. The financial conditions report, we have 19 years of
data for you. We can pretty much provide as much as you want. Probably not 30 years anywhere from 30 years too much. >> Yes, it's a lot of data, but we do have that data and we can certainly provide that. >> Would it help if you had clarity from
the commission on how many years back? >> It would, but currently our financial conditions report does provide from 2007 through 2025. We already have that report put together. So you will have that data and for the historical trend
we have 10 10 years I believe. >> Thank you >> Bob. >> Cash management. Uh uh >> yeah when I was >> got it when I was managing a multi-
divisional organization each division had its own treasury but we had one common treasury before the corporation and I would basically analyze everybody's cash position sweep the accounts put them in the central
treasury so I would know what excess cash I had to invest so I maximize any opportunities we had for investment of excess cash. So I was just wondering if you do the same thing because you have multiple funds that you
have balances in. So uh Commissioner Terry U commissioners the budget review commission's task is not to look at operational processes but to review the budget but to answer your question we do pull out cash and
centralize our cash management and we do centralize all our cash investments and management. That's how we do it is how you described. >> Thank you. Um, Mark, >> yeah, I uh I got to tell you I'm really
kind of conflicted on something. Uh, I'd love to have more specificity in here and that's the reason I summarized everyone's comment by meeting date and one thought was, do we need to walk through in order to decide what level of specificity you want to suggest to the staff so we get what we want at each of
the meetings. On the other side, uh the city's going through a really painful system conversion and it's really drawn on the resources of um our treasures personnel and I think there's even been some attrition. So, I'm really conflicted between my desire to make
sure I get enough information with the importance of trying to get that thing done. So part of me would like to have us go through real quickly on your suggestions to see what can we throw out or defer and what do we really want to provide the treasurer a little more
guidance in each of the areas or the other side of it is do I just let it go let her present what she thinks is what we need and see how that goes this year so they can get the system conversion done. So, I'm not actually making I guess I'm asking for feedback
from my fellow commissioners about kind of what path we should go down. And then and if and again, if we go down the path or we just let her provide what we want, I recognize I still have the opportunity to reach out to her to say, "Hey, does it make sense for me to also look at
this?" In which case, if it does, she'll provide it to me and provide it to all of us to look at. So, and maybe Sonia, you want to respond to that first or do you want the commissioners to respond first? Uh, chairman. >> Um, I think we'll let commissioners
respond first, Carla. >> Okay. >> Uh, thank you. In a way, I think Mark kind of answered his own question because the way you laid it out in the end, it seemed to make more sense because staff is overburdened.
um not just you know Sonia's staff but also the clerk's staff etc. and maybe we go through as she's explained it, but if there's something that really really stands out to you, then we ask for more
specificity in it. Because part of me doesn't understand, for example, in capital projects how we can pull one out to go into depth on it before we've actually seen the budget and seen what's
coming up. So, that's my take on that. And as a way to move forward, you know, with some specificity, um Skyler had asked, you know, how many years are we going to go? And Sonia said, "You you're doing 10 years." So the first thing we could do is do we agree 10 years is
enough or do we need to change the number? And and then this way as we go through this discussion this morning, we can get some decisions made. That's just my take. >> Skyler Sorry comment there.
>> I just had it on. >> Oh, okay. Okay. All right. >> Can I add something to what what Commissioner Carla said? The one thought I also had was I would like to have more specificity, but maybe at the end of every meeting if we use the future agenda item section to have uh a
treasurer present what she plans on providing to us at the next meeting. That would then give us an opportunity to understand if that's enough or if there's something else we might want. That way we're not doing it all right now. We're kind of doing it in step uh
before each meeting. Yeah, I think that makes very good sense and I would support doing it that way. Um and also Mark listening to some of the questions you may come up with during this whole process even though these are kind of the agenda things
obviously there will be a place on the agenda for if you ask a question at the end of the meeting that they'll bring that information back for the next meeting so we can we can make sure we have time and room for all of that. Does anybody else have any comments on
on this um proposed timeline or the topics that we're are proposed to talk about? Bob? >> Yeah. >> Experience, you know, the SEC requires anywhere between three and five years of data. 10 years is long because there's
so many influences that affect old data that might not be relevant. And you know, you might be spending your time looking at something that's not relevant. So I think 10 years is a long period of time. I would be satisfied with three to five. >> I would I would agree with Bob. Three to
five seems plenty. >> Should we just say five years? Make it easy. >> Can I have a quick question on this though? Um Councilwoman I mean Councilman Graham had asked for us to look at trends. Is five years enough to look at trends? If it is, then I'm fine
with it. it. Um the question was that uh Councilman Graham had asked us to look at trends and Carla wants to know if a five-year review is enough to see trends or if we need longer. >> So um Commissioner um Carla
commissioners um I would recommend longer because the last five years uh significantly changed the finances of the city because of the pandemic. So in 2020 when the pandemic hit the city's
revenues and expenditures went through a very significant change and I think showing a little bit past five years helps you understand what has happened with the expenditures in the last 5 years and where it is going to go. So we
already have the data. In fact, the presentation for the 18th is already being done for the commission and it does include tw >> 2013 >> back to 2013. I do believe that the
commission would uh it would serve the commission well to understand the data past five years to understand what has happened in the last five years and what might happen in the next five. I think that's a good point. I'd forgotten about the the we saw that last
year about how the pandemic skewed everything. So, I think maybe, you know, we get a longer period of time and then we can kind of focus on what we need to focus on. Uh Bob, So, do we need a vote on this? Would
somebody like to recommend something, Carla? Um I would like to make a motion that we go with um Sonia's recommendation that we do the um it's from 2013 right forward for the analysis
you know due to a variety of reasons and also because staff already has it prepared. >> Do we have a second? >> I have one clarifying question. It's it's both revenues and expenditures. So for um the December 18th we are
looking at just revenues. >> Correct. But but what but >> as it relates to the the commission will we be looking both at historical trends of revenues and expenditures past 10 years? >> We can. >> Yeah. >> The expenditures might be a little uh
more challenging but we haven't put that together yet but the revenues we're very comfortable with right now. So, we'll work on the expenditure side for you guys. >> Okay. Up to 10 years. >> Great.
>> Do I take that as a second? >> Yes. >> Okay. I second. >> Is there any more discussion? Otherwise, all those in favor of the proposal, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed?
Motion carries. Mark Uh yeah, ju a couple more things. One, uh I'd like a reaction to one of my recommendations just for general discussion. And then the other thing is I think we out of uh fairness to Brad ought to at least talk a little bit
about his recommendation on artificial intelligence. probably premature right now. But one of the things he mentioned is there's probably a lot of AI opportunities out there that people are using at cities in order to identify opportunities for trend analysis and
savings. I doubt that our systems are ready for that right now. But, uh, in fairness to Brad, maybe that's something we ought to be talking about in the future about or get a or maybe get, uh, city staff to give us their thoughts on
what a future next step might be with respect to engaging, uh, a consultant or some software with respect to using AI for analysis. And maybe that's more of a next year item. >> Yeah. And I think my opinion on that is
it's probably a next year item. Brad and I talked a little bit about that after our last meeting because when he first came up with that, he wasn't aware that the uh IT upgrade uh was not totally implemented yet. So, I think doing that now would just put way too much burden
on the uh city staff, but I do think it's something very worthy to look at for maybe next year. >> Okay. And and the other Oh, >> Steve, do you mind if I just weigh in on that real quick? Jeff Walter, assistant city manager, sitting in for Greg. Um, Sonia, just maybe for a discussion
purposes, I think in the in the newest ERP, if I remember right, in some discussion uh that that came up and it came up also with uh with our chief information officer, Bianca Lochner, that there was an AI a backend AI component uh of the new system that can
do some of what I think Commissioner Newman is talking about in terms of analysis. Um, so maybe and I agree for next year it's a it's a great opportunity, but just something to consider uh that we might already have that uh software component on the back end of the new system.
>> I I think we would welcome that information if it if it was ready yet. I just wasn't sure that that part was up and going yet. >> I don't believe that it is. >> Okay. All right. >> Okay. Okay. My and my my second thing was um I'm going to um I'm going to make
an here's what I'm looking for this year just so you all know for your benefit. Uh I want to look at capital projects and I think Commissioner Newman wants to look at it and understand that better. One of my recommendations was to have each of our council persons and mayor
provide one project and have each of you select one project for us to look at. That'd be 14 projects but didn't look at it and then we're able to dig into that a little bit. might be too much. Don't know. Okay. So, just park that thought for right now. Uh but I feel like I need
to understand that. I'm thinking of making a motion that we talked about earlier that might be more relevant. And um and I I would move that we add to each future agenda item a report by city staff as to the nature of
the things to be presented for our discussion and potential changes with respect to the next meeting. That just makes it a standing agenda item where we're basically going to say here's what you're going to get at the next meeting.
>> So yeah, I have no objection to that. I think we usually do that as part of the future agenda items, but if you want to make that a standing part, I was my idea there was that way she can provide a little more specificity as to what we're going to get in order to help us. And
I'll tell you the things I'm looking for. I'm looking for that. And the other thing I'm terribly excited about is her providing the budget to actual quarterly information. I think we're going to learn a lot from that because my understanding is she's going to give it to us at possibly a level down from the
top reporting level. >> Sonia, do you have any response? >> Yeah, Vice Chair Riker, Commissioner Stevens, Commissioners, yes, we can certainly do that. We can provide you, we can explain, I guess maybe some clarification. Would you like an example
of reports that you're going to see? Would you like a stepbystep, you know, what you're going to actually be presented with? Because the reports that we will present to you are the reports you saw last year. We put a proposed budget together. So, you will get the
same proposed budget. You will get the same spreadsheets and uh detailed information on all the capital projects that we provided last year. These are the standard reports that the city provides. We can provide additional detail if you would like to, but we have
a a whole bunch of additional detail depending on what detail um a line item detail for expenditures for you. Um that will be it may be this thick by the time we print it out, but we can provide that as part of your
review of the expenditures. We can certainly provide the line item detail on the uh revenues. So for example, we can show you in uh in a our presentation will show you total sales tax but we can provide you a report this thick on every
single line item of every single fund of every single sales tax if you want that. So we can certainly provide that. Um but you know uh there's a lot of detail that we have. Um we have multiple categories of sales tax. We have multiple categories of certain expenditures and
we are putting together a level of detail that we hope that the commission would um can review. Um so that's what we're prep preparing to provide for capital projects. We're preparing to provide for you a crosswalk to show you
from last year's budget what was uh completed, what's new, what's changed, and what's this year's budget. So, we're preparing to pre present all of that to you. So, you can see um the detail you will get will be like last year's booklet where you have every single
capital project, every single cost categories included in those capital projects and um if you want additional detail, we can bring additional detail to you, >> Commissioner Carla. Um, yeah, I I agree with the, you know, at the end of the
agenda identifying reports, etc. That seems very efficient. But I will respectfully disagree with Mark about asking council members to each identify a capital project. Number one, that's two owners. I mean, you're talking about seven capital projects. Then you're talking about this
group's capital projects. And yet, we haven't even seen what's coming up in the budget yet as far as capital projects. So I don't understand how that would be done without making it too ownorous for staff. And then you also
have to say well out of these seven that are recommended by our nominters or whatever it's called. Um how do we decide which ones we're actually doing? You know because if you say no I'm not going to do that council
persons then you have caused an issue. Um, I mean, wouldn't it make more sense to actually look at the budget, see what the major capital projects are, and then decide if we have concerns about any of them, and then do what Mark is
suggesting. >> That's my >> um, Commissioner Carla, thank you for your comments. I do um I do want to make sure the budget review commission understands that the task is to review the budget and not the merits of the
project. Um so to that to that extent I I do believe that perhaps a suggestion would be having our city engineer um or uh explain to the budget commission how project budgets are put together which
would apply to most of the all the projects and for you all to understand how those project estimates are developed. I don't anticipate this commission diving into the merits of the project and why we're doing a specific capital project or the operational
aspects of it but rather the budget that is put in for that project. So we can certainly approach it that way versus uh selecting seven or 14 projects or what however many projects to dive into. we can approach it that way if that will
help the commission understand how project budgets are put together. >> That does help me because we're not saying is this a worthy project or not. We're looking at what are the costs and do we have a concern about the costs. So
for that works for me >> and Mark I'll get to you in just a second but but my feeling about this particular point and it's the one of the things I put down uh capital projects is they're approved by the council if they
come in on budget and on time. I don't particularly care about them. I don't think we need to really look at those. I think where the issues are are the ones that are way over budget. And you know we talked about that last year. anything that was over 10% over budget or over a
million dollars over budget were things that we might have some questions about. But if things are coming in on time and on budget, I agree with Carla. Um our role is not to decide whether or not the council should have approved that because they did it. That's their legislative
um ability. I think we want to look at things that are the the capital projects that aren't working the way they were expected to work. Mark Yeah, and I'm okay and I I will echo the fact that it's I don't believe it's our job to decide whether a project is
worthy. My focus is on whether or not the cost buildup that is being proposed is materially correct as to amount and timing. And so, for example, what I'm I might be asking for is okay, you your budget book tells us a total contract
amount, but what I don't know is what part is it low bid? Is it semar which is com uh construction manager at risk? Is it design build? Is it job order contracting? Because each one has a different uh susceptibility to change or a different level of estimation. So I
guess what I'm hoping is I'll get educated a little bit are hey what are the big pieces of what's behind the contracts we want to look at? and I will back off on my 14 thing and we'll we'll just decide which ones we each decide we want to look at a little bit and maybe
um I guess I'm just giving you a heads up that I I would like to see enough detail to understand the risk dynamics and quality of the estimates that take place on the couple that we look at. >> Sony if I can jump in on that one too.
Uh I just want to support uh our city treasurer and her comments earlier. I think we can do that. Commissioner Stevens, I think it's pretty easy to bring in Allison Tim Q, um, who's our city engineer and over transportation infrastructure to to really kind of drill down into the questions that you have specifically related related to
Semar, Joocc, any of those low bids. So, I think we can do that um without picking out 14 different uh projects. We can we can drill down into that when we get into capital projects. >> Okay, I'm done for now. And Mark, I think some of that will also
show up in the quarterly budget to actual reports. So I I think we'll cover most of the things that you're interested in because I'm interested in a lot of those things too. So I I think that'll get covered. And just to expand on that, the thing you and I looked at last year that Scott put together for us that kind of
reported the variance things. I mean that was just a basic listing of okay, which one do you want to know more about? So that's probably a good starting point. >> Okay. Does anybody else have any comments on the uh the four common themes that we
have down here? >> Um if we're in agreement on those chair >> I mean I had a I had a motion on the table right that we were going to have her report the nature of what was going to be presented at each following meeting. >> Yes. >> Is there a second on that or is that
going to die for lack of a second? >> Do we have a second for that? Could you restate what you're actually motioning, please? >> Yeah. My my motion was that there be a uh future agenda item discussed with staff presenting
in reasonable specificity what is to be provided at the upcoming meeting uh based on the topics that have been agreed to. >> Kind of a preview of coming attractions. >> That's basically what it is. And that
way it gives us a chance to say well wait will that be this many years or will that be at this level or uh and that way hopefully it'll save some time and get us what we need. And I do really respect her opinion on giving us what would be meaningful and that might help
there. And uh and and Sonia, I guess I would encourage you when you make presentations to try to feel free to tell us what might be questionable as to value to us absorbing and what would be the most meaningful. >> So Mark has a motion.
Carla, you look quizzical. >> I'm I'm still a little tiny bit confused, number one, as to whether or not we have to have a motion on it. Um, my only concern is because because I agree if we're going to have a future agenda item, it shouldn't be something that's amorphous.
But I just don't want us at the end of the meeting under future agenda items spending a half hour on each one having staff have to walk through and say, "I'll provide this, this, this, and this, and then be questioned about whether or not that's enough."
That's my concern. >> Okay. And my observation to that would just be that if we actually had some slides or whatever with her saying, "Here's the kind of things you're going to see." It gives us an opportunity to get our head around and get her to prepare. Here's what I'm going to show
you so that we are not surprised and we get something that's meaningful to us. >> Can can I make a suggestion? >> Yes. Uh, vice chair and members of the commission commission, I I think actually Commissioner Stevens um idea is an excellent idea. Um, I think it will
save time. Um, I would I do recognize Carla's concern. So there's I think there's a a simple solution to that is set a time frame for that item to limit it so it doesn't become basically a a
separate meeting in advance of the other meeting. But I think it would ultimately be very helpful um if it's as long as it's properly agendaized because you'll have to properly agendaize it um for the discussion. So you'll you'll save time at your future meeting because you won't
be asking what about this because you can let um Miss Andrews know ahead of time and they'll be prepared. So um but if you're concerned that you know it causes the meeting to go on for another hour or two hours or what have you, just set a time frame to for it and stick to
that time frame. I mean, all you're all you're asking to do is just have a conversation about what we want to talk about next time. >> With just a little bit of specific >> with specificity. >> Just a little bit of specificity. So, we know >> in a time constraint. >> Yeah. And I'm fine with the time constraint. >> Fine.
>> Yeah. And I would agree with that. Actually, the city treasurer and I had talked about for future agenda items of of all of our agenda items having a time frame attached to them so that these meetings don't run longer than they're supposed to. So, um, if that's okay with
you, Mark, I mean that that >> Yeah, and you can put my name at the end of that comment. >> Yeah, it looks like we're narrowing down, but I would like to ask Sonia, what are you comfortable with? I know you're comfortable with the concept, but as far as, you know, the amount of
detail we're going to go into for each future agenda item, and then we can actually set a time constraint and make a friendly amendment to his motion. >> Uh, thank you, Carla. Um, Commissioner Carla, um, I feel that it is absolutely
fine if you would like us to explain to you what you will be seeing at the next meeting. Um however that said I think it would be easiest if your request is li uh is limited to what we can provide
without a huge amount of effort. So um just unfortunately because we're uh still in the process of implementing a new ERP system new ERP system does not have in and of itself robust reporting
capabilities. we have we are looking at a third-party vendor to help us um provide that reporting. So the new system has limited reporting capabilities right now even though the data is in our system. So I can um I
just want to you know um caution the commission that if you ask for specific data that we're unable to provide or unable to generate without a huge amount of effort um I will have I will have to let you know that we will provide as
best we can what we feel is um uh an an appropriate level for the commission to review the budget this year. But if you're looking for a lot of different details that it's difficult for us to provide then um
you know that that might be a challenge for us. Well, if uh Mark will accept a friendly amendment that um the specificity on each future agenda item um will be
limited to what staff can provide and the discussion will take no more than five minutes for each item. >> Oh, for each item. >> For each item. for each item. I'm If you
want to change it, change it. I'm just trying to move this forward. >> I was looking for 15, but >> Okay. 10 minutes per No more. No more than for >> 10 minutes per each item. >> Does that include the presentation and our discussion,
>> but staff is not doing a full presentation? >> No, but she's telling us what we're going to see, >> right? a five then a fivem minute presentation with no more than a 10-minute discussion afterwards. >> Can I clarify? So you you're saying that for every meeting under the future
agenda item, you would like a staff presentation on what we are bringing you and you would like to spend five or 10 minutes discussing if that is sufficient. >> What you're going to bring us at the next meeting. So, at the next meeting that's coming up, you are going to give us the
sustainability reporting and some revenue stuff. At the end of that meeting, you're then going to say, "Here's uh you take a few minutes and talk about here's the preliminary capital improvement plan information we're expecting to provide to you at the next meeting." It's going to be this
book that is similar to what you've seen before. We're also going to provide you a list of the exception contracts approved that were 10% $1 million by uh by uh council and that's what we're expecting to present to you. And then we
would say, okay, well, could you also do this? Could you also do that? To which you would then say, man, I don't know that our systems are good for that. In which case, we'd say, okay, we don't need that. And then you'll some others you might say, let me see if I can do that quickly, and if I can, we'll do
that for you. And we'll say, okay, I really think it's important that we be careful with our staff this year. Even if we can't be as effective this year in carrying out a review, we need to get the system done. So, I do want to defer to your judgment on a lot of this stuff this year.
>> Okay. I'll throw an alternate motion out there. >> Well, let's hear it. >> Okay. That for each upcoming meeting under future agenda items, staff will give a brief presentation on what will be included in that future
agenda item. And there will be brief discussion and questions and possible requests about the future agenda item. And each agenda item in total take no more than 10 minutes. Please
>> Bob practice I always follow for board meetings was the 8020 rule. I would get 20% of the items that made up 80% of the importance or or monetization and focus them on what's really important. So I I
don't know that uh this broad brush is going to serve any purpose, but I believe it's your discretion to use that 8020 rule. >> And like you, I'm a big believer in the 8020 rule. I think that's been proven time and time again. Carla has a motion on the table.
>> I'm gonna I'm gonna second her motion with the understanding that my mic doesn't get caught off at 10 minutes. I'll second her motion as is. >> Okay. Uh the motion's been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion?
Otherwise, all those in favor say I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. I think we're pretty much done for the day unless somebody else has anything they want to bring up. Hearing none, uh, the chair would
entertain a motion to adjurnn. Bob makes a motion to adjurnn. Is there a second? >> I'll second. Any discussion? Otherwise, all those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> I.
Motion carries. Meeting adjourned. Maybe this year love will appear deeper than ever before. Maybe.