[A. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
          [00:00:02]
          ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING. REGULAR MEETING OF THE BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMISSION IS CALLED TO
ORDER ON AUGUST 14TH, 2025 AT 6:30 P.M.. IF WE CAN, PLEASE BEGIN WITH A ROLL CALL. 
          COMMISSIONER MARIN. HERE. COMMISSIONER JESTE. 
          HERE. COMMISSIONER RAMCHARAN. HERE. COMMISSIONER WOODHAM. 
          HERE. COMMISSIONER SAMPLES. HERE. I'M SORRY. CHAIR ALLEN. 
          HERE. AND COMMISSIONER SHERBIN IS ABSENT. THANK YOU. 
          PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO OUR FLAG. 
          ALL READY? BEGIN. 
          AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD,
INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. 
          YOU MAY BE SEATED. THANK YOU. NEXT, WE HAVE APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA. 
          [D. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA]
CAN WE PLEASE MOVE ITEM. ITEM. [INAUDIBLE] J. 
          J.1. AND J.2. J.1. CITY INVESTMENTS, AND J.2. 
          BECAUSE WE HAVE A CONSULTANT ON THE LINE. CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE? SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL OPPOSE? NONE. DO YOU WANT TO ALSO MOVE THE CIP TO AFTER CITY TREASURER ITEMS? OH, YES. NOW WE HAVE TO VOTE AGAIN. CAN WE MOVE THE CIP ALSO AFTER CITY TREASURER? DO I HAVE A MOTION? SO MOVED. SECOND. WE'RE JUST MOVING A CIP PRESENTATION RIGHT AFTER TREASURER'S PRESENTATION SO JESSE CAN GO HOME. 
          BUT YOU'RE GOING TO LEAVE I.2. AND 3. WHERE THEY ARE? LET'S DROP DOWN. YES. ARE YOU GOING TO TAKE JUST I.1. AND I.2. WE'RE MOVING I.1. AND I.2. 
          OH WE DON'T NEED TO. DO WE NEED TO? NO, WE DON'T NEED TO BUY BUT ERIN, THESE ARE ALREADY IN THE FRONT. WE DON'T NEED TO MOVE THOSE. 
          OH, OKAY. YEAH. IF YOU. OKAY. NEVER MIND. THANK YOU. 
          [E. BLUE FOLDER ITEMS - ADDITIONAL BACK UP MATERIALS]
ITEM E, WE HAVE ONE BLUE ITEM, I BELIEVE. YES,
WE HAVE ONE BLUE FOLDER ITEM. 
          AND DO WE? SO, FOR THE. I'M STILL CONFUSED WITH THE BLUE FOLDER ITEMS. WE DON'T EVEN LOOK AT IT. WE DON'T DISCUSS IT. 
          WE JUST SAY WE HAD A BLUE FOLDER ITEM, I BELIEVE,
BECAUSE IT WAS ADDED BY THE CITY TREASURER AFTER WE PUT THE AGENDA, WE HAVE TO ACCEPT IT AS RECEIVE AND FILE, BUT IT IS PART OF THEIR ITEM. SO IT'S PART OF THE PRESENTATION YES, I'M SURE EUGENE CAN. 
          IS IT PART OF THE PRESENTATION, MR. TREASURER? IT'S RELATED TO THE PRESENTATION AS WE'RE PRESENTING TO YOU THE QUARTERLY REPORT TONIGHT. 
          AND THE QUARTERLY REPORT INCLUDES SOME BENCHMARKING INFORMATION. 
          FOR ADDITIONAL CONTEXT, I INCLUDED THIS PRESENTATION FOR THE REVIEW OF THE COMMISSIONERS
AT THEIR LEISURE. 
          THANK YOU. OKAY. DO WE NEED TO FILE IT? OKAY. 
          ACCEPT AND FILE? YES. ALL RIGHT. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT AND FILE THE BLUE FOLDER
ITEM, PLEASE? SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL OPPOSE? NONE. MOTION APPROVED. CONSENT CALENDAR. DOES ANYONE WANT TO PULL ANY OF THE 
          [F. CONSENT CALENDAR]
ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR? FOR THE. I GUESS NO ONE. 
          FOR THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 12TH, 2025. 
          WAS IT? NO, JULY 10TH, 2025. ELEANOR TOLD ME THAT THE PART THAT I PRESENTED OR I HAD IT IN WRITING, WAS GOING TO BE PART OF THE MINUTES. 
          I THOUGHT THAT WAS FOR JULY 10TH. MAYBE IT'S FOR JUNE 12TH. 
          I DID NOT SEE IT. AND I'M GOING TO CHECK ONE MORE TIME. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO HOLD OFF UNTIL THOSE ARE INCLUDED. 
          LET ME. SO THOSE ARE. I CHECKED THE JULY. IT'S NOT THERE AND I BELIEVE I ALSO CHECKED. 
          I'M JUST DOUBLE CHECKING. IT'S NOT THERE, SO I'M 
          [00:05:03]
OKAY APPROVING IF THEY ADD MY NOTES TO THE. OOPS. 
          WHERE'S MY AGENDA? I THINK I LOST MY AGENDA. OH I FOUND IT. 
          IF THEY ADD THE NOTES THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO ADD,
I THINK IT WAS FOR J.12. 
          I MEAN, JULY 12TH OR IS IT JULY 10TH MEETING. 
          IS IT THE ATTACHMENT TO THE MINUTES ITSELF OR TO THE ITEM,
LIKE THE MINUTES ITEM AND THE AGENDA? IT WAS THE ATTACHMENT TO THEM TO. I ASKED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE MINUTES AND SHE SAID SHE
WILL INCLUDE IN THE MINUTES. 
          I THINK SHE'S REFERENCING THE MINUTES AS THE ITEM FOR THAT DATE. 
          SO, BECAUSE WE CAN'T. I DON'T THINK WE COULD ATTACH IT TO THE ACTUAL MINUTES,
BUT WE COULD ATTACH IT TO THE ITEM, AS THE AGENDA ITEM FOR THE MINUTES. OKAY, SO WHERE CAN I FIND IT? SO I THINK IF YOU GO BACK TO THE JUNE MEETING AND THEN IT SHOULD BE ATTACHMENT TO THAT
PART. 
          OKAY. YEAH, SO WE COULD CHECK TO SEE IF IT'S THERE OR NOT. 
          BUT I DON'T THINK IT COULD BE ATTACHED AS PART OF LIKE,
THAT PDF OF THE MINUTES. 
          OKAY. AND FOR TRANSPARENCY PURPOSES, I DO WANT TO LET THE COMMISSIONERS KNOW THAT WHEN
THEY WRITE MINUTES, THEY REALLY FOCUS ON WHAT EITHER STAFF SAID OR WHAT THE CITY SAID. 
          AND THAT'S, I UNDERSTAND THAT'S FOR THEIR PROTECTION. 
          SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU SAID THAT'S IMPORTANT AND YOU WANT IT TO BE THERE,
YOU PROBABLY WANT TO REQUEST IT AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THERE. 
          SO THEY DON'T REALLY COVER A LOT OF WHAT WE SAY,
THEY COVER MOSTLY WHAT THE CITY SAYS. 
          JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, JUST READ THE MINUTES. BECAUSE WE'RE APPROVING THINGS THAT PROBABLY
ARE NOT COMPLETE. 
          ALL RIGHT. ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES,
OR THE CONSENT CALENDAR. 
          SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. 
          ALL OPPOSED? NO ONE. MOTION PASSED. 
          ALL RIGHT. OH, I'M ON THE WRONG AGENDA. OH. WE'RE ON. 
          I NEED TO. YEAH, I CLOSED SOMEHOW EVERYTHING,
WHICH I SHOULD NOT HAVE DONE. 
          OH, YOU KNOW, I HAVE A HARD COPY WITH ME. OH,
THAT WILL BE HELPFUL. 
          ITEMS EXCLUDED. G. EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY. ITEM. H. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. 
          [H. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS]
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS? SO THERE ARE NO ECOMMENTS, WE ONLY HAVE A PRESENTER ON ZOOM,
BUT WE DO HAVE SOMEBODY IN PERSON THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. 
          ALL RIGHT, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS,
AGAIN. 
          THE CITY'S PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUDGET RUNS FROM 8 TO 10% OF THE BUDGET. 
          A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION. THE CITY BUDGET IS TIGHT AND CAREFUL PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACT
MANAGEMENT CAN SAVE MONEY. 
          FINANCIAL RISKS ARE INFLATED. CONTRACT AMOUNTS,
LACK OF MANAGEMENT. 
          EXCUSE ME. LACK OF COMPETITION LEADING TO HIGHER COSTS. 
          LAX CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CAUSING OVERRUNS,
AND COST INFLATION. 
          THESE HAVE FINANCIAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES. I WAS A PROCUREMENT OFFICER IN THE UNITED STATES
AIR FORCE, SO I HAVE A BACKGROUND IN PURCHASING. THE CITY HAS LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF PROPOSALS AND
CONTRACTS OUT. 
          HERE ARE TWO THAT I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT. FIRST,
THE PROPOSED CONTRACT WITH FM3 COMPANY TO DO THE CANNABIS SURVEY THE COUNCIL WAS ARGUING ABOUT ON TUESDAY. THE REQUIREMENT SEEMS PRETTY GENERIC. 
          DO A SURVEY OF REDONDO BEACH POPULATION ABOUT WHETHER TO ALLOW CANNABIS RETAIL IN OUR
CITY. 
          THERE ARE DOZENS OF SURVEY OUTFITS THAT COULD DO A CREDIBLE JOB. 
          HOWEVER, THE PROPOSED CONTRACT IS TO A SOLE SOURCE FM3 COMPANY. 
          IN LOOKING OVER THE DOCUMENTS I HAVE ACCESS TO,
THE ONLY JUSTIFICATION FOR GOING WITH FM3 IS, AS A SOLE SOURCE, IT'S A HIGHLY REGARDED FIRM KNOWN FOR DELIVERING STATISTICALLY VALID
SURVEYS. 
          IT IS ALSO THE FIRM THE CITY USED FOR PUBLIC OPINION WORK RELATED TO MEASURE FP. 
          WHY IS FM3 THE ONLY SURVEY COMPANY AROUND THAT CAN DO THE JOB? FURTHERMORE, THE COST QUOTED IS TWICE THE USUAL RATE FOR A SIMILAR SURVEY. 
          [00:10:04]
WHEN VENDORS THINK THEY ARE THE SOLE SOURCE,
COSTS GO UP. 
          THE SECOND CONTRACT IS FOR SELECTION OF ART FOR ARTESIA BOULEVARD. 
          THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT IS VERY LONG, FROM 2025 TO 2027. 
          TIGHT CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION IS NEEDED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE PROGRESS AND COMPLETION. 
          THERE ARE FOUR BASIC MILESTONES SPREAD OVER THE TWO YEARS. 
          THE CONTRACT WAS SIGNED ON MAY 13TH. I HAVEN'T SEEN A FIRM TIMELINE OR PROGRESS REPORT
FROM THE VENDOR TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL OF EVEN THE FIRST MILESTONE. SO I GUESS MY POINT TO YOU IS, I THINK IT'S INCUMBENT UPON THE BUDGET AND
FINANCE COMMISSION TO BE QUESTIONING THE CONSULTING CONTRACTS AND HOW THEY ARE AWARDED AND HOW THEY ARE
ADMINISTERED. 
          THIS IS A FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY,
AND I DON'T THINK THAT THEY'RE. 
          FROM LOOKING OVER THE PROPOSALS AND THE CONTRACTS I SEE,
I DON'T THINK THERE IS VERY TIGHT PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. 
          SO THAT'S WHY I'M SUGGESTING THAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO TAKE IT ON AS A PROJECT. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I WILL BRING THAT UP WHEN ITEM K. 
          COMES UP, WHEN WE COMMISSION MEMBER ITEMS AND FUTURE COMMISSION AGENDA TOPICS. 
          SO I WILL BRING THAT UP. NEXT ITEM. SO THE PUBLIC. 
          ALL RIGHT. NOW WE HAVE CITY TREASURER'S OFFICE. 
          [J. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION]
LET'S SAY. J. ITEM DISCUSSION. OKAY. ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE CITY'S STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT
POLICY. 
          THAT'S J.1. TAKE IT AWAY, MR. TREASURER. THANK YOU,
CHAIR ALLEN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. 
          EUGENE SOLOMON, REDONDO BEACH CITY TREASURER. 
          WE ALSO HAVE ON THE LINE WITH US TONIGHT, RICK PHILLIPS FROM OUR INVESTMENT PARTNERS,
MEEDER, WHO HELPED WORK WITH US ON OUR INVESTMENT POLICY. 
          THERE ARE TWO PRINCIPAL CHANGES THIS YEAR. WE ARE SPECIFIED WITHIN OUR CURRENT INVESTMENT
POLICY TO BRING THIS BACK TO YOU AS THE COMMISSION BODY, ONCE A YEAR FOR REVIEW AND TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR REVIEW AS WELL. 
          THE TWO CHANGES THAT WE'RE PROPOSING THIS YEAR ARE NOT SIGNIFICANT IN MY EYES. 
          THE FIRST PART IS A INCREASE WITHIN OUR LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND,
ALSO REFERRED TO AS LAIF, FROM $65 MILLION TO $75 MILLION, TO ALLOW THE CITY TO INVEST UP TO $75 MILLION,
THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED OR PERMITTED BY STATE LAW. THE SECOND PORTION OF OUR CHANGES IS MORE MINISTERIAL,
IN THAT THERE WERE SOME CHANGES ON THE STATE LEVEL. 
          WE WANTED TO ALIGN OUR CODE, OUR INVESTMENT POLICY,
SPECIFICALLY WITH THE CODE. 
          SO RECOMMENDING SOME CHANGES IN THE LANGUAGE WITH REGARDS TO OUR JPA,
OR JOINT POWERS AUTHORITIES, WITHIN OUR INVESTMENT POLICY TO ALIGN OR MIRROR THE STATE CODE. 
          THOSE ARE THE PRESENTATIONS OF CHANGES THAT WE HAVE FOR YOU TONIGHT. 
          I HAVE WITH US TONIGHT NILESH MEHTA, AS WELL,
TO HELP US ANSWER QUESTIONS. 
          AND AS I MENTIONED, RICK PHILLIPS, AVAILABLE AS WELL TO ANSWER QUESTIONS SHOULD YOU HAVE
ANY. 
          THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. I'M GOING TO INTERJECT. 
          I'M HAVING TECHNICAL ISSUES WITH MY MOUSE NOW. 
          CAN ANYONE HELP ME WORK MY MOUSE? OTHERWISE I CAN'T SEE THE PRESENTATION. 
          IS IT ON? BECAUSE THERE'S A ON BUTTON RIGHT HERE. 
          YOU MIGHT HAVE TO JUST USE THE KEYBOARD. THAT WILL HELP YOU TO NAVIGATE. 
          LIKE THERE'S NO BATTERY ON IT? OR. 
          IF YOU NEED TO NAVIGATE. 
          THAT'S GOT POWER. OKAY. LET ME SEE. WELL, CAN'T BE WIRED. YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M JUST GOING TO RESTART THE COMPUTER. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH, I GUESS SOMETHING WAS GOING ON. 
          WELL, WE HAVE A PAUSE. CHAIR ALLEN. I'D LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS WILL BE THE SECOND
TO LAST MEETING FOR MR. SAMPLES, COMMISSIONER SAMPLES. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR EIGHT YEARS OF SERVICE HERE ON THE
COMMISSION. 
          THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE. AND THEN CONGRATULATE MR. WOODHAM ON HIS REAPPOINTMENT. OH, YOU GOT REAPPOINTED? 
          [00:15:06]
YEAH. 
          WAITING FOR THE CONFIRMATION. CONGRATULATIONS. 
          YEAH. CONGRATULATIONS. WELL, WE'LL CELEBRATE YOU NEXT TIME,
BECAUSE THAT WILL BE. 
          YOU'RE GOING TO BE HERE, RIGHT? IN SEPTEMBER. 
          YES. YES. SO WE'LL HAVE A LITTLE PARTY FOR YOU. 
          SAMPLES FOR THE NEXT MEETING. YEAH. 
          IS IT TOO EARLY FOR ME TO NOMINATE HIM TO BE THE NEXT CHAIR? IT IS. 
          NO. NO, I THINK. YOU SHOULD BE. 
          CAN I USE THAT ONE? CAN I SWITCH? IF THAT'S MORE EFFICIENT,
YEAH, I'LL SWITCH. 
          YEAH. DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR J.1.? JUST THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT THAT YOU SEE HERE ON THE SCREEN. AND WE DO HAVE THE ACTUAL VERSION WITH THE UPDATED LANGUAGE. 
          IF YOU WANT TO ASK HER TO TURN ON YOUR MIC. TURN UP THIS MIC? YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. I'M ON. DO WE NEED TO FILE APPROVE OR DO WE NEED TO FILE? IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THESE CHANGES FROM THE
COMMISSIONERS, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM OR COMMENTS FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC. 
          AFTERWARDS, IF YOU'RE WILLING TO ACCEPT THESE CHANGES AND RECOMMEND THE ACCEPTANCE OF
THESE CHANGES, WE WOULD FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL. I GUESS,
WHAT DROVE THE DECISION TO INCREASE THE PERCENTAGE INVESTABLE IN LAIF? THIS WAS TO ALIGN WITH THE STATE CODE. OH, THE FIRST ONE IS AS WELL? YES. COULD YOU REMIND US THE ASSET ALLOCATION OF LAIF,
OR APPROXIMATELY WHAT THAT IS? UNDER OUR INVESTMENT POLICY, WE CAN ALLOCATE AS MUCH AS,
I BELIEVE IT'S 100% OF OUR ASSETS INTO LAIF. 
          YES. IT USED TO BE $65 MILLION. BUT NOW WITH 2025,
THE CHANGE IS $75 MILLION. 
          BY PERCENTAGE, WE WOULD BE PERMITTED. THERE'S ONE GUARDRAIL,
WHICH IS BY PERCENTAGE, AND THE OTHER GUARDRAIL, AS YOU SEE HERE, WOULD BE BY DOLLAR AMOUNT, TOTAL AMOUNT INVESTABLE. 
          AND AGAIN, THEIR ALLOCATION IS A TYPICAL MONEY MARKET FUND? LAIF, TO BE SPECIFIC, INVESTS IN A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT. 
          IT ACTS MUCH LIKE A MONEY MARKET FUND IN THAT IT'S VERY LIQUID AND WE HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE
FUNDS, BUT INVESTS IN A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT VEHICLES IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THEIR INVESTMENT
RETURN. 
          THEY TAKE A LITTLE BIT LESS CREDIT RISK THAN,
SAY, THE JPAS DO, BUT TYPICALLY TREASURIES, AGENCIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. RICK, DO YOU WANT TO. 
          RICK IS AVAILABLE. RICK, IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND ANSWER ABOUT WHAT OTHER VEHICLES LAIF
MAY INVEST IN, PLEASE? I'D BE HAPPY TO. DO YOU HEAR ME ALL RIGHT? YES, WE CAN. YEAH. SO I JUST BROUGHT UP THE JUNE REPORT. 
          IT'S 55% TREASURIES, 25% AGENCIES, 9% CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT AND 6% COMMERCIAL PAPER. 
          AND JUST LIKE LESS THAN 1% OF CORPORATE BONDS. 
          SO. AND THAT'S THE TYPICAL ALLOCATION OVER TIME,
THEY STAY PRETTY HEAVY INTO TREASURIES AND AGENCIES. 
          OKAY, THANKS. WHAT LEVEL DO WE TEND TO INVEST IN LAIF? IT WILL VARY A LITTLE BIT BASED ON OUR CASH FLOW NEEDS AND WHAT'S AVAILABLE WITHIN OUR
PERCENTAGES OF, LET'S SAY, THE JPA CAMP. WE WOULD LOOK AT WHAT THE INVESTMENT RETURNS ARE FOR THAT SORT OF
LIQUID VEHICLE. 
          AND IF WE SEE A BETTER RATE OF RETURN WITH CAMP,
THEN WE'LL PLACE OUR MONEY THERE WITHIN THE GUIDELINES THAT WE'RE PERMITTED. 
          AND FOR THOSE MONIES, IF LAIF IS AN INFERIOR RETURN,
AS THEY'RE SIMILARLY LIQUID, WE WILL PUT THE MONEY THERE. 
          OH. JUST AS A REMINDER TO MAKE SURE TO SPEAK INTO THE MIC. 
          ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR CAN WE GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION
TO 
          [00:20:06]
APPROVE THE INVESTMENT POLICY 2025? OH, JUST BEFORE YOU DO THAT,
THERE IS NO ONLINE COMMENTS AND I BELIEVE NO COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. RIGHT. NO COMMENTS. OKAY. THANK YOU. I MOVE WE APPROVE THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES. 
          SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSE? NONE. 
          MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM J.2. THE CITY TREASURER'S FOURTH QUARTER FISCAL YEAR
2024-25 REPORT. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AGAIN. EUGENE SOLOMON,
REDONDO BEACH CITY TREASURER HERE WITH OUR FOURTH QUARTER OF THE 24-25 FISCAL YEAR. ONLINE, WE HAVE WITH US RICK PHILLIPS FROM MEEDER. 
          RICK SERVES AS THE SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF INVESTMENT STRATEGIST WITH MEEDER. 
          PREVIOUSLY, HE WAS THE CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER AT FHN FINANCIAL MAIN STREET ADVISORS. 
          HE HAS OVER 35 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WITH MUNICIPAL CASH AND INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT. 
          RICK HAS WORKED FOR MANY OF THE COUNTRY'S LARGEST PUBLIC ENTITIES,
INCLUDING CLARK COUNTY AND LAS VEGAS. 
          RICK IS THE FOUNDER OF THE GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT OFFICER´S ASSOCIATION,
A NATIONAL ORGANIZATION WITH OVER 1000 GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT OFFICERS AND CORPORATE AFFILIATES AS MEMBERS. FROM 2004 TO 2023, WAS WHEN HE HAD THE FHN MAIN STREET,
AND HE WAS THE CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER PREVIOUSLY FOR THE CITY OF LAS VEGAS AS WELL,
FROM 1989 TO 1998. 
          SO THAT IS OUR PRINCIPAL AT MEEDER INVESTMENTS,
WITH WHOM WE WORK ON A MONTHLY BASIS ON OUR INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO AND OUR RETURNS. 
          ALSO HAVE WITH ME TONIGHT, NILESH MEHTA, WHO IS GOING TO WALK YOU ALL THROUGH THIS
PRESENTATION. 
          GOOD EVENING ALL. SO WITHIN YOUR PACKET YOU'LL SEE THE QUARTERLY ADMIN REPORT,
WHICH INCLUDES THE TREASURER'S PORTFOLIO SUMMARY, INVESTMENT REPORTING GUIDELINES AS WELL AS THE INVESTMENT REPORT BY MEEDER INVESTMENT AND
THE ADMIN REPORT. 
          I'M SORRY. THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION, WHICH WE´LL GO OVER INCLUDES THE INVESTMENT
REPORTING OBJECTIVES AND GUIDELINES, POLICY COMPLIANCE, QUARTERLY PERFORMANCE, CASH FLOW ANALYSIS,
MATURITY DISTRIBUTION, TRADING ACTIVITY, AND FINALLY, FISCAL IMPACT. I'M SORRY. KEY INVESTMENT REPORTING OBJECTIVES FOR MUNICIPAL
INVESTING. 
          THE CITY TREASURER MAINTAINS THE CITY'S CASH FLOWS WHILE EARNING A COMPETITIVE RATE OF
RETURN ON INVESTMENTS WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE CITY'S INVESTMENT POLICY AND STATE LAW. WE SHOULD LOOK AT THE SAFETY, WHICH IS PROTECTION OF PRINCIPAL. 
          LIQUIDITY, PROVIDE NECESSARY LIQUIDITY TO COVER BOTH ONGOING AND UNEXPECTED CASH NEEDS,
AND FINALLY, YIELD, WHICH IS MAXIMIZING EARNINGS, RECOGNIZING NEED FOR SAFETY AND LIQUIDITY. 
          INVESTMENT REPORTING GUIDELINES. ALWAYS REMEMBER WHOSE MONEY IT IS AND ACT ACCORDINGLY IN
A RESPONSIBLE STEWARDSHIP CAPACITY. 
          THE INVESTMENT MANAGERS OBJECTIVE IS TO EARN A REASONABLE RATE OF RETURN ON THE CITY'S
INVESTMENT, WHILE PRESERVING CAPITAL IN THE OVERALL PORTFOLIO. 
          IT SHOULD NEVER BE THE INVESTMENT MANAGER´S GOAL TO EARN MAXIMUM RETURNS ON THE CITY'S
PORTFOLIO, AS THIS WOULD EXPOSE THE CITY TO AN UNACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF RISK. 
          FAILURES IN PUBLIC INVESTING OCCUR WHEN EITHER POLICIES ARE NOT CLEAR,
THEY ARE INAPPROPRIATE, THEY ARE NOT FOLLOWED, AND OUR OVERSIGHT WAS INADEQUATE. 
          QUESTIONS TO ASK. DO YOU REVIEW THE INVESTMENT POLICY? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE CITY'S INVESTMENT PROGRAM? DO YOU RECEIVE AND REVIEW PERIODIC INVESTMENT REPORTS? ARE THEY CLEAR, CONCISE, ARE THEY READABLE? AND DO YOU FINALLY FULLY UNDERSTAND THEM? POLICY COMPLIANCE. SO OVER THE PAST QUARTER,
ON THE RIGHT HAND YOU'LL SEE THAT WE WERE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE INVESTMENT POLICY ON ALL OF THE ITEMS LISTED HERE. THE FOURTH QUARTER 24-25 PERFORMANCE, QUARTER BY QUARTER, LISTED HERE IN A CHART FORMAT. 
          KEY NOTABLES IS WEIGHTED AVERAGE MATURITY, FOR THE FOURTH QUARTER,
0.76. 
          PORTFOLIO EFFECTIVE RATE OF RETURN, 3.07. THE LAY FIELD IS 4.27. 
          THE YIELD ON THE BENCHMARK, 4.4. AND I'LL GO OVER THE INTEREST EARNED YEAR TO DATE ON A
LATER SLIDE. 
          MAY I INTERJECT. SURE. I THINK LAST TIME I WAS LOOKING FOR CAMP,
AND YOU ADDED, RIGHT? MY EYES ARE TIRED. CAMP. YOU WERE GOING TO BREAK IT DOWN AND NOT INCLUDE IT JUST WITH
MONEY MARKET SO THAT YOU 
          [00:25:02]
KEEP MONEY MARKET SEPARATE. YOU'RE ASKING FOR THE YIELD,
THE YIELD ON CAMP, OR THE TOTAL ASSETS WITHIN CAMP. 
          I THOUGHT THERE WAS IN THAT PRESENTATION, IN A SUMMARY PRESENTATION,
NOT IN A RICK'S PRESENTATION OR OTHER PRESENTATIONS. 
          I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO ADD THAT AND UPDATE THAT CHART,
ESSENTIALLY. 
          TO SEPARATE CAMP FROM LAIF? GO BACK TO THE PRESENTATION IF YOU WOULD. 
          SO HERE FOR EXAMPLE. SO IT'S CURRENTLY I BELIEVE IN MONEY MARKET. 
          THAT'S CAMP. THAT'S WHERE CAMP RESIDES. THAT'S WHAT I THINK YOU SAID LAST TIME,
NO? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE 22.4 MILLION? YES. YEAH. 
          THAT IS A COMBINATION OF MONEY MARKET AND CAMP. 
          CAMP IS MONEY MARKET. YES, THAT'S WHAT WE DISCUSSED. 
          AND I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO SEPARATE THEM,
SO THAT WE COULD SEE HOW MUCH IS IN THE MONEY MARKET AND HOW MUCH. 
          OKAY, DEFINITELY. GOING FORWARD I CAN DEFINITELY DO THAT. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. WHERE WAS I? BECAUSE IT'S VERY DETAILED. 
          IT HAS ALL THE FUNDS, SO WE MIGHT AS WELL. OKAY. 
          SO THIS SLIDE GOES OVER THE CASH FLOW ANALYSIS FOR THE CITY. 
          WE HAVE MET THE CASH FLOW NEEDS OF THE CITY FOR THE QUARTER AND EXPECT TO MEET THE
EXPENDITURE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE UPCOMING PERIOD. 
          SECTOR ALLOCATION. SO US TREASURY'S 36%, US AGENCIES,
27%. 
          MONEY MARKET, WHICH INCLUDES CAMP AS WELL AS THE US BANK MONEY MARKET IS 24.88%,
CORPORATE BONDS 11.74. 
          AND THEN LGIP STANDS FOR THE LAIF AND THAT'S 0.12. 
          SO OF OUR PORTFOLIO, 0.12% IS ENOUGH, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION FROM THE PREVIOUS ITEM. 
          MATURITY DISTRIBUTION. SO WE HAVE 25% OF OUR INVESTMENTS MATURING IMMEDIATELY LIQUID. 32.5% BETWEEN 0 AND 1 YEAR. 
          ALMOST 37% BETWEEN 1 AND 2 YEARS, AND THEN 5.5% BETWEEN 2 AND 3 YEARS. 
          MAY I PAUSE ON THAT SLIDE, PLEASE? I JUST WANT TO LET THE COMMISSIONERS KNOW. 
          SO THIS WAS THE SLIDE THAT MADE ME ASK 30 QUESTIONS TO THE TREASURER LAST TIME WHEN THEY
WERE PRESENTING. 
          BECAUSE WHEN I SAW THIS SLIDE TO ME, OH, THEY'RE RUNNING OUT OF MONEY. 
          THAT WAS MY FIRST RED FLAG BECAUSE THEY CAN INVEST UP TO FIVE YEARS AND THEY'RE NOT
INVESTING. 
          THEY'RE INVESTING 95% UP TO TWO YEARS. SO THAT'S WHEN I STARTED ASKING THE TREASURER ALL
THESE QUESTIONS, BECAUSE TO ME, THIS WAS THE CHART THAT WAS TELLING ME WE'RE GOING TO RUN OUT OF MONEY. 
          SO THIS WAS THE CHART THAT TRIGGERED MY QUESTIONS. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THIS CHART GOES OVER THE HISTORICAL EARNINGS AND BOOK RATE OF RETURN. 
          SO YOU CAN SEE THE MONTH BY MONTH COMPARISON. 
          THE YELLOW IS THE FISCAL YEAR 2023. BLUE IS FISCAL YEAR 2024 AND GRAY IS FISCAL YEAR 2025. 
          AND THEN THE BOTTOM HALF OF THIS SHOWS THE MONTH BY MONTH,
YEAR TO DATE EARNINGS. 
          AND YOU'LL SEE THE COMPARISON HIGHLIGHTED IN RED FOR EACH FISCAL YEAR AT THE END OF THE
FISCAL YEAR. 
          AND THEN THIS CHART IS A GRAPHICAL DISPLAY GOING BACK TO JULY 2009 OF OUR HISTORICAL BOOK VALUES FOR THE ENTIRE PORTFOLIO. 
          AND THEN THE BOTTOM HALF OF THE CHART IS A NUMERICAL PRESENTATION OF THE SAME. 
          SO JUST TO ASK A QUESTION ON THIS, IS NOW A GOOD TIME TO ASK OR WOULD YOU LIKE. 
          BUT IS THAT COMING MAINLY BECAUSE THE YIELD HAS GONE UP ON SHORT TERM DEBT? I WOULD SAY THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS IN PART. 
          TO THE FIRST PART OF YOUR QUESTION, IT'S MORE THAN JUST THE CHANGES IN RATE. 
          IT'S THOSE MATURITIES THAT ARE COMING OFF THAT WERE MATURING,
AND MAYBE AT 0.5 OR LESS THAN 1% ARE NOW BEING ABLE TO REINVEST AT A HIGHER. 
          EXACTLY. SO FOR THAT RISK THAT WAS TAKEN FOR LONGER TERM,
THOSE MATURITIES COMING UP AND MAKING FUNDS AVAILABLE TO INVEST AT A HIGHER RATE. 
          AND THEN THE SECOND PART, YES, IT WOULD BE A HIGHER INTEREST RATE. 
          SO A COMBINATION OF THOSE TWO THINGS. SO JUST TO SAY IT'S SLIGHTLY DIFFERENTLY. 
          THE EXTRA INCOME IS COMING NOT BECAUSE YOU'RE TAKING ON MORE RISK PER SE,
BUT BECAUSE THE RISK FREE RATE HAS GONE UP? 
          [00:30:06]
YES. YEAH. OKAY. AND ARE THERE ANY, I GUESS,
PURCHASES COMING UP? BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THE MONEY MARKET FUND JUMPED UP PRETTY HIGH QUARTER OVER QUARTER AND
YOUR DURATIONS CONTINUED TO GO DOWN. 
          SO I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK. IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE WEIGHTED MORE TOWARDS THE NEAR TERM. SO
JUST TO KNOW IS THERE MORE PURCHASES COMING UP OR WHAT'S KIND OF THE PLAN? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, COMMISSIONER MARIN. YES,
WE HAD SOME MATURITIES THAT WERE FIVE YEARS THAT WERE INVESTED AT LESS THAN 1% IN 2020 THAT CAME AVAILABLE, AND WE HAVE SOME MORE THAT HAVE COME ON HERE IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF
THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. 
          WE'RE CURRENTLY DISCUSSING INTERNALLY INVESTING THOSE OUT FOR LONGER TERM. 
          SO THIS SLIDE GOES OVER THE PURCHASING ACTIVITY FOR THE QUARTER. 
          YOU'LL SEE THE TRADE TICKET WHICH INCLUDES THE ISSUER THE COUPON MATURITY,
THE CUSIP NUMBER. 
          AND THEN THIS SLIDE IS THE FISCAL IMPACT FOR THE ENTIRE FISCAL YEAR. 
          YEAR TO DATE INTEREST EARNED WAS $2,793,124. APPROXIMATELY 60% OF THAT IS CONTRIBUTED TOWARDS THE GENERAL FUND, WHICH COMES OUT TO $1.675 MILLION. 
          ORIGINALLY, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE FISCAL YEAR,
WE HAD BUDGETED $1.5 MILLION TO BE CONTRIBUTED TOWARDS THE GENERAL FUND. 
          SO WE EXCEEDED THOSE BUDGETED ESTIMATES. JUST TO ASK. 
          SO THE 40% IS REINVESTED, IS THAT WHAT HAPPENED? NO, IT'S DIVIDED UP WITHIN VARIOUS OTHER FUNDS WITHIN THE CITY. 
          REFERRED TO IT INTERNALLY AS POOLED CASH. POOLED CASH. 
          OKAY. AND WE MAY HAVE A BREAKDOWN OF. NOT ON THIS SLIDE. 
          WE GET A BREAKDOWN OF WHAT THE POOL CASH FUNDS ARE FOR YOU. 
          OKAY. SO WE HAVE RICK PHILLIPS ON THE LINE, AND HE'S GOING TO GO OVER OUR PORTFOLIO MORE
IN DETAIL. 
          RICK, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES. THANK YOU. SO I KNOW EUGENE INTRODUCED MYSELF. 
          MY BIO BULLETS ARE DOWN AT THE BOTTOM. WE, MEEDER PUBLIC FUNDS AND MEEDER INVESTMENTS
STARTED IN 1974. 
          WE JOINED THEM, OUR VEGAS TEAM FROM FHN ABOUT ALMOST TWO YEARS AGO. 
          AND WE WORK WITH OVER 400 PUBLIC FUNDS ACROSS THE COUNTRY. 
          WE'RE AT 155 BILLION OF ASSETS UNDER ADVISEMENT MANAGEMENT. 
          WE'RE THE SECOND LARGEST PUBLIC FUND FIRM IN THE COUNTRY. 
          SO GO TO THE NEXT ONE. SO THIS WAS TOUCHED ON EARLIER. 
          THIS IS THE BALANCE HISTORY GOING BACK TO 2009 SINCE WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE CITY. 
          AND OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN JUST SEE THE PATTERNS. THERE'S FISCAL YEAR PATTERNS WHERE CHUNKY
MONEY COMES IN FROM THE COUNTY AND PROPERTY TAXES. 
          THE END OF THE YEAR AND THEN AROUND APRIL. AND SO THAT KIND OF MAKES THAT HEARTBEAT. 
          BUT YOU JUST SEE THE GENERAL TREND GOING HIGHER. 
          AND THEN IN 2020 DURING COVID, VERY SIMILAR TO OTHER CITIES COUNTIES PORTFOLIOS DROPPED AS
REVENUE SLOWED DOWN. 
          BUT THEN STIMULUS PUT US UP TO THE ALL TIME HIGH. 
          AND THEN I DREW THAT OTHER ARROW JUST TO SHOW THAT WE HAVE GONE DOWN FROM THAT PEAK IN
LATE 22, EARLY 23 TO THE BOTTOM EARLIER THIS YEAR, DOWN OVER 25% IN VALUE. 
          AND THEN IT'S REBOUNDED BECAUSE PROPERTY TAX CAME IN. 
          BUT IT'S STILL DOWN ALMOST 19% FROM THE PEAK. 
          AND THAT IS UNUSUAL. AND THINK YOU KNOW. GO TO THE NEXT ONE. 
          AND SO WE ALWAYS WANT TO BE CAREFUL COMPARING CITIES TO CITIES AND COUNTIES,
YOU KNOW ALL AROUND. 
          BECAUSE THERE'S JUST DIFFERENT WAYS OF SPENDING MONEY,
REVENUE COMING IN, ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT THINGS. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO SHOW YOU ONE A SIMILAR DOWN THE ROAD WITH CITY OF ANAHEIM,
ANOTHER ONE OF OUR CLIENTS. 
          KIND OF THAT SIMILAR PATTERN GROWING OVER TIME REALLY WENT DOWN DURING COVID. 
          BUT YOU CAN SEE CITY OF ANAHEIM HAS NOT HAD THAT SIMILAR DRAWDOWN AS THE CITY OF REDONDO
BEACH HAS. 
          THEY'VE PREPAID THEIR PENSION UP FRONT IN JULY,
SIMILAR TO THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH. 
          SO THERE'S THAT SAME BIG OUTFLOW. SO YOU JUST SEE THAT PATTERN WHERE ENTITIES CAN BE NOT
AS MUCH REVENUE VERSUS SPENDING AND ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT THINGS GO INTO THAT. 
          BUT WE JUST LIKE TO LOOK AT THAT PATTERN, BECAUSE IF AN ENTITY'S BALANCE IS DROPPING,
THEN THAT MEANS WE NEED TO PROVIDE MORE LIQUIDITY AND WE CAN'T INVEST SOME OF THE FUNDS AS LONG TERM AS WE TYPICALLY WOULD LIKE. 
          SO, RICK, IF I COULD STOP YOU JUST A SECOND. IF I COULD ASK YOU TO KINDLY GO BACK TO THE
PREVIOUS SLIDE. 
          SO JUST TO CONCEPTUALLY MAKE SURE I GET THIS. 
          ON THE LEFT HAND, ON THE Y AXIS, THE MILLIONS IS THE BALANCE THAT YOU HAVE UNDER
MANAGEMENT FOR THE CITY, 
          [00:35:01]
IS THAT ACCURATE? YEAH. IT'S THE TOTAL INVESTMENT POOL THAT THE CITY HAS,
THAT MIXTURE OF ASSETS THAT NILESH WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER IN CAMP AND LAIF, AND THEN THE OTHER SECURITIES LIKE TREASURERS AND AGENCIES. 
          YES. AND THEN JUST TO MAKE SURE I GOT IT. SO I SEE THAT THE SERIES BECOMES RELATIVELY
STATIONARY, I GUESS IF YOU LOOK AT IT THE LAST 5 OR 6 YEARS. 
          AND WHAT'S YOUR EXPLANATION AGAIN? IS IT THAT THE CITY IS DRAWING FUNDS OUT FASTER THAN
THE FUNDS ARE FLOWING IN, AND SO THE BALANCE IS CONSTANT? JUST TO MAKE SURE I GOT THE POINT THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO
MAKE. 
          AT A TOP LEVEL, AND THAT'S HOW WE LOOK AT IT. 
          IT'S TOP LEVEL. BASICALLY, YES. LESS REVENUE COMING IN THAN EXPENSES GOING OUT WOULD HAVE
THE BALANCE DROP AND VICE VERSA. 
          BUT THAT'S WHERE THE TREASURER TEAM GETS INTO THAT NUANCE WITH THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT AND
OTHERS AT THE CITY, TO MAYBE GIVE YOU MORE INSIGHT ON THAT. AND JUST TO SAY IT BACK,
JUST TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR IN MY OWN HEAD, I'M SORRY FOR BEING SLOW. SO THAT MEANS THAT IF YOU DRAW DOWN THE BALANCES FASTER THAN
INCOME, THAN THE INVESTMENT IS GROWING, THEN YOU DON'T GET THE APPRECIATION IN BALANCES. 
          IT LOOKS FLAT. THAT'S WHAT THE PICTURE WOULD WOULD IMPLY. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. WE HAVE ANOTHER SIMILAR CLIENT WHERE THEY HAVE A BIG PROJECT COMING UP,
AND THEY DECIDED NOT TO BORROW MONEY BUT TO SPEND THAT DOWN. 
          SO THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF THINGS WHERE YOU COULD HAVE HAD A BOND ISSUE A FEW YEARS AGO. 
          PROJECTS DELAYED. NOW YOU'RE SPENDING IT DOWN. 
          AND SO WE DON'T GET INTO THOSE TYPES OF NUANCES. 
          BUT IN GENERAL SPEAKING, THERE'S LESS MONEY COMING IN THAN IS GOING OUT. 
          AND THAT WOULD LOWER THE BALANCE OVER TIME, AND AGAIN,
VICE VERSA. 
          AND, COMMISSIONER RAMCHARA, IF I MAY, PLEASE. 
          SOME OF THE OTHER FACTORS YOU'VE TOUCHED ON. SOME OF THEM RICK JUST TOUCHED ON A COUPLE OF
THEM. 
          SO WE HAD IN 2021 REFINANCED OUR PENSION DEBT,
AND WE ISSUED ROUGHLY $29 MILLION WORTH OF LEASE REVENUE BONDS. 
          THERE WAS SOME FUNDS THERE, SOME $13 MILLION THAT WAS UNDER MANAGEMENT FOR A WHILE AND
THEN GETS SPENT BY A COUNCIL. 
          YOU HAVE OTHER THINGS THAT COME IN WHICH YOU'RE GOING TO DISCUSS IN A BRIEF PERIOD OF TIME
WITH REGARD TO CIP FUNDS. 
          SO SOME OF THOSE FUNDS ARE INVESTABLE AND THEN GET SPENT AS THEY GO OUT. 
          YOU HAVE ARPA FUNDS THAT COME IN AND OTHER FEDERAL STIMULUS THAT MIGHT COME IN,
AND WE'RE ABLE TO INVEST IT FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. 
          AND THEN THOSE FUNDS ARE DISPERSED INTO THE PROJECTS UPON WHICH THEY ARE SPENT. 
          SO BEYOND THE BIG PICTURE, THE 10,000 FOOT PICTURE THAT RICK HAS DESCRIBED,
THOSE ARE SOME OF THE OTHER NUANCES IMPACTING THE FLUCTUATIONS WITHIN OUR INVESTMENT POOL. EUGENE,
DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATE OF WHAT THIS IS LIKELY TO LOOK LIKE, SAY, OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS? I KNOW THE REVENUE STREAMS ARE UNCERTAIN,
BUT BASED ON WHAT YOU'RE SEEING AND THE ESTIMATES YOU'RE MAKING. DOES THIS CONTINUE TO GO DOWN OR DOES IT STABILIZE? DOES IT GO UP? MY BEST ESTIMATE, AND IT IS AN ESTIMATE BECAUSE WE CAN'T PREDICT THE
FUTURE, IS THAT IT WOULD RELATIVELY STABILIZE. AND I BASED THAT UPON SEVERAL DIFFERENT FACTORS. 
          SOME INFORMATION THAT WE'VE BEEN RECEIVING VERY RECENTLY. 
          SO ONE IS OUR PROPERTY TAX BASE HAS BEEN STABLE. 
          AND WE GET A REPORT FROM HDL ON THAT. AND WE CAN EXPECT X NUMBER OF DOLLARS. 
          WE HAVE OUR OTHER PROJECTIONS AS THEY COME IN WHEN WE'RE GOING THROUGH OUR ANNUAL ACFR,
AND OTHER REPORTING WITH REGARD TO OUR TOT, WITH REGARD TO OUR UDT AND THOSE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU SEE WITHIN OUR BUDGETING,
ARE PROJECTED TO EITHER REMAIN RELATIVELY STABLE OR SLIGHTLY INCREASE AT THIS TIME. THE OTHER COMPONENTS OF THAT WOULD BE SOME OF THE THINGS
THAT ARE AFFECTING OUR UNCERTAINTIES, WHICH WOULD BE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT HERE BEFORE,
PAYMENTS TO CALPERS. 
          WELL, CALPERS JUST CAME BACK WITH A REPORT AND THEY OUTPERFORMED THEIR 6.8% PROJECTED. 
          SO I TALKED ABOUT IT HERE WITH THE COMMISSION BEFORE,
WE CAN THINK THAT SOME OF THE MONIES THAT WE'VE PAID CALPERS IN THE PAST, WHEN THEY'VE UNDERPERFORMED, PERHAPS WOULD BE STABLE OR LESS,
GOING FORWARD. 
          THAT IS UNCERTAIN AT THIS TIME. BUT I WOULD SAY BASED ON THE INVESTMENT RETURN,
IT WOULD BE STABLE OR LESS PAYMENT TO CALPERS. 
          THE OTHER THING WOULD BE STRUCTURAL REVENUES THAT WE ANTICIPATE COMING ONLINE. 
          SO THE HOTEL OVER AT THE LEGADO PROJECT ON THE CORNER OF PALOS VERDES BOULEVARD AND PCH,
THOSE SORTS OF ANTICIPATED STRUCTURAL REVENUES WOULD INCREASE. 
          [00:40:02]
THERE IS CAPEX, THAT UNKNOWN LAWSUITS THAT COME IN,
INCREASES IN INSURANCE FOR WORKERS COMPENSATION LIABILITIES AND OTHER THINGS. 
          THOSE WE CAN PROJECT FOR THEM, BUT THEY ARE A CAPEX AND UNCERTAIN. 
          SO JUST TO ASK ON THIS, AND I HATE TO SLOW YOU DOWN,
BUT IF THIS WERE A COUNTRY, YOU'D SCALE IT BY THE GDP TO GET A SENSE OF THE SCALE. 
          SURE. WHAT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO VIEW THIS? IS IT ON A PER CAPITA BASIS OR ON A REVENUE
BASIS? SO WHAT SHOULD BE THE THING WE HAVE AT THE BOTTOM TO HELP TO INTERPRET THIS? I DEFER TO RICK TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. IF YOU CAN ANSWER COMMISSIONER MANCHARAN´S
QUESTION, PLEASE. SO I DO THINK PROBABLY ONE OF THE BETTER WAYS TO LOOK AT IT WOULD BE ON A PER
CAPITA BASIS FOR A CITY. 
          COUNTIES ARE DIFFERENT IN CALIFORNIA, BUT FOR CITIES,
YOU KNOW, HOW MANY CITIZENS DO YOU HAVE? BUT AGAIN, CITIES HAVE DIFFERENT PROJECTS, LIKE EUGENE JUST MENTIONED. 
          AND SO PER CAPITA IS ONE WAY, YOU KNOW, TO LOOK AT IT. 
          AND MAYBE THE FINANCE FOLKS CAN GIVE A BETTER METRIC ON HOW THEY'RE LOOKING AT IT AND
MAYBE COMPARING TO PEER CITIES. 
          BUT WE DO LOOK AT AT ON CITIZENS. AND JUST WHAT'S THE PORTFOLIO SIZE FOR A CITY. 
          GOT IT. THANK YOU. I WOULD SAY CITIES ARE VERY DIFFERENT. 
          IT'S PATENTLY OBVIOUS. SOME CITIES RELY MORE UPON PROPERTY TAX. 
          SOME CITIES OUTSHINE US ON SALES TAX. SOME CITIES ARE. 
          NEIGHBOR CITIES HAVE HIGHER SALES TAX THAT GETS PUT INTO THEIR COFFERS THAN WE DO. 
          THEY MIGHT HAVE LOTS OF CAR DEALERSHIPS, VERSUS OUR RESIDENTIAL. 
          SO THAT MIX OF FUNDS COMING INTO THE CITY AND LOOKING AT THE BIG PICTURE ECONOMIC DATA IS
HOW WE TRY AND MEASURE WHAT OUR OUTLOOK WOULD BE AND THEN BOIL DOWN TO THE PER CAPITA VERSUS SOME OTHER METRIC,
AS YOU DISCUSSED. 
          I THINK YOU'RE TRYING TO GET TO HOW DO WE KNOW WE HAVE HEALTHY REVENUE COMING IN? EXACTLY, EXACTLY. AND THAT WOULD BE MORE OF A FINANCE QUESTION. 
          WE CAN. THAT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION. SO WE CAN DISCUSS WHEN WE GET TO THE BUDGET ITEM IF
YOU WANT. 
          YEAH, BECAUSE THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION. YOU KNOW,
A REPORT BY THE STATE AUDITOR BACK IN 22, 23, HE HAD THE CITY AUDITS FOR EVERY CITY IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND HE PUBLISHED A REPORT THAT TALKED ABOUT WHAT THE
CITY'S FINANCIAL CONDITION WAS. 
          BUT LATELY THEY HAVE NOT ISSUED ONE. IS THERE A REPORT SIMILAR TO IT THAT COMPARES ALL THE
CITIES WITHIN THE STATE WHAT THEIR STANDING IS? I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT. 
          I'M SURE THAT THERE IS. WE PRESENT OUR AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORTS TO THE STATE EVERY YEAR,
OUR [INAUDIBLE]. 
          AND I'M SURE THERE'S A CONSOLIDATION OF ALL OF THOSE THINGS IN REVIEW BY THE STATE
AUDITOR. 
          BUT I'M NOT AWARE OF A REPORT BEYOND WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT. 
          NO. I KNOW THAT S&P, I THINK GIVES RATINGS TO TWO CITIES BECAUSE MANHATTAN BEACH JUST GOT
THE TRIPLE A OR SOMETHING. 
          THEY GAVE US A RATING. AND FOR OUR UPCOMING ISSUE OF THE MEASURE FP GENERAL OBLIGATION
BONDS, I WOULD ANTICIPATE IT WOULD BE AA OR BETTER AS FAR AS OUR FINANCIAL RATING IS CONCERNED. 
          IN OUR AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORTS ARE NOT SIGNIFICANT ISSUES THAT ARE COMING UP AND BEING
REPORTED AS PROBLEMATIC. 
          THE REDONDO BEACH WAS CONSIDERED AS ONE OF THE LOCAL HIGH RISK CITIES BACK IN 22-23,
BUT SINCE THEN, THE MARCH 24TH CITY AUDIT REPORT SAID CITY RESERVES ARE AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL IN TEN YEARS, AND CALPERS PENSION OBLIGATIONS DROPPED FROM 200 MILLION TO 22 MILLION,
WHICH IS GOOD NEWS. 
          SO WE HAVE MADE SOME PROGRESS, BUT AT THE SAME TIME IT SAID THE SALES TAX REVENUES WERE
THE LOWEST OF ALL THE THREE BIG CITIES. HERMOSA BEACH, 36% GROWTH, MANHATTAN BEACH 23% GROWTH AND REDONDO BEACH WAS 6%. 
          SO DO THESE FACTORS PLAY INTO THIS OVERALL EVALUATION? WELL, I THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, COMMISSIONER JESTE. I THINK THAT THAT'S A REALLY GOOD
EXAMPLE OF CONTEXT. 
          [00:45:06]
SO WHILE YOU HAVE. LOCALLY, SOME CITIES MIGHT HAVE MUCH MORE STOREFRONT RETAIL THAN WE DO. 
          WE USED TO HAVE A LOT MORE STOREFRONT RETAIL PRODUCING WHEN THE GALLERIA WAS AT ITS PEAK. 
          AND SOME TIME AGO, I THINK IT WAS IN 2013, WE HAD NORDSTROM'S LEAVE THE SOUTH BAY
GALLERIA. 
          AND NOW, OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, THE GALLERIA HAS BEEN IN A REIMAGINING PROCESS. 
          AND AGAIN, IT'S NOW BEING REIMAGINED AGAIN AS IT WAS RECENTLY CHANGED HANDS. 
          THERE MIGHT BE A LOT MORE RETAIL SPACE, THERE MIGHT BE MORE CAR DEALERSHIPS,
THERE MIGHT BE OTHER HIGHER PERFORMING RETAIL, BIGGER TICKET ITEMS THAT GENERATE A HIGHER SALES TAX REVENUE BASE THAN WE HAVE IN REDONDO, WHERE WE MIGHT OUTPERFORM ON TOT, OR WE MIGHT OUTPERFORM ON PROPERTY TAX THAN SOME OTHERS
BASED ON OUR PROGRAMING. THIS THING REFERS TO PERCENTAGE GROWTH,
OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, NOT PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL REVENUE. 
          SO IF THE BASE IS STABLE THEN THE GROWTH IS A LOT MORE SLUGGISH IN RUNWAYS THAN MANHATTAN
BEACH OR HERMOSA BEACH. 
          THEY HAVEN'T ADDED ANY MORE CAR DEALERS OR CREATED NEW BUSINESSES. 
          IF THEY HAVE, THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO CONSIDER. 
          AND YET PRICES HAVE GONE UP. SO WHERE THERE ARE HIGHER PRICES,
THERE'S GREATER SALES TAX REVENUE. 
          AND WHERE WE HAVE AN AREA LIKE THE SOUTH BAY SOCIAL DISTRICT THAT'S NOT PRODUCING AS MUCH, THERE AREN'T AS MANY STORES. THOSE PRICE INCREASES ARE NOT REFLECTED IN A GREATER
AGGREGATE. 
          THIS IS ALL PART OF THE BOOK VALUE, ISN'T IT? BOOK VALUE VERSUS SALES TAX? VERSUS, I BEG YOUR PARDON? VERSUS IS THAT CORRECT? OUR BOOK VALUE IS AN APPROXIMATION OF OUR INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO. 
          OUR SALES TAX REVENUES COULD CONTRIBUTE TOWARDS THAT IF THAT'S THE QUESTION. 
          WELL REVENUES VERSUS EXPENDITURES, ISN'T IT? WELL,
THE SALES TAX GETS DEPOSITED INTO THE GENERAL FUND. 
          YEAH. IT DOESN'T GET DEPOSITED INTO OUR ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT. 
          BUT IF YOU HAVE A BUDGET DEFICIT, YOU'RE SPENDING MORE THAN WHAT YOUR REVENUES ARE. 
          ISN'T THAT GOING TO AFFECT THE BOOK VALUE? IT WOULD NOT AFFECT OUR ASSETS UNDER
MANAGEMENT, NO. BECAUSE THEY BUY AND HOLD. THEY DON'T SELL I THINK. 
          IS THAT WHAT WE'RE. YEAH. WE'RE NOT ACTIVE TRADING. 
          WE'RE PRESERVING CAPITAL AS THE HIGHEST AND THE HIGHEST PRIORITY. 
          BUT THAT PUTS YOU IN THE HIGH RISK CATEGORY,
WOULDN'T IT? HIGH RISK WITH REGARD TO WHAT, SIR? IF YOU ARE SPENDING MORE THAN WHAT YOU'RE EARNING,
WOULDN'T THAT BE A HIGH RISK? WE DON'T OPERATE ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE. WE OPERATE ON THE REVENUE AND INVESTMENT SIDE. 
          SO I WOULD SAY PHILOSOPHICALLY, I WOULD AGREE WITH THE STATEMENT THAT YOU'RE MAKING. 
          IT'S BETTER TO BRING IN MORE MONEY THAN YOU SPEND,
CERTAINLY. 
          BUT IT'S NOT WITHIN OUR PURVIEW, THAT PARTICULAR CONCERN. 
          OUR CONCERN IS FOCUSED ON OUR INVESTMENTS UNDER MANAGEMENT,
MONITORING OUR REVENUES AND AUDITING THOSE REVENUE SOURCES. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. DID YOU WANT TO. ARE WE OKAY TO CONTINUE WITH THE PRESENTATION THEN? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? COULD YOU PLEASE PROCEED,
RICK? RICK, IS THIS THE CORRECT SLIDE OR. SORRY. YES,
I HAD IT ON MUTE FOR A SECOND. 
          SO THAT IS A NICE LEAD INTO HERE. AS HIGHLIGHTED EARLIER,
THE THREE PRIMARY OBJECTIVES OF THE INVESTMENT PROGRAM, SAFETY, LIQUIDITY AND THEN YIELD A RETURN. AND SO THE BEST WAY TO ENSURE SAFETY. 
          BECAUSE PUBLIC FUNDS JUST DON'T INVEST IN HIGH RISK INSTRUMENTS. 
          THEY'RE GOVERNED BY CODE, AND WE JUST HAVE TO INVEST IN A RATE AND ABOVE. 
          AND SO IT'S REALLY THE LIQUIDITY WE HAVE. WE NEVER WANT TO HAVE TO SELL SOMETHING EARLY TO
PROVIDE LIQUIDITY, PARTICULARLY AT A LOSS IF INTEREST RATES HAVE GONE UP. 
          AND SO WITH SOME OF THE UNCERTAINTY THAT EUGENE WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER,
WE HAVE SHORTENED THE DURATION OF THE PORTFOLIO. 
          YOU JUST SEE OVER TIME ON THAT TOP THE WEIGHTED AVERAGE MATURITY. 
          WE'VE ANALYZED THIS THE SWEET SPOT, THE BEST RISK ADJUSTED RETURN IS BETWEEN ONE AND A
HALF AND TWO AND A QUARTER YEARS FOR THE CITY AND ACTUALLY MOST PUBLIC FUNDS. AND SO YOU CAN JUST SEE WE DID DROP IT DOWN A BIT DURING GREAT RECESSION,
DURING COVID TIMES. 
          AND THEN PARTICULARLY NOW, JUST BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN A GREATER LIQUIDITY NEED WITH THE
PORTFOLIO OF THAT ENDING MONTH BALANCE DROPPING A BIT. 
          [00:50:06]
AND SO LOOKING DOWN BELOW, ONE OF THE WAYS THAT WE LOOK AT,
ARE WE EARNING A MARKET RATE OF RETURN OVER ECONOMIC CYCLES, WHICH ARE 3 TO 5 YEARS DEPENDING ON THE CYCLE OF CAUTION. 
          AND SO WE HAVE THE 0 TO 5 YEAR INDEX. THAT'S WHAT WE CAN OUR UNIVERSALLY INVEST IN. 
          AND YOU SEE IT'S THE PORTFOLIO YIELDS BEEN HIGHER MOST OF THE TIME. 
          AND THEN THAT GAP WIDENED, YOU GET MORE VOLATILITY VERSUS THE INDEX WHEN THERE'S INTEREST
RATE VOLATILITY. 
          SO FOR EXAMPLE THE FIRST PART OF COVID WHEN INTEREST RATES DROPPED DOWN TO ZERO ON FED
FUNDS THE PORTFOLIOS YIELD, BEING A LONGER TERM INVESTMENT, WEIGHTED AVERAGE MATURITY AT THE TOP DID HOLD UP MORE THAN
THE MARKET INDEX BECAUSE THE INDEX IS JUST RESETTING EVERY MONTH. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT CASH FLOWS. 
          IT DOESN'T GET CHUNKY MONEY IN FROM THE COUNTY OR HAVE A BIG CHUNK GOING OUT FOR PROPERTY
TAX. 
          IT'S JUST INVESTING AND REDEEMING EVERY MONTH ON A PRETTY MUCH EVEN BASIS. 
          AND THEN WHEN INTEREST RATES REALLY SKYROCKETED BACK IN 22,
I TRACKED THIS EVERY MONTH. 
          THE BLOOMBERG CONSENSUS WAS THAT WE WOULD HAVE ABOUT ONE AND A QUARTER,
125 BASIS POINTS OF FED HIKES OVER THE CYCLE. 
          WELL, THE FED WENT FROM 0 TO 5 AND A HALF. YOU KNOW,
SO MUCH GREATER THAN THEY ANTICIPATED, THE MARKET ANTICIPATED. SO YOU SEE REFLECTED THE INDEX WENT UP. 
          AND SO SOME OF THE TIMES THE LIQUIDITY HAS BEEN NEEDED WHEN WE'VE HAD WHAT I CALL COVID
ERA BONDS, WHEN WE BOUGHT AT LOWER INTEREST RATES, BECAUSE NO ONE CAN TIME INTEREST RATES,
THOSE MATURED BUT THEN WERE NEEDED FOR LIQUIDITY SOME OF THE TIME, A FEW THEN WE'D HAVE BEEN ABLE TO REINVEST. AND SO THAT'S WHY THE YIELD HAS GONE UP
SITTING AT THE END OF JUNE AT 3.27. 
          SO THAT JUST GIVES YOU SOME CONTEXT. AND AGAIN I'M ALWAYS CAUTIOUS TO COMPARE IT TO
SOMEBODY ELSE. 
          BUT JUST LET'S GO TO ANAHEIM WHERE A BALANCE HAS THEM ON THE NEXT SLIDE WHERE ANAHEIM,
THEIR BALANCE HASN'T BEEN DROPPING LIKE I SHOWED YOU BEFORE. 
          YOU CAN SEE WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO KEEP THEIR WEIGHTED AVERAGE MATURITY IN THAT SWEET SPOT
ANALYSIS BETWEEN ONE AND A HALF AND TWO AND A QUARTER TWO AND A HALF YEARS. 
          AND SO, AND THEIR PORTFOLIO YIELDS ABOUT 50 BASIS POINTS HIGHER BECAUSE OF THAT. 
          BUT YOU SEE THAT SAME VOLATILITY IN THE INDEX,
AND THEY HAVE US PUT LAIF ON THERE. 
          AND JUST TO SHOW THAT. AND SO THAT'S THE BIGGEST REASON WHY THE CITY'S YIELD ISN'T HIGHER
THAN SAY, SOME OF OUR OTHER CLIENTS. JUST MAINLY BECAUSE WE'VE HAD TO KEEP THINGS A LITTLE SHORTER
FOR THOSE LIQUIDITY NEEDS THAT THE CITIES HAD WITH THE PORTFOLIO DROPPING IN THE THE BOOK VALUE AT THE END OF THE MONTH. 
          AND THEN THIS WE CALL THIS OUR YIELD PIPELINE. 
          AND AS JASMINE WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, WE DON'T HAVE ANY INVESTMENTS PAST THE THREE
YEAR MARK. 
          SO THESE ARE BY EVERY SIX MONTHS, EVERY HALF YEAR. 
          AND THE YIELD THERE IS THE AVERAGE YIELD FOR ALL THE SECURITIES IN THAT SIX MONTH BUCKET. 
          AND SO YOU SEE WE HAVE A COMBINATION OF SOME LOWER YIELDING SECURITIES THAT WILL BE
MATURING OVER THE NEXT SIX MONTHS THAT ARE YIELDING, YOU KNOW, 1% OR SO, 1.5%. AND THEN COMBINE THAT WITH LAIF AND CAMP AT 4.25,
4.3. 
          AND SO THAT'S JUST HOW YOU GET ALL THE BUBBLES THERE. 
          AND SO OUR GOAL IS AS EUGENE SAID, IN THE HOPES OF THE ANALYSIS WHERE IT'S A CRYSTAL BALL
BUT THAT THE STABILIZING OF THE PORTFOLIOS MONTH IN BALANCES WILL NOT BE DROPPING AS MUCH. 
          AND SO THAT GIVES US THAT STABILITY TO BE ABLE TO INVEST LONGER. 
          SO JUST LOOK AT THAT BUBBLE CHART. AND THEN LET'S LOOK AT ANAHEIM. 
          AND YOU CAN SEE THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT SIMILAR CHALLENGE. 
          SO WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO INVEST OUT THE FIVE YEARS AND LOCK IN THOSE LONGER MATURITIES THERE. 
          SO AGAIN WE ALWAYS WANT TO BE CAREFUL TO COMPARE AND CONTRAST. 
          BUT I JUST THOUGHT THEY SINCE THEY'RE BOTH, YOU GUYS ARE CLIENT AND ANAHEIM'S CLIENT. 
          AND THERE'S JUST THE DIFFERENCE ON THE BALANCE. 
          I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE A GOOD COMPARE AND CONTRAST. 
          RICK, LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION. GO TO THE PREVIOUS SLIDE. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT THE DIFFICULTY OF COMING UP WITH A BENCHMARK FOR A FUN LIKE OURS. 
          IF YOU'RE RUNNING A STOCK PORTFOLIO, YOU'VE GOT THE S&P TO COMPARE IT TO. 
          BUT INTERNALLY WITH THE LIQUIDITY ISSUES THAT THE CITY HAS. 
          HOW DO YOU ALL DECIDE WHETHER THE RETURNS ARE AS THEY SHOULD BE? DO YOU HAVE ANY SORT OF A BENCHMARK THAT WOULD SAY IF WE'RE OUR RETURN IS,
SAY, 3%? DO YOU HAVE ANY SORT OF A BENCHMARK TO SAY THAT WITH A FUND,
WITH OUR RISK CHARACTERISTICS, THE ALLOWABLE RANGE OF, OF RETURNS IS, SAY, TWO AND A HALF TO THREE AND A HALF AND WE'RE
IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT, 
          [00:55:01]
OR CAN YOU, CAN YOU BE THAT EXACT OR IS IT MUCH LESS EXACT THAN THAT? WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS WHAT DO YOU ALL THINK OF OUR RATE OF RETURN,
GIVEN OUR LIQUIDITY CONSTRAINTS? ARE WE OKAY? YES. AND GO BACK A COUPLE OF SLIDES. 
          WHO'S EVER RUNNING TO, ONE MORE. AND SO YOU CAN SEE DOWN ON THE BOTTOM THERE'S THE INDEX
OF 0 TO 5. 
          THAT'S THE UNIVERSE THAT WE CAN INVEST IN FOR THE CITY. 
          AND WE LOOK AT IT OVER ECONOMIC CYCLES, AS IT SAYS IN THE INVESTMENT POLICY,
BECAUSE THESE ARE BUY AND HOLD PORTFOLIOS, THEY'RE DIFFERENT THAN THE S&P 500 OR A PENSION FUND. 
          THAT JUST DOES THINGS DIFFERENTLY. AND SO YOU CAN SEE OVER THE LONG RUN,
WE HAVE EARNED THE MARKET RATE OF RETURN. 
          AND THAT IS THE GOAL BECAUSE SAFETY AND LIQUIDITY ARE ONE AND ONE A AND THEN YES,
GENERATING A YIELD. 
          SO THAT'S WHAT THIS SHOWS THAT YES, IT'S A LITTLE BIT UNDER RIGHT NOW THAT THE INDEX IS
STARTING TO COME DOWN BECAUSE INTEREST RATES HAVE DROPPED. 
          AND SO THE CITY WE THINK WILL CONTINUE TO GO UP SOME MORE IN YIELD AS WE ARE ABLE TO
INVEST SOME OF THE NEW MONEY OR MATURING MONEY AT THESE HIGHER YIELDS WITH THE INDEX ACTUALLY COMING DOWN. BUT YOU JUST SEE OVER THE LONG RUN THAT GREEN OR TEAL
LINE IS SLIGHTLY ABOVE MOST OF THE TIME THAN THE MARKET, BUT HASN'T BEEN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS WHEN INTEREST RATES REALLY WENT UP AND
THE PORTFOLIO NEEDED MORE LIQUIDITY SO WE COULDN'T REINVEST, BUT THAT'S A LONG ANSWER. THIS IS HOW WE LOOK AT OVER THE LONG RUN,
ARE WE EARNING A MARKET RATE OF RETURN? NOW, THE TREASURER GAVE YOU A GREAT PRESENTATION OF ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES THAT I'VE WORKED
WITH FOR 30 PLUS YEARS. 
          THE BENCHMARK REALLY IS THE CITY'S INVESTMENT POLICY AND CASH FLOWS,
BECAUSE THE CITY IS UNIQUE AND IT'S DIFFERENT THAN TORRANCE OR ANAHEIM OR LOS ANGELES. 
          AND SO WE ALWAYS WANT TO BE CAREFUL TO COMPARE. 
          AND I'M SLIGHTLY HESITANT EVEN TO SHOW ANAHEIM,
BUT I JUST WANTED. 
          IT'S MAINLY THE DIFFERENCE IN THE BALANCE THAT WE NEEDED MORE LIQUIDITY. 
          BUT AGAIN, A LONG ANSWER TO THIS PAGE DOWN AT THE BOTTOM. 
          THAT'S WHAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF THINGS. 
          COMMISSIONER WOODHAM, IF I CAN TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE SOME OF THE PORTFOLIO IN JULY. 
          WE HAD JULY 31ST. WE HAD $2 MILLION THAT MATURED. 
          THAT WAS PAYING 0.57%. THAT WAS A LONG TERM INVESTMENT. 
          IT WAS A FIVE YEAR INVESTMENT. WE HAVE AT THE END OF THIS MONTH,
ON AUGUST 31ST, $2 MILLION. 
          THAT'S 0.76%. IN OCTOBER, WE'VE GOT ANOTHER $4 MILLION. 
          THAT'S 0.41 AND 0.50 THAT WERE LONG TERM INVESTMENTS THAT WERE MADE WHEN INTEREST RATES
WERE LOWER. 
          SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT IS OUR GOAL, WHAT IS OUR WHAT IS OUR INVESTMENT BENCHMARK GOAL
PERCENTAGE? I THINK IT'S MORE THE, AS RICK JUST MENTIONED,
THE ADHERENCE TO POLICY AND TAKING THOSE OPPORTUNITIES WHERE WE HAVE MATURITIES THAT ARE COMING ONLINE AND AVAILABLE TO US TO REINVEST THOSE AT A BETTER RATE,
WHICH IS WHAT WE DO EVERY MONTH AND LONGER TERM WHEN WE CAN AND IN ANTICIPATION OF MEETING CASH FLOW NEEDS. SO WITH THAT 8 MILLION YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BETWEEN NOW AND
OCTOBER IS ABOUT 8 MILLION. 
          YOU SAID IT'S GOING TO MATURE. WHAT'S I GUESS WHAT'S THE PLAN FOR IT? IS THERE NEAR-TERM LIQUIDITY NEEDS BY THE CITY OR CAN WE GET BACK INTO THE TARGET? IS THE INTENT TO TRY TO GET BACK INTO THE TARGET ZONE IN TERMS OF DURATION,
AND THEN BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY INCREASE OUR YIELD? BOTH OF THOSE THINGS ARE HAPPENING. I BELIEVE THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO MEET THE SHORT TERM
LIQUIDITY GOALS AND INVEST A SEGMENT OF THAT MONEY OUT LONGER TERM. 
          WHAT DO YOU THINK A SEGMENT LIKE IS THAT LIKE ALL 8 MILLION OR A MATERIAL PART OF IT OR
YOU JUST DON'T KNOW THAT A SIGNIFICANT PART OF IT? I WOULD SAY. HALF MORE, THAN HALF? I DON'T WANT TO COMMIT TO AN EXACT NUMBER,
BUT IT WOULD BE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN HALF AND JUST UNDER HALF. SO JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO WRAP MY MEMORY. 
          SO FIVE YEARS AGO. SO IF YOU INVESTED IN A FIVE YEAR BOND THAT YIELDED 0.5%,
AND THE YIELD CURVE WAS SO COMPRESSED FIVE YEARS BACK, SO YOU COULD HAVE INVESTED IN A 30,
IN A THREE MONTH TREASURY AT 0.4%. 
          SO WHY TAKE THE LIQUIDITY RISK BY TYING IT UP IN A FIVE YEAR BOND AT 0.5%,
WHEN YOU COULD INVEST IN A THREE MONTH TREASURY AT 0.4% AND ROLL THE BOND OVER EVERY THREE MONTHS,
AND ALSO ENJOY THE LIQUIDITY BECAUSE IT'S A THREE MONTH AS OPPOSED TO A FIVE YEAR BOND. I WOULD LIKE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION AS IF I WAS SITTING IN THIS AT
THE TIME, BUT I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE THERE. 
          I THINK IT'S THEIR VALID, VALID QUESTIONS TO ASK. 
          IT'S YOU HAVE THAT UNKNOWN, THAT KNOWN UNKNOWN OF WHAT OUR RATE'S GOING TO DO. 
          [01:00:04]
SO WHEN YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, IF YOU THINK THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE CONTINUED FISCAL
STIMULUS WHERE INTEREST RATES ARE GOING TO BE NEAR ZERO. 
          THEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO INVEST AT 0.7 6TH MAY SEEM TO BE THE PRUDENT THING AT THE TIME. 
          I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT. WELL, I GUESS JUST TO PUT IT IN CONTEXT,
I MEAN, WE'RE ABOUT 150 BASIS POINTS BEHIND THE AVERAGE, BEHIND THE BEHIND THE INDEX. AND I THINK THE PORTFOLIO IS ABOUT 200,
$190 MILLION OR SOMETHING IS THAT I HAVE MY I MIGHT HAVE THE NUMBER OFF BY A LITTLE BIT,
BUT IT'S A SIZABLE 150 BASIS POINTS ON THE VALUE OF THE PORTFOLIO IS NOT A TRIVIAL NUMBER. SO I GUESS JUST THINKING A LITTLE BIT AS TO WHAT THE
COST ENTAILS AND HOW WE MIGHT AVOID THAT. I THINK IT'S A FAIR QUESTION. OUR ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT ARE JUST A LITTLE HIGHER
THAN THE LAST QUARTER WAS 91 MILLION. 
          I'M SORRY. I WAS OFF BY A LITTLE BIT. 91 MILLION. 
          AND SOME OF WHAT'S AFFECTING OR WHAT'S CREATING THAT SPREAD ARE THOSE LONGER TERM
MATURITIES THAT WERE IN THE CURRENT MARKET ENVIRONMENT UNDERPERFORMING. YEAH. BUT AS THOSE ARE AND YOU SEE OUR CHART,
YOU SEE THE THE CHANGES AS THOSE ASSETS ARE BEING INVESTED AT CURRENT RATES ARE PERFORMANCE WITH REGARD TO YIELD IMPROVING. 
          SURE. TREASURER. COUNSEL. OH GO AHEAD. JASMINE. 
          AND BEFORE YOU CAME HERE, I BELIEVE ABOUT A MAYBE A YEAR AGO,
WE ALSO HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT SWAPPING. 
          SO YOU CAN SELL YOU. WE ARE ALLOWED TO SELL IN GOVERNMENT AND THEN PURCHASE. 
          BUT THOSE ARE VERY DIFFICULT TO. AND YOU TAKE THE POINT OF THE LOSS. 
          I KNOW OF, YOU TAKE A TEMPORARY LOSS IN SOME CASES. 
          AND IN SOME CASES YOU DON'T. IT DEPENDS. THAT'S WHY THERE'S A LOT OF ANALYSIS INVOLVED. 
          I KNOW I'VE PERSONALLY DONE IT. IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK,
A LOT OF FOCUS, BUT WE'VE DISCUSSED THAT TOO. 
          AND WE DID A SWAP ANALYSIS ON MANY OF OUR SECURITIES IN CONSIDERATION OF THAT. 
          AND BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE SELLING AT SUCH A DEEP DISCOUNT,
IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE. 
          THE THE GAIN ENDED UP BEING A FEW THOUSAND DOLLARS. 
          RICK YOU HAD SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO ADD PLEASE. WELL,
AND JUST TO ADD TO THAT CONTEXT OF UNCERTAINTY OF MARKETS AND AND SO WE LOOK AT THE PORTFOLIO OVER LONG TERM BECAUSE YES QUARTER TO QUARTER,
IT'S JUST IT'S HARD TO MAKE IT. 
          SO EVEN IN EVEN A YEAR LIKE I WAS GOING EARLIER SAYING THE FED THOUGHT THEY WERE GOING TO
RAISE INTEREST RATES FOUR TIMES AND THEY ENDED UP RAISING INTEREST RATES 25 TIMES QUARTER BASIS POINTS. THIS TIME FIVE YEARS AGO WAS THE ALL TIME LOW YIELDS. 
          THE THREE MONTH WAS NOT ACTUALLY EARNING 50 BASIS POINTS. 
          IT WAS EARNING ONE BASIS .0.0 1% A THREE MONTH AND LIKE EUGENE SAID,
FIVE YEARS. 
          THEY WERE HIGHER AND SO WE DIDN'T. WE LOOKED AT THE CITY OF TOKYO,
THE CITY OF MUNICH. 
          THEY HAD NEGATIVE INTEREST RATES. THEY ACTUALLY IF YOU BOUGHT A SECURITY,
YOU ACTUALLY LOST MONEY. 
          AND SO WE WERE GLAD THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN IN AMERICA. 
          AND SO YEAH, HINDSIGHT IS 2020. WE'D LOVE TO JUST BE ABLE TO TIME THE MARKET. 
          AND I LIVE IN LAS VEGAS. I WOULDN'T BE MANAGING PORTFOLIOS. 
          I'D BE DO SOMETHING ELSE. BUT ANYWAY JUST I WANTED TO GIVE YOU THAT CONTEXT WHERE SHORT
INTEREST RATES WERE ESSENTIALLY ZERO ONE BASIS POINT. 
          THE LONGER ONES WERE EARNING A LITTLE BIT MORE,
JUST TO PUT THAT. 
          BUT JUST TO COMMENT ON THAT, IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THE EXPECTATIONS HYPOTHESIS WORKS THEN
THE SHORT, THE LONG INTEREST RATE IS JUST THE SUM OF THE SHORT RATES. 
          NOT UNLESS YOU WANT TO TAKE THE TERM PREMIUM RISK,
WHICH IS WHAT WE DID, IS WE TOOK THE TERM PREMIUM RISK AND WE BETTED THE WRONG WAY ON THE TERM PREMIUM AND THAT'S FINE. THAT'S NOT I MEAN,
THAT HAPPENS, BUT THERE'S ANOTHER WAY OF DOING IT, WHICH IS TO BE REASONABLY AGNOSTIC ABOUT THE TERM PREMIUM AND TAKE THE EXPECTATIONS. 
          WELL, THAT'S A SEPARATE. BUT IF I HAD THE SLIDE TONIGHT,
YOU WOULD SEE THE TERM PREMIUM. 
          A THREE MONTH VERSUS A ONE YEAR IS ABOUT 35 BASIS POINT DIFFERENTIAL OVER THE LAST 60
YEARS, AND A ONE YEAR VERSUS A TWO YEAR, YOU ADD ANOTHER 30 BASIS POINT. 
          SO WE LIVE IN THE WORLD OF TERM PREMIUM. WE WANT TO HAVE AS LONG A DURATION AS WE CAN
WHILE WE'RE MEETING SAFETY AND LIQUIDITY NEEDS. 
          SO THAT'S THAT TARGET ZONE. THAT'S THE BEST RISK ADJUSTED RETURN ON THE SCREEN RIGHT HERE
BETWEEN ONE AND A HALF AND TWO AND A HALF. 
          WE ALWAYS WANT TO LIVE THERE BECAUSE NO ONE CAN TIME THE MARKET ACCURATELY OVER THE LONG
RUN. 
          THE FED'S TERRIBLE AT IT. WALL STREET'S TERRIBLE AT IT. 
          PUBLIC FUND INVESTORS ARE TERRIBLE AT IT. AND SO WE COULD HAVE HAD NEGATIVE INTEREST
RATES. 
          WE HAD COVID. WE WEREN'T SURE WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN. 
          I'M NOT MAKING EXCUSES. I'M JUST SHARING THE FACTS. 
          AT THE TIME, THE MARKET WAS TRADING WHERE IT WAS FOR A REASON. 
          [01:05:03]
FIVE YEAR BONDS WERE TRADING AT 70 BASIS POINTS FIVE YEARS AGO AND AND MILLIONS BILLIONS
WERE BOUGHT AT THAT TIME. 
          EVEN WITH ALL THAT ANALYSIS. AND SO YES, WE WISH WE COULD TIME THE MARKET. 
          BUT THAT'S THE MAIN POINT IN BENCHMARKING. IT'S OVER BUDGET AND ECONOMIC CYCLES,
WHICH ARE TYPICALLY 3 TO 5 YEARS. 
          AND THAT TEAL LINE ON THE BOTTOM HAS AVERAGED THE MARKET OR A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THAT
OVER THE LONG RUN. 
          THAT IS OUR GOAL BECAUSE SAFETY AND LIQUIDITY ARE ONE AND ONE A RISK. 
          DO YOU BUY CALLABLE AT ALL FOR REDONDO? WE DID DURING THE TIME WHEN WE EXPECTED INTEREST
RATES TO GO UP JASMINE, TO CAPTURE THAT EXTRA RETURN. MORE RECENTLY WITH OUR THOUGHT INTEREST RATES WERE ARE
PROBABLY COMING DOWN. 
          WE WE SHY AWAY FROM CALLABLE. SO BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO INVEST AT LOWER RATES. 
          SO, REINVEST. BECAUSE THAT'S ANOTHER WAY TO INCREASE THE RATE AND EARNINGS. 
          AND I'VE HAD GOOD LUCK WITH THOSE. I'VE HAD GOOD LUCK WITH THOSE. 
          BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF WORK. YOU HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL. 
          THEY TAKE A LOT OF FOCUS, A LOT OF BRAIN AND A LOT OF WORK. 
          WELL, YOU'VE PROBABLY SEEN SOME OF MY PRESENTATIONS THAT OVER THE LONG RUN,
CALLABLE IS IN THE 1 TO 5 YEAR. 
          THAT'S THE INDEX THAT WE HAVE ON BLOOMBERG. CALLABLE IS UNDERPERFORMED BULLETS BY ABOUT 70
BASIS POINTS SINCE 2000 TO 2024. SO OVER THE LONG RUN BULLETS HAVE DONE BETTER. 
          THAT'S JUST ANOTHER FUNDAMENTAL THING. WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE A LOT OF GETTING INTO THE
WEEDS. 
          NEGATIVE CONVEXITY WITH CALLABLE IN THERE BECAUSE NO ONE CAN TIME AND WE DON'T. 
          WE WANT TO BE CAREFUL AS WE SEE INTEREST RATES COMING DOWN. 
          I'D HAVE TO REINVEST AT LOWER RATES. SO. ALL RIGHT I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON
THIS BECAUSE WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE OTHER STUFF. 
          SO JUST OVERALL I CALL THIS MY FIGEY MODEL OF INTEREST RATES,
BED INFLATION, GROWTH, EMPLOYMENT. 
          THEY ARE THE PRIMARY DRIVERS OF THE WHY OF YIELDS. 
          AND YOU SEE I PUT AT THE TOP THE ECONOMY. THIS IS FROM THE ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE NOT TOO
HOT NOT TOO COLD. 
          BUT WE ARE SEEING A FEW SIGNS OF COOLING DOWN. 
          SO IF YOU AVERAGED ALL OF THOSE WE WOULD KIND OF BE AROUND NEUTRAL FROM THE ECONOMY,
BUT WITH THE HINT THAT IT SEEMS LIKE THE FED IS PLANNING TO LOWER RATES, ALTHOUGH LOTS OF DEBATES OF THE FED ABOUT THAT. 
          SO LET'S GO TO THE NEXT PAGE AND LET'S JUST LOOK AT I'LL SKIP ALL THAT. 
          YOU GUYS CAN READ WHAT POWELL SAID RECENTLY IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE. 
          AND SO HERE'S FED FUNDS. SO THE EFFECTIVE FED FUNDS RATE IS THAT ORANGE LINE ACROSS THE
TOP 4.33%. 
          THAT'S APPROXIMATELY WHAT MONEY MARKET RATES AND SHORT TERM RATES LIKE LAIF AND CAMP ARE
EARNING. 
          YOU SEE THE SEPTEMBER MEETING IS 4.11. AND I DID THIS A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO IN AND TO GET
ALL THE PUBLISHING DEADLINES, THAT'S ACTUALLY A LITTLE LOWER NOW. SO IT'S ABOUT ALMOST 100% CHANCE THAT THE FED'S THE
FUTURES MARKET IS EXPECTING THE FED TO LOWER RATES. 
          I HAD THE STAR IN OCTOBER. THAT'S WHERE IT WAS FULLY PRICED IN. 
          AND SO THE FED IS EXPECTING BETWEEN TWO FED EXPECTING TWO CUTS TO MARKET MAYBE 2 TO 3
DEPENDING ON THE DAY. 
          BUT THEN AS YOU GO OUT TO THE END OF NEXT YEAR THESE ARE ALL THE FED MEETING DATES. 
          THEY'RE EXPECTING FIVE CUTS. SORRY. JUST GO BACK ONE PAGE. 
          FIVE CUTS DOWN TO 3.04%. SO THAT'S WHY WE WANT TO GET AS MUCH AS WE CAN LONGER SECURITIES
IN THE PORTFOLIO. 
          IF LIQUIDITY IS MET. AND THAT ALLOWS US TO GO LONGER. 
          OKAY I'M GOING TO SKIP THE NEXT ONE ACTUALLY. 
          AND SO HERE'S INFLATION. WHY HAVE THIS FUNNY LITTLE THING FROM X FROM TRUE DEFLATION. 
          THEY'RE SAYING POWELL'S ASLEEP. THEY SAY INFLATION,
THEY MEASURE WITH WAY DIFFERENT LOOKED AT IT THAN CPI, AND SO THEY SAY IT'S AT 2%, WHERE CPI IS AT 2.7% OR ON A YEAR OVER YEAR BASIS. 
          NOW THE RATE OF CHANGE HAS COME DOWN A TON FROM 9.1% A FEW YEARS AGO. 
          BUT YOU CAN SEE THE BLOOMBERG ECONOMISTS IN THE SHADED AREA ARE EXPECTING INFLATION TO GO
UP. 
          AND THAT'S WHERE, WHY THERE'S A DEBATE AT THE FED. 
          ABOUT HALF SAY WE SHOULD CUT, HALF SAY THEY SHOULD STAY IN PLACE. 
          NEXT ONE. HERE'S GROWTH. WE GO BACK TO 21. THAT'S ALL THE STIMULUS MONEY KICKING IN. 
          GDP IS, HAS INFLATION SUBTRACTED FROM IT TO GET REAL GDP IN MY TITLE OF THE GRAPH. 
          THAT'S WHERE WE SEE THE FIRST QUARTER AND SECOND QUARTER OF 22 THE NEGATIVE AND REALLY LOW
BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN INFLATION WAS PEAKING. 
          WE SEE QUARTER ONE OF THIS YEAR AT A -0.5 BECAUSE GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT IMPORT SUBTRACT
FROM GDP AND BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MUCH FRONT RUNNING OF THE TARIFFS,
THERE WAS A LOT BOUGHT IMPORTS. 
          AND SO WE HAD A NEGATIVE. BUT THEN WE HAD A NICE REBOUND IN THE SECOND QUARTER. 
          WE JUST FINISHED. AND WE SEE BLOOMBERG ECONOMISTS ARE EXPECTING IT TO BE BETTER I THINK,
NOT TO GET INTO POLITICS AT ALL. 
          [01:10:07]
BUT JUST LOOKING AT THE MATH, I THINK THE THE BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL AND TAX CUTS AND OTHER
THINGS WILL BE STIMULATIVE. 
          TARIFFS COULD SLOW THINGS DOWN. SO AGAIN THESE ARE JUST ALWAYS ESTIMATES. 
          BUT WE DON'T SEE A RECESSION ON THE HORIZON. AND MAYBE SOME,
A LITTLE BIT LOWER INTEREST RATES BY THE FED. 
          NEXT ONE. HERE'S THE NONFARM PAYROLLS. THE BARS THE EVERY FIRST FRIDAY OF THE MONTH AND
THOUSANDS WE GET. 
          AND YOU CAN SEE WHERE WHEN WE'RE GETTING BACK TO WORK IN 21. 
          DURING COVID TIMES HIGH HIGH GROWTH ON NONFARM PAYROLLS. 
          AND SO THEN WE SEE IN ABOUT THIS TIME LAST YEAR,
IT SLOWED DOWN WHERE THAT ONE ARROW IS. 
          AND THAT'S PANICKED THE FED IN MY OPINION AND GOT THEM TO CUT 50 BASIS POINTS IN SEPTEMBER
OF LAST YEAR. 
          AND TREASURY SECRETARY BENSON, THEY WANT LOWER RATES. 
          HE SAID WE SHOULD HAVE A 50 BASIS POINT MOVE IN SEPTEMBER,
THE NEXT MEETING. 
          I VERY MUCH DISAGREE. BUT YOU DO SEE WE HAD A DOWNSHIFT IN EMPLOYMENT WITH THIS LAST
REPORT AND REVISIONS OF THE LAST TWO MONTHS. 
          AND SO IF YOU LOOK JUST AT NON-FARM, THAT WOULD BE THE CASE. 
          BUT POWELL WAS TALKING AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE LAST WEEK AT THE FED MEETING THAT SINCE
IMMIGRATION HAS SLOWED SO MUCH AND THE BIRTHRATE IS LOWER, WE DON'T NEED AS MANY JOBS TO KEEP THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE STEADY OR LOW. 
          SO LET'S GO TO THE NEXT PAGE. AND SO WE SEE THIS IS THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE GOING BACK COVID
TIMES. 
          WE SEE ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO WE DID HAVE A LOW OF 3.4%. 
          AND WE'VE RISEN TO 4.2% ON THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE. 
          BUT THAT IS BELOW THE FULL EMPLOYMENT RATE OF THE LOW END OF 4.25. 
          SO IT'S STILL HISTORICALLY VERY LOW. POWELL SAID WE SHOULD FOCUS ON THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE. 
          I AGREE, I THINK THAT'S A BETTER MEASURE WITH ALL THE IMMIGRATION CALCULATIONS GOING ON
NOW. 
          AND YEAH, I MIGHT PICK UP A LITTLE BIT, BUT IT'S STILL VERY,
VERY LOW. 
          THE LONG TERM AVERAGE IS ABOUT 5.8%. NEXT ONE. 
          SO PUTTING THAT TOGETHER I JUST GO BACK TWO AND A HALF ISH YEARS TO JANUARY OF 23. 
          AND LET'S LOOK AT INTEREST RATES. THE TOP ONE IS THE FED FUNDS THE DASHED LINE. 
          AND THE TOOL LINE IS THE THREE MONTH BILL. THEY'RE USUALLY SUPER CORRELATED. 
          SOMETIMES THERE'S VOLATILITY. BACK IN MARCH OF 23,
AT THE START OF THE GRAPH, THE THREE MONTH BILL DROPPED QUITE A BIT, THAT'S WHEN THE BANK FAILURES HAPPENED. AND THEN THAT GOT TAKEN CARE OF BY THE FED AND THE
FDIC AND THE FED CONTINUED TO HIKE. 
          AND THEN WE HAD STABLE RATES. BUT THEN YOU SEE THE MARKET LEADING THE FED,
ANTICIPATING THE FED TO CUT ABOUT THIS TIME LAST YEAR. 
          AND THEY DID. AND THEN WE'VE BEEN STABLE. AND I DID THIS CHART ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO. 
          WE ACTUALLY HAVE DROPPED DOWN TO 4.23 ON THE THREE MONTH TEE BILL AGAIN SLIGHTLY
ANTICIPATING A CUT IN EITHER SEPTEMBER OR OCTOBER. BUT YOU DO SEE, MY THREE MONTH OF THE M IS A LITTLE IN THE WAY
THERE, BUT THAT WAS THE TARIFF ANNOUNCEMENTS. WHEN INTEREST RATES DROP AND THEN RIGHT AT THE END
OF JUNE, THAT WAS THE ISRAEL IRAN BOMBING AND ALL THAT GOING ON IN THE MIDDLE EAST THAT GOT SPOOKED
THE MARKET AND PUSHED RATES DOWN. 
          THE BOTTOM GRAPH, THAT'S THE FIVE YEAR LONG BOND THAT WE CAN BUY FOR THE PORTFOLIO. 
          AND YOU JUST SEE A LOT MORE VOLATILITY AND LONGER RATES DEPENDING ON MY FIGEY COMPONENTS. 
          WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH INFLATION AND JOB MARKET AND EMPLOYMENT ARE WITH THE FED. 
          AND SO WE ACTUALLY SEE SOMETHING REALLY INTERESTING THIS TIME LAST YEAR WHERE I HAVE THAT
RED DOT WAS THE FIRST FED CUT OF THE CYCLE. 
          THEY WERE AT 5.5%. TYPICALLY LONGER RATES LIKE THE TWO YEAR AND THE FIVE YEAR. 
          SIX MONTHS, NINE MONTHS LATER, LIKE WE ARE ALMOST 12 MONTHS LATER,
THEY'RE TYPICALLY LOWER. 
          AND YOU CAN SEE THE FIVE YEAR. ACTUALLY, AGAIN,
THIS IS TWO WEEKS AGO. 
          IT'S ABOUT THE SAME ABOUT 380 TODAY IT'S MUCH HIGHER. 
          AND THAT'S THE MARKET PARTICIPANTS TO ME SAYING WE'RE STILL WORRIED ABOUT INFLATION. 
          WE DON'T THINK THE FED PROBABLY SHOULD CUT THAT MUCH BECAUSE THE EMPLOYMENT MARKET STILL
FAIRLY SOLID AT 44.2% UNEMPLOYMENT. 
          SO ANYWAY, ALWAYS SO MANY MOVING PARTS TO THINK WE'RE INTEREST RATES MIGHT GO THIS RANGE
WE'VE BEEN IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, 80% OF THE OCCURRENCES HAVE BEEN BETWEEN THAT 3.80 AND 4.80 WHERE I'VE SHADED AND WE'RE AT
THE LOWER END. 
          WE DO THINK THE RISK IS TO, THE LOWER SIDE OF FED FUNDS GOING DOWN AND SHORT RATES,
AS WELL AS THE LONGER RATES. 
          THAT'S AGAIN, WHEN EUGENE WAS TALKING ABOUT OUR PLAN IS TO INVEST LONGER WHEN THIS MONEY
COMES UP OVER THE NEXT SIX MONTHS OR SO. 
          AND SO THAT IS DEFINITELY THE GOAL TO GET THE PORTFOLIO YIELD HIGHER. 
          SO JUST A COMMENT ON THE IF YOU DECIDE TO INVEST LONGER AND THERE IS UNANTICIPATED
INFLATION THAT HAPPENS. 
          SO IF YOU LOCK IN AT 3.83 OR SOMETHING, AND THEN THE INFLATION RATE SPIKES TO 3.3 OR 3.4. 
          [01:15:01]
SO YOUR REAL RATE NOW FALLS. IS THAT A RISK THAT YOU SEE? I MEAN, IF YOU INVEST IT SHORT, AT LEAST YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO ROLL OVER THE HIGHER SHORT
RATE. 
          IF THE IF THE SHORT END OF THE YIELD CURVE. IF THAT INTERNAL,
IF IT SEES INFLATION AND JUMPS IN ANTICIPATION, AT LEAST YOU PROTECT THE REAL RATE. BUT IF YOU INVEST LONG AND THEN YOU GET HIT WITH THE
INFLATION GOING UP. 
          WOULDN'T THAT HURT? WELL WHAT WOULD YOU THINK THROUGH THAT IT. 
          WELL, THIS IS WHY WE LOOK AT IT OVER THE LONGER RUN. 
          AND THAT'S WHY I WAS SHOWING EARLIER. AND I WISH I WOULD HAVE PUT THIS GRAPH IN THERE
TONIGHT. I AGAIN THE THREE MONTH BILL SO THAT CASH AND PROTECTING AGAINST MAYBE INFLATION MOVES WITH THE FED MOVING HIGHER. THAT'S EARNED ABOUT 70 BASIS POINTS LESS THAN THE
AVERAGE PORTFOLIO OF ABOUT 2.2 YEARS OVER EACH YEAR OVER THE LONG RUN. 
          AND SO WE'RE GIVING UP, YOU KNOW, 50 TO 70 BASIS POINTS OF NOMINAL OR RETURN,
JUST THE ACTUAL RETURN BY TRYING TO GAME THE SYSTEM. 
          SO WE'VE DONE TONS OF ANALYSIS THAT WHEN THE MARKET WAS ANTICIPATING THE FED TO RAISE
RATES, IF YOU WOULD HAVE JUST KEPT THE PORTFOLIO SHORT VERSUS KEEPING AN AVERAGE ABOUT TWO
DURATION, YOU'VE LOST OVER EVERY ROLLING FIVE YEAR PERIOD EXCEPT THIS LAST ONE DURING COVID. 
          AND THIS WAS OBVIOUSLY AN UNUSUAL ONE. SO WE LOOK AT THINGS OVER THE LONG RUN BECAUSE NO
ONE CAN TIME THE MARKET AGAIN. 
          THE FED AND THE MARKET IT EXPECTED RATES TO GO TO 2%. 
          THEY WENT TO FIVE AND A HALF. AND SO THERE ARE HALF OF THE FED MEMBERS THAT THINK
INFLATION IS COMING DOWN AND HALF ISH, THAT THINK INFLATION IS GOING UP. AND THAT'S ABOUT THE MARKET. 
          SO YOU KNOW AGAIN COMMISSIONER IF YOU IF YOU COULD DO THAT WE'D PAY YOU A LOT OF MONEY TO
COME AND WORK FOR OUR FIRM BECAUSE YOU COULD TIME INTEREST RATES AND OBVIOUSLY NO ONE CAN,
STILL. 
          I GET PAID A FAIR BIT. BUT MY QUESTION IS NOT THAT MY,
I MEAN, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT HISTORICAL DATA, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE PARTICULARLY USEFUL BECAUSE WE'VE
NEVER BEEN THROUGH THIS. 
          THIS IS THE FIRST TIME. WE'VE DEFINITELY BEEN THROUGH THESE CYCLES LIKE THIS. 
          WELL, WE HAVEN'T HAD INFLATION BE OUT OF THE TARGET FOR THIS LONG EVER. 
          BECAUSE IN THE 1970S THERE WAS NOT A TARGET. SO THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT THE FED IS
DEALING WITH A DISINFLATION. 
          AND THEN WE'VE NEVER HAD A SITUATION WITH TARIFFS,
OF WHICH WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW THAT'S GOING TO PLAY OUT IN INFLATION. 
          IT COULD LOWER INFLATION IF THE DEMAND SOFTENS. 
          IT COULD LEAD TO SPIKES IF FIRMS PASS IT THROUGH. 
          AND WE JUST DON'T KNOW. SO THERE'S A LOT OF RISK AT THIS POINT IN TERMS OF THE DIRECTION
OF INFLATION. 
          SO I'M SYMPATHETIC TO HISTORICAL DATA. BUT THE HISTORICAL DATA IS NOT USEFUL TO GUIDE THE
CURRENT TIME PERIOD. 
          AND IF YOU LOCK IN LONG YOU OPEN UP YOURSELF TO THE POTENTIAL THAT IF YOU GET AN
UNEXPECTED SURGE IN INFLATION, YOU'RE GOING TO GET HIT HARD ON THE REAL SIDE. 
          AND IF YOU DID GO SHORT, AT LEAST YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO ROLL OVER THE HIGHER NOMINAL
RATE. 
          SO ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST A THOUGHT IN THE INTEREST. 
          I'M MINDFUL OF TIME, BUT IN TERMS OF RISK MANAGEMENT,
IT JUST SEEMS THAT IF YOU WANT TO BE CAUTIOUS, NOW MIGHT NOT BE THE OPTIMAL TIME TO LOCK IN LONG. 
          AT LEAST YOU WANT TO HEDGE YOU OUT IN SOME SENSIBLE WAY. 
          THINK LONG IS. 
          YOU CAN ONLY DROP BY. 
          SO I WENT BACK TO 1990 WHEN I STARTED DOING THIS AND DID THREE MONTH OUT TO FIVE YEARS,
WHICH WE CAN INVEST. 
          AND YOU CAN SEE THE BLUE IS WHEN INTEREST RATES WERE HIGHER,
READ INTEREST RATES WERE LOWER. 
          AND SO THIS IS A 36 YEAR TIME FRAME CAPTURING YOU KNOW A LITTLE BIT I MEAN WHEN I STARTED
INTEREST RATES ARE 8.9%. 
          AND SO ARE WE GOING TO HAVE THAT KIND OF 70S,
80S INFLATION. 
          ALMOST EVERY ANALYST SAYS NO. COULD IT AVERAGE MAYBE 3% A LITTLE HIGHER WHEN IT'S BEEN
AVERAGING 2% THE LAST DECADE AND A HALF? SURE. BUT YOU LOOK WHERE I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT THE AVERAGE INTEREST RATE ON THE SIDE,
WE'RE AROUND 4% RIGHT NOW. 
          WE HAVEN'T SEEN THOSE RATES FOR 17 YEARS. EXCEPT FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS. 
          SO YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT I SHOULD JUST STAY SHORT AND TAKE THE RISK OF THE FED'S GOING TO
CUT 150 BASIS POINTS OVER THE NEXT 18 MONTHS? THAT COULD. AND INFLATION COULD COME DOWN AND LONG RATES WOULD DROP. 
          AND I WOULD HAVE TO LOCK IN, YOU KNOW, 2 OR 3% TWO THREE,
FOUR YEAR RATES. 
          WE, OUR ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT IS NOT THE WAY TO MANAGE A PUBLIC FUND. 
          [01:20:02]
WELL MOST JAPANESE, SO JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME CONTEXT. 
          A LOT OF JAPANESE INVESTORS HAVE EXITED THE TREASURY MARKET BECAUSE OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT
THE POTENTIAL RISKS WITH THE TREASURY MARKET. 
          AND THE SAME PRINCIPLE IS APPLYING IN EUROPE AS WELL. 
          A LOT OF THE GERMAN INVESTORS ARE CAREFUL. AND SO I'M NOT SAYING DO OR DON'T. 
          I'M JUST SAYING THAT THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS HERE,
BOTH IN TERMS OF WHAT WE UNDERSTAND, WHAT WE DON'T KNOW, HOW THINGS ARE CHANGING. AND SO IF THERE'S SOME WAY TO HEDGE. 
          IT MIGHT BE OPTIMAL TO SORT OF THINK THROUGH A LITTLE BIT. 
          BUT IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO IT. 
          BUT BUT I YEAH. SO THAT'S ALL I'LL SAY. WELL,
JUST ONE LAST POINT. 
          THE ONLY WAY WE HEDGE IS TO SAY SHORTER DURATION. 
          AND THAT MEANS THE SHORTEN THE PORTFOLIO UP WITH THE RISK THAT THE FED WOULD LOWER RATES
EVEN MORE, EVEN MORE THAN THE MARKETS PROJECTING. THAT COULD BE THE RISK. 
          THE INFLATION EXPECTATIONS COULD BE WEIGHT WRONG AND THE FED COULD CUT THAT. 
          THAT'S ONE DOWNSIDE. ABSOLUTELY. BUT MY CONTEXT IS WE'RE AT INTEREST RATES WE HAVEN'T
REALLY SEEN FOR 17 YEARS. 
          WE WANT TO LOCK IN THOSE BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT SEEN THAT. 
          WE SURE INFLATION AND INTEREST RATES HERE GO HIGHER,
BUT THAT WOULD BE A MUCH LOWER PROBABILITY THAN ALMOST EVERY MARKET PUNDIT AND STRATEGIST THINKS RIGHT NOW. I'D JUST LIKE TO ADD IT'S A GREAT IT'S A GREAT CONVERSATION. 
          AND THANK YOU FOR FOR BRINGING IT UP. AND I THINK THAT SEVERAL OF US HERE FROM HOLLYWOOD
HAVE A GOOD TIME SPENDING A FEW HOURS OVER OVER OUR OWN CHOICE OF BEVERAGES, DISCUSSING IT. 
          IT'S ALL A MEASURE OR APPROXIMATION IN ALL THESE SCENARIOS OF RISK. 
          AND THERE'S CERTAINLY YOU'RE TAKING DURATION RISK. 
          YOU'RE TAKING CREDIT RISK, YOU TAKE ALL PREMIUM RESCUE,
TAKE ALL MANNER OF DIFFERENT RISK. 
          AND YOU CONSIDER THAT AND YOU TRY TO REACH THE BEST CONCLUSION WITH YOUR PRIORITIES OF
SAFETY AND LIQUIDITY, AS BRICK HAS DESCRIBED AS ONE AND ONE A AND SO YES,
THERE IF WE IF WE FOCUSED ON THE IMPACTS OF INFLATION, IF WE FOCUSED ON ONE PART OF THAT RISK, MORE SO THAN THE OTHER. 
          BUT WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON THE LIQUIDITY AND SAFETY AS THE PRIMARY RISK FACTORS. 
          AND CERTAINLY INTEREST RATE RISK IS A REAL THING. 
          AND. AND INTEREST AND INFLATION AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS COME INTO PLAY AND WE JUST MAKE
THE BEST DECISIONS WE CAN BASED ON ALL THOSE FACTORS. 
          BUT IT'S A GREAT CONVERSATION. OF COURSE, I RICK,
I SAID ALL THAT. 
          I'M DYING TO ASK THIS QUESTION BECAUSE YOU EMPHASIZE SO MUCH ABOUT INVESTING IN TO LOCK IN
FOR LONGER TERM. AND THEN COMMISSIONER MARIN ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT,
ARE WE GOING TO INVEST LONGER TERM? SO MY QUESTION, YOU WEREN'T HERE LAST, DURING THE LAST PRESENTATION,
BUT THERE WAS A PURCHASE. 
          AND AND THIS OPENED UP A LOT OF QUESTIONS FROM ME. 
          THERE WAS A PURCHASE OF TREASURER BOND. I THINK IT WAS A 3.9% FOR TWO YEARS. 
          SO WHY DID YOU PURCHASE FOR TWO YEARS? A NOT SOMETHING BETTER FOR FIVE YEARS. 
          THAT WAS MY DECISION. YEAH. OKAY. LIQUIDITY NEEDS. 
          EUGENE SAID. YES. SO IN TWO YEARS, YOU'RE GOING TO NEED A LIQUIDITY. 
          WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS THE LAST TIME AT OUR MEETING. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT COME UP THAT WE HAVE TO MEASURE FOR. 
          AND THAT'S WHY WE MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. AND JASMINE, JUST AS A SIDE NOTE,
JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, THIS IS NON-DISCRETIONARY FOR US. 
          WE SEND THE IDEAS TO AND TALK TO THEM WITH WITH THE TREASURER. 
          AND THEN THE FINAL DECISION IS MADE BY THE TREASURER OF THE PLANTS WHERE WE JUST DO THAT
ON OUR OWN. 
          SO YEAH, IT'S A TEAM APPROACH. AND HE OF COURSE GETS THE DECIDING VOTE FOR SURE. 
          SO OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THAT'S ALL I HAD. THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU RICK. THANK YOU. I THINK AT THIS POINT,
DO WE ACCEPT AND FILE THE REPORT FROM TREASURER'S, THE QUARTER, WHAT IS IT CALLED? FOURTH QUARTER FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 REPORT. 
          BEFORE YOU DO THAT, THERE ARE NO E-COMMENTS AND NO ONE ON ZOOM. 
          ALL RIGHT. I JUST HAD A QUICK QUESTION. COULD YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE
MANAGEMENT FEES AND HOW THEY COMPARE? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S AVAILABLE? I'M SURE IT'S ALL PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. 
          MEEDER FUNDS. WE HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THEM. IT'S $18,000 PER YEAR. 
          [01:25:05]
THERE ARE NO TRADING FEES. AND THERE ARE OTHER COMPONENTS OF WHAT THEY PROVIDE,
SUCH AS CLEARWATER, WHICH IS A CASH MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE THAT IS PROVIDED TO US AS PART OF THE PACKAGE THAT
THEY HAVE. 
          SO WE HAVE THE SOME COMPANIES CHARGE BASED ON ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT. 
          FEE IS A FLAT FEE. AND IF I COULD ADD CONTEXT MOST OF OUR OTHER CLIENTS WE THAT'S ABOUT A
TWO BASIS POINT FEE. 
          MOST OF OUR OTHER CLIENTS ARE 4 TO 6. SO THE CITY WAS ONE OF OUR EARLIEST CLIENTS WHEN WE
STARTED OUR COMPANY MANY YEARS AGO. 
          SO WE'VE JUST KEPT THAT FEE INCREDIBLY LOW. THANK YOU. 
          THANKS VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? OH, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT AND FILE THE
QUARTERLY REPORT? SO MOVE SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSE? NONE. MOTION CARRIED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. 
          THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM I.1 CIP PROJECTS REPORTED BY PROJECT. 
          [I. ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS AGENDAS]
AND WE HAVE JESSE FROM PUBLIC WORKS HERE. 
          GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. I DON'T HAVE A FORMAL PRESENTATION,
BUT I'VE ATTACHED KIND OF A FLOWCHART OF KIND OF THE SPREADSHEET THAT WE PUT TOGETHER FOR YOU GUYS. 
          THIS CAME AFTER CONVERSATION DURING OUR LAST MEETING IN APRIL REGARDING OUR CIP KIND OF
FUNDING EXPENDITURES. 
          SO WHAT WAS ATTACHED AND THIS IS THE EXCEL FILE. 
          WHAT WAS ATTACHED IS A BREAKDOWN OF ALL OUR PROJECTS THAT WE COMPLETED IN THE LAST FISCAL
YEAR. 
          THE BREAKDOWN OF THE OF THE SPREADSHEET. IT'S BROKEN DOWN INTO KIND OF THESE FOUR
CATEGORIES, PROJECT INFORMATION. JUST NAMING THE ACTUAL PROJECT,
BUDGET INFORMATION, HISTORY OF BUDGETED AMOUNTS AND SPENT, AND EXPENDITURES OF THE PROJECT. BID INFORMATION. 
          THIS IS. THIS IS SPECIFIC FOR THOSE FORMERLY BID PROJECTS IN THE LAST YEAR. 
          AND THEN WE. WE ADDED SOME LINKS ON THAT SPREADSHEET AS WELL THAT THAT LINKED DIRECTLY TO
ADMIN REPORTS AND, AND BIDS THAT WERE PUT OUT. AGAIN WE HAVE, THAT FIRST SECTION TALKS ABOUT THE INITIAL
APPROPRIATED AMOUNT, SUBSEQUENT APPROPRIATIONS THAT WERE MADE TO THOSE PROJECTS,
TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS AND TOTAL PROJECT SPENDING OVER THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT. 
          AND THEN HOW MUCH FUNDS REMAIN IN A PARTICULAR PROJECT. 
          FOR THE BID INFORMATION, IF THERE WAS AN ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE,
WHICH WOULD BE FOR ONLY THOSE THAT WERE FORMALLY BID, THAT'S INCLUDED HOW MANY BIDS WE RECEIVED, WHAT THE AWARD WAS OF THE ACTUAL BID,
ANY CHANGE ORDERS THAT WERE MADE IN THOSE PROJECTS, AND THEN THE FINAL PROJECT COST. AGAIN, THOSE WERE,
AND THEN THE LENGTHS OF WHEN THEY WERE FORMALLY ACCEPTED AS COMPLETE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          THIS LAST PAGE, WE KIND OF JUST PUT AN EXAMPLE OF,
OF HOW THIS WOULD WORK FOR, FOR A PARTICULAR PROJECT. 
          WE TOOK KIND OF, ONE OF OUR METRO FUNDED PROJECTS,
WHICH WAS THE ANITA PCH ADJUSTMENTS THAT THAT WERE FINALIZED THIS LAST YEAR. 
          IF YOU GUYS HAVE DRIVEN DOWN 190TH, THIS IS THE KIND OF THE EXPANSION OF THE LANES THERE
TO CUE MORE CARS AS THEY GO. 
          GO LEFT OR GO SOUTH ON PCH. SO INITIALLY WE,
$400,000 WAS APPROPRIATED INTO, BY THE CITY COUNCIL AS PER THE METRO FUNDING AGREEMENT. WE MADE AN ADDITIONAL $2.1 MILLION IN
APPROPRIATIONS, THAT WAS ALSO BY DICTATED BY THE FUNDING AGREEMENT THAT METRO EXECUTED. 
          $2.5 MILLION IN TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS. WE'VE SPENT $731,000 ON THE PROJECT. 
          SO THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF FUNDING REMAINING IN THAT PROJECT,
ALL THOSE FUNDS, ONCE WE FORMALLY CLOSE THIS OUT, WE'LL GO BACK TO METRO AND GO BACK TO THE SBCOG TO DISTRIBUTE TO OTHER PROJECTS,
NOT NECESSARILY TO OUR CITY, BUT POTENTIALLY. AGAIN, WE HAD AN ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE INITIALLY OF $250,000. 
          DURING THAT TIME YOU KNOW, WE RECEIVED THREE FORMAL BIDS. 
          WE AWARDED A PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $214,000. 
          [01:30:01]
DURING CONSTRUCTION, THERE WAS SEVERAL CHANGE ORDERS THAT WERE MADE. 
          A COUPLE OF THEM WERE ACTUALLY WHILE WE WERE OUT THERE ADJUSTMENTS THAT WOULD MAKE THE
PROJECT BETTER, SUCH AS ADDING PAVERS TO THE MEDIAN THERE, EXPANDING SOME OF THE ACTUAL RESURFACING OF THE
STREET. 
          THOSE WERE ALL BROUGHT TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL,
SINCE THEY WERE ABOVE AND BEYOND THE AUTHORITY OF THE CITY ENGINEER BY OUR APP, AND ALL THOSE WERE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL. SO AGAIN ALL IN ALL ENDED UP COSTING ROUGHLY
712,000, OR $730,000, AND THIS WAS ACCEPTED AS COMPLETE BY THE COUNCIL IN APRIL 1ST,
2025. 
          SO THAT'S JUST AN EXAMPLE OF KIND OF THE PROCESS FOR ONE PROJECT. 
          I'LL PULL UP THE EXCEL SPREADSHEET. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO GO THROUGH
THIS. 
          THIS WAS AN ATTACHMENT AS PART OF THE AGENDA. 
          SO I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS. I TURN IT BACK TO YOU,
CHAIR ALLEN. 
          DID YOU SAY THIS WAS AN ATTACHMENT? YEAH. MY MISTAKE. 
          I, FOR SOME REASON. OKAY, SO EVERYONE RECEIVED THIS. 
          OKAY. IT WAS A PDF. YEAH. IT WAS. IT WASN'T AN EXCEL FILE,
BUT THE PDF OF THIS WAS AN ATTACHMENT. 
          OKAY. I WANT TO SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. ONE PROJECT YOU MENTIONED WENT FROM 400,000 TO 2.5
MILLION. 
          THAT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE, IS THERE? WHICH ONE? I DON'T KNOW. THE PROJECT WENT FROM 400. 
          THEN YOU ADDED SUBSEQUENT APPROPRIATIONS AT 2.1 TO GET TO A TOTAL OF 2.5. 
          WAS LIKE YOUR EXAMPLE WAS. OH, THE EXAMPLE. SO,
THE EXAMPLE. 
          SO THOSE WERE. SO THAT WAS A METRO APPROVED PROJECT. 
          WHEN WE INITIALLY ASKED FOR FUNDING FOR THIS PROJECT,
WE IMAGINED A MUCH LARGER PROJECT WHICH WAS ACTUALLY ADJUSTMENTS TO THE RIGHT TURN LANE GOING NORTHBOUND ON PCH. 
          AFTER WE GOT INTO THE DESIGN, THERE WERE SOME ISSUES THAT CAME UP. 
          COOPERATION FROM HERMOSA, FROM CALTRANS. SO THE SCOPE CHANGED,
RIGHT? SO THE INITIAL PROJECT THAT WE IMAGINED WAS $2.5 MILLION. 
          AS WE WENT THROUGH THE DESIGN PROCESS, WE WORKED THROUGH THE DIFFERENT AGENCIES. WE
REALIZED THAT CERTAIN ELEMENTS WERE NOT REALISTIC ANYMORE. 
          SO IT WAS A MUCH SMALLER SCOPE THAT WE ACTUALLY WENT FORWARD WITH,
WHICH WAS JUST THE, THE EXPANSION OF THE QUEUING OF THE OF THE VEHICLES GOING SOUTHBOUND ON PCH ADDING SOME,
SOME LANDSCAPING IN THAT MEDIAN, SOME BRICKS, SOME PAVERS THERE TO MAKE IT LOOK A LITTLE NICER. 
          AND THEN WHILE WE WERE IN CONSTRUCTION AS WELL THE INITIAL SCOPE DIDN'T CALL FOR A WHOLE
RESURFACING OF THAT SECTION. 
          IT ONLY CALLED FOR RESURFACING OF, OF THOSE TWO LANES. 
          SO GIVEN THAT WE HAD AVAILABLE FUNDING, WE WE ASKED COUNCIL TO APPROVE A CHANGE ORDER TO
ACTUALLY RESURFACE A MUCH LARGER PORTION, BOTH EVEN ON THE GOING EASTBOUND AND SOUTHBOUND ON 1/90. 
          SO WHEN YOU HAVE A CHANGE OF THAT MAGNITUDE,
DO YOU GO OUT FOR BIDS AGAIN, OR YOU SIMPLY KEEP PAYING MORE TO WHICHEVER CONTRACTOR YOU'VE SELECTED? IF IT'S CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND WE HAVE THE FUNDING
AVAILABLE, WE WILL GO THROUGH A CHANGE ORDER PROCEDURE. RIGHT. 
          AND THE CHANGE ORDER PROCEDURE IS GOVERNED BY OUR APP. 
          WE HAVE AN ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY AND PROCEDURE THAT GOVERNS WHAT ON THE STAFF LEVEL WHAT
AUTHORITY THE CITY ENGINEER HAS FOR CHANGE ORDERS. 
          AND IT'S DICTATED BY DOLLAR AMOUNTS. RIGHT. SO ANY PROJECT UP TO $250,000,
IT'S 10% OR $25,000. 
          BETWEEN 250 AND 500, I BELIEVE IT'S ALSO 25% OR 50,000. 
          ANYTHING OVER HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IS 10% OR $125,000,
WHICHEVER IS GREATER. 
          SO THOSE ARE DICTATED. IF THERE'S SOME CHANGES THAT THAT GO ABOVE AND BEYOND THOSE
AMOUNTS, WE HAVE TO GO TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. RIGHT? SO THAT IS THE ONLY THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY ON THE STAFF SIDE TO MAKE THE
DECISION TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND THOSE LIMITS. WOULD YOU CONSIDER THIS AS ABOVE AND BEYOND WHEN YOU GO FROM 400,000 TO 2.5
MILLION? WELL, WE DIDN'T GO TO $2.5 MILLION. WE ENDED UP SPENDING $711,000. 
          WELL, THERE'S THE REMAINING FUND. SO I GUESS THE INTENT IS YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SPEND THE
REST OF THOSE FUNDS. WE CAN'T SPEND THAT MONEY. IT'S METRO FUNDED. IT'S GRANT FUNDED. SO ONCE WE CLOSE IT OUT, THAT MONEY WILL GO BACK TO METRO. 
          GOTCHA. AND IT'LL GO BACK TO THE COG. THE SOUTH BAY COG,
WHICH IS IN CHARGE OF DISTRIBUTING METRO AND FUNDINGS IN THE SOUTH BAY TO VARIOUS CITIES. 
          [01:35:10]
SO WHAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL, I GUESS ON THE BIGGER I'M LOOKING AT THE BIGGER SPREADSHEET THAT
HAS ALL THE DATA. 
          THE CITYWIDE SLURRY IS MAYBE ONE ADDING SOURCE OF FUNDS,
BECAUSE IT'S GREAT TO KNOW THAT YOU KNOW WHERE THEY CAME FROM. 
          AND THEN TWO ON THE REMAINING FUNDS, LIKE ARE THEY GOING BACK? ARE WE ON TARGET? WE HAVE, WHAT'S LEFT TO BE SPENT? BECAUSE AGAIN, I JUST I THINK TO COMMISSIONER JESTE HIS POINT,
LIKE I ASSUME THE 1.759 WAS GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE SPENT. 
          AND WE COULD ADD A COLUMN THAT STATES WHETHER IT'S GRANT FUNDED OR WHETHER IT'S
DISCRETIONARY MONEYS OR WHETHER IT'S DIFFERENT. 
          YEAH. YEAH. THAT'S THAT THAT THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN ADD THERE. 
          WHAT? YEAH. IF IT IS A GRANT FUNDED PROJECT,
WE DON'T HAVE DISCRETION TO SPEND THAT ON ANYTHING ELSE. 
          AND FOR ANY PROJECT, IF THERE IS FUNDING REMAINING FOR A SPECIFIC PROJECT AND IT'S A
STANDALONE PROJECT, THAT MONEY GOES BACK TO THE FUND ONCE IT'S CLOSED OUT. 
          THESE ARE ALL IS THE LIST OF ALL THESE PROJECTS. THESE ARE ALL COMPLETED PROJECTS ARE
DONE. SO THESE ARE SO, AND YOU'LL SEE ON THE, ON COLUMN D, RIGHT, THERE STANDALONE. AND THERE'S CONTINUOUS RIGHT. 
          SO IF WE TAKE CONTINUOUS FOR EXAMPLE THE CITYWIDE SLURRY SEAL PROGRAM. 
          RIGHT. THIS IS A CONTINUOUS PROJECT THAT THERE'S DIFFERENT PHASES OF,
RIGHT. 
          AS YOU GUYS KNOW WE'RE OUT THERE, WE'RE SLURRING THE STREETS. 
          SO WE'LL HAVE A PROJECT, FOR INSTANCE YOU'LL SEE LAST YEAR WE DID A PHASE. 
          ESTIMATE FOR THAT PHASE WAS $600,000. WE ACTUALLY GOT FAVORABLE BIDS AWARDED THAT
$484,000, HAD, AND ENDED UP ACTUALLY SPENDING LESS THAN WHAT IT WAS,
BECAUSE I THINK WE REMOVED CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE OF WHAT WAS GOING ON, AND WE ENDED UP SPENDING $468,000, RIGHT. SO THEN THAT LEAVES US WITH FUNDS REMAINING
THERE, RIGHT. AS YOU CURRENTLY SEE, WE HAVE $920,000. 
          THAT MONEY WILL REMAIN IN THAT PROJECT SINCE IT'S A CONTINUOUS PROJECT AND IT WILL GO TO
THE NEXT PHASE OF, SO PHASE FIVE. PULL OVER TO PHASE FIVE. CORRECT. 
          GOT IT. YEAH. IF IT'S A STANDALONE PROJECT FOR INSTANCE MBB RESURFACING. 
          RIGHT. WE CURRENTLY SEE $746,000 REMAINING. ONCE WE CLOSE THAT OUT,
WE'LL CLOSE THAT OUT, AND THEN THOSE FUNDS WILL GO BACK TO WHATEVER FUNDS IT CAME FROM. 
          GOT IT. YES. WE DON'T HAVE THE DISCRETION TO THEN ALLOW STAFF TO SAY,
OH, LET ME GO SPEND IT OVER HERE. 
          YEAH, RIGHT. IF WE SAY, HEY, WE ACTUALLY HAVE A PROJECT THAT'S NEAT AND THAT NEEDS MORE
FUNDING, WE HAVE SUFFICIENT FUNDINGS AND MBB THAT ONE'S DONE. 
          WE'LL COME TO COUNCIL AND ASK THEM TO MOVE THE MONEY AND TRANSFER THE MONEY FROM X PROJECT
TO ANOTHER PROJECT. 
          BUT THAT'S ALL DONE THROUGH COUNCIL APPROVAL. 
          ARE THERE ANY PROJECTS THAT WERE DEFERRED IN THE PAST BECAUSE OF WHATEVER REASON? AND TO THIS YEAR OF THE CURRENT YEAR. WAS THERE ANY? ANY PROJECTS FROM THE PAST, SAY, 22-23 FISCAL YEAR OR 23-24 OR 24-25? ANY PROJECTS DURING THAT PERIOD THAT WERE DELAYED OR DEFERRED BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE ANY
REFUNDS? SO CURRENTLY THERE'S THE. SO WE BID OUT A PROJECT IN LATE LAST YEAR WHICH WAS THE NORTH
REDONDO, NOT THE NORTH REDONDO BEACH, THE PIER PARKING STRUCTURE REPAIRS. 
          THERE WAS SOME SEISMIC WORK IN THE OLD FUN FACTORY AREA,
AND SOME SMALL SPALLING REPAIRS THAT NEED TO BE DONE ON THE CONCRETE. 
          WE BID THAT OUT. WE HAD ROUGHLY $2.1 MILLION. 
          THE BIDS CAME IN AT $4.5 MILLION, RIGHT. WE DID NOT MOVE THAT PROJECT FORWARD. 
          SO IN THOSE CASES, KNOWING THAT THERE'S NO WAY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE EXTRA $2.5 MILLION
AND THE FUND IS NOT GOING TO BE AVAILABLE, WE HAD TO REASSESS WHAT WE WERE GOING TO DO WITH THAT
PROJECT. SO WE ACTUALLY JUST RECENTLY REASSESSED THAT AND WE'RE MOVING FORWARD. 
          WE REMOVED THE SEISMIC PORTION OF THE PROJECT,
AND WE'RE MOVING ON WITH THE SMALLER PROJECT OF JUST REPAIRING THE SPALDING REPAIRS TO THE CONCRETE. AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD REALISTICALLY AFFORD WITH THE FUNDING
AVAILABLE. 
          WELL, ONE OF THE REASONS THE MAYOR MENTIONED FOR THE BUDGET DEFICIT WAS,
ACCORDING TO HIM, SOME PROJECTS THAT WERE DEFERRED ARE NOW INCLUDED IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET. 
          SO I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT PROJECTS DID WE DEFER LAST YEAR OR TWO YEARS PAST. 
          FOR WHAT REASONS AND WHY ARE WE DOING THEM NOW WHEN WE HAVE A BUDGET DEFICIT? I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE, I HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO THE MAYOR,
SO I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHICH PROJECTS HE'S REFERRING TO, THAT WERE DEFERRED. THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS IT? 
          [01:40:04]
I KNOW, I KNOW FOR SEVERAL YEARS, AND THIS WAS BEFORE I TOOK THIS ROLE. 
          I KNOW, LIKE IN THE LATE TEENS, THE COUNCIL APPROPRIATED A LOT OF FUNDING TOWARDS
WATERFRONT PROJECTS, RIGHT. THERE WAS A LOT OF APPROPRIATIONS THAT WERE MADE TOWARDS WATERFRONT PROJECTS,
AND THOSE REALLY DIDN'T COME INTO CONSTRUCTION. 
          THOSE WERE, I GUESS. QUOTE UNQUOTE. I WOULDN'T SAY DEFERRED. 
          THEY'RE JUST TAKING A LITTLE LONGER TO GET TO. 
          AND THEN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WE ACTUALLY EXECUTED A LOT OF A LOT OF PROJECTS DOWN
THERE WHICH WHICH PUT SOME PUT SOME STRAIN ON THE TIDELANDS FUND AT THAT TIME. SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAD THE PAVERS THAT WE JUST RECENTLY DID THIS LAST YEAR,
WE HAD PIER LIGHT FIXTURES THAT WERE REPLACED ALL ALL ALONG THE PIER. WE HAD THE PIER RAILING PROJECT THAT TOOK PLACE DOWN THERE. 
          SO AT TIMES WE'VE HAD THE COUNCIL APPROPRIATE FUNDING TOWARDS CERTAIN PROJECTS. 
          AND IT JUST TAKES US A WHILE TO GET TO THEM,
GIVEN OUR RESOURCES, ESPECIALLY DURING THAT TIME. 
          CAN I UNDERSTAND? CAN I UNDERSTAND? JUST, JUST I WANTED TO CLARIFY. 
          SO ALL THESE CIP PROJECTS, THEY'RE NOT FUNDED BY GENERAL FUND,
RIGHT? THE VAST MAJORITY ARE NOT FUNDED BY DISCRETIONARY FUNDING. 
          OKAY. SO. OH, DO WE HAVE A LINE WHERE. WHICH ONES ARE GENERAL FUND OR NO. 
          SO ONLY THERE'S. THERE'S NO LINE THERE. AND WHEN YOU SAY GENERAL FUND. 
          SO HISTORICALLY THE COUNCIL HAS APPROPRIATED EITHER THEY'VE TRANSFERRED GENERAL FUND TO
THE CAPITAL, WHICH BECOMES CAPITAL FUNDS. RIGHT. SO THEY'RE CAPITAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDS,
WHICH I GUESS THEY'RE TECHNICALLY NOT GENERAL FUNDS, BUT THEY'RE DISCRETIONARY. AND THE COUNCIL DID,
ESPECIALLY DURING THE PENSION REFORM WHERE THERE WAS $5 MILLION LEFT OVER. THEY APPROPRIATED A LOT OF THAT MONEY TO CAPITAL DURING THAT TIME. 
          CAN YOU SHOW AN EXAMPLE OF ONE OF THOSE? SO WHAT? SO THEN THAT MONEY DOESN'T GO TO METRO, THAT IF THERE IS A REMAINING FUND. 
          SO A LOT OF THESE SAY. THAT GOES BACK TO OUR CIP. 
          CORRECT. SO MANY OF. SO HE'S PROBABLY, THE MAYOR. 
          I'M JUST THINKING THE MAYOR'S PROBABLY REFERRING TO ONE OF THOSE THAT AFFECTED OUR BUDGET, NOT ONE OF THE PROJECTS THAT, RIGHT? YEAH. FOR INSTANCE,
THESE GRANT AVENUE BULB-OUTS, GRANT AVENUE CROSSWALK. 
          RIGHT. $450,000 THERE. THOSE WERE ALL DISCRETIONARY FUNDS,
RIGHT, THAT WERE THAT WERE PLACED TOWARDS THIS PROJECT. 
          SO THEY WERE OUR CITY'S FUNDS? EXACTLY. GRANT AVENUE SIGNALS HAD A PORTION OF THIS THAT
WAS DISCRETIONARY FUNDS. 
          DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT HAS DISCRETIONARY FUNDS THERE. 
          BUT MOST, A LOT OF, I WON'T SAY MOST, A GOOD PORTION OF OUR PROJECTS ARE EITHER GRANT
FUNDED OR RESTRICTED FUNDING AND. 
          OKAY. AND THE REASON I ASK COMMISSIONER JESTE IS PROBABLY I'M THINKING IT IT HAS TO BE ONE
OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT INITIALLY IT WAS GENERAL FUND THAT GOT TRANSFERRED TO. 
          SO ONE COULD BE MORE THAN ONE. WE DON'T KNOW BECAUSE HE WAS NOT GRACE SPECIFIC. 
          BEFORE I FORGET, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. 
          THIS IS, THIS IS REALLY GREAT. AND THIS IS I KNOW THIS IS A LOT OF WORK. 
          SO WE TOOK A LOT OF TIME FROM YOU. THIS WAS A LOT FROM WORK. IT WAS,
OUR ANALYST JESSICA DID A LOT OF WORK ON THIS. 
          SO SHE, WE DID SPEND A LOT OF STAFF TIME PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. 
          YEAH. THANK YOU. YEAH. THANK YOU. SORRY FOR INTERRUPTING YOU,
COMMISSIONER JESTE. 
          WELL, IN THE LETTER THAT THE MAYOR WROTE TO HIS READER JULY 24TH,
HE SAID THE DEFICIT THIS YEAR WAS LARGELY DRIVEN BY THE NEED TO INVEST IN CITY INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WAS NEGLECTED AND IN WHICH MAINTENANCE
WAS DEFERRED BY PREVIOUS COUNCILS. 
          THAT'S WHAT HE SAID, AND HE WAS NOT VERY SPECIFIC. 
          SO I WAS WONDERING, EXACTLY WHAT IS IT THAT WE ARE NOW PAYING FOR IN SPITE OF THE BUDGET
SHORTFALL? YEAH. LIKE I MENTIONED, I HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO THE MAYOR. SO I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHAT HE'S
REFERRING TO IN THAT STATEMENT. 
          IT WAS PROBABLY GENERALLY, YOU KNOW, IT WAS PROBABLY A GENERAL STATEMENT,
ONE OF THE INDICATORS OR ONE OF THE REASONS. WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO ADD A COLUMN TO TELL US IF THAT MONEY,
HOW IT'S FUNDED, IF IT'S BY METRO? OH, YEAH. THAT SHOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE. WE COULD PUT A COLUMN THAT STATES THE TYPE OF
FUNDING IT IS, WHETHER IT'S A TRANSPORTATION RESTRICTED FUND,
WHETHER IT'S GRANT FUNDED, WHETHER IT'S CAPITAL MONEY. 
          BECAUSE THAT WAY WE'LL SEE HOW THAT'S AFFECTING THE GENERAL FUND OR YOU KNOW,
IT USED TO BE GENERAL FUND. 
          NOW IT'S IN CIP FUND. SO. CORRECT. JUST FOR,
TO PUT SOME COLOR TO IT. 
          [01:45:07]
HISTORICALLY, THE COUNCIL WOULD TRANSFER ABOUT $1 MILLION EVERY YEAR DURING MID-YEAR TO
CAPITAL FUNDS. 
          RIGHT. IN CAPITAL IN GENERAL, FUND TO CAPITAL FUNDS. 
          THAT'S IT. THAT'S $1 MILLION, RIGHT? 1%. GIVEN THE THE CITY'S ECONOMIC SITUATION THE LAST
COUPLE OF YEARS, THAT TRANSFER HAS NOT HAPPENED. THE ONLY FUNDING THAT'S DISCRETIONARY OVER THE LAST 2 OR 3
YEARS IS AN OLD BOND FROM THE GALLERIA THAT WE RECEIVED ROUGHLY $800,000. AND I THINK WE HAVE ONE MORE YEAR. 
          WE'RE IN THE LAST YEAR OF THAT. SO THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN FUNDING ANY DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS
IN THE CAPITAL PROJECTS. 
          SO ONCE THAT DRIES UP UNLESS THE COUNCIL AND THERE'S FUNDING AVAILABLE,
THERE WON'T BE ANY DISCRETIONARY FUNDING ON THE CAPITAL SIDE AND IT'LL BE STRICTLY ON THE RESTRICTED FUNDS THAT WE, AND GRANT FUNDS THAT WILL FUND THESE CAPITAL PROJECTS. 
          BUT I, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, BUT I YOU KNOW,
WHAT YOU READ I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT DURING OUR BUDGET ITEM MORE, BECAUSE I THINK THOSE ARE QUESTIONS THAT WE CAN ASK THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT. 
          OF WHAT CAUSED THE DEFICIT? YEAH, ESSENTIALLY THAT'S,
I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GET TO. 
          RIGHT. WELL, IF YOU RECALL, IN MONTHS GONE BY,
AND YEARS GONE BY, THERE WERE ISSUES THAT CAME UP ABOUT THINGS LIKE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE ON ALL THE FIRE STATIONS THAT WERE UNFUNDED. AND THEY WERE THEY WOULD ORDINARILY FALL
UNDER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, THINGS LIKE REPLACING ROOFS AND, DOING WORK LIKE THAT. 
          SO THOSE WOULD BE CIP PROJECTS. THERE'S NO GRANT FUNDS TO DO IT AND IT HAS TO BE DONE. 
          IT'S EITHER AN OSHA REQUIREMENT OR IT'S AN EPA REQUIREMENT OR IT'S,
YOU KNOW, A CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENT WITH THE UNIONS. 
          THE CITY HAS TO PAY FOR IT. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT OVER THE YEARS GET DEFERRED IN
CITIES, AND IN THIS CITY, THERE ARE THERE'S A LOT OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE THAT'S GONE ON OR THEY
CALL IT DEFERRED MAINTENANCE. 
          IT'S BASICALLY BEEN PATCHWORK, JUST BARELY TO KEEP THINGS RUNNING. 
          AND AT SOME POINT, IT FINALLY BREAKS BADLY ENOUGH THAT THE ANSWER IS NO,
WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY GO FIX THIS. 
          SO IS THE MAINTENANCE PART OF CIP? SO WE HAVE CERTAIN WHAT WE WOULD CALL. 
          SO WE HAVE OUR TRADITIONAL CIPS, RIGHT? THAT GO THROUGH. 
          THAT'S NOT PART OF THE CIP. AND THEN WE HAVE MAINTENANCE CIPS. 
          YEAH. SO THEY'RE IN THE CIP BUT WE THEIR MAINTENANCE PROJECTS PERSE. 
          AND THEY'RE GENERAL FUND MONEY? THEY'RE FUNDED DEPENDING ON. 
          A GENERAL FUND OR BY. MOSTLY BY CAPITAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDS. 
          WE ALSO HAVE A MAJOR FACILITIES REPAIR THAT'S FUNDED THROUGH ISF,
RIGHT. 
          THAT WE HAVE OCCASIONALLY. MAYBE THAT'S WHAT HE MEANT. 
          SO THE, FOR THE MAINTENANCE NOT FOR. WELL, YOU ALSO HAVE. 
          I DON'T THINK A BRAND-NEW BUILDING, BUT FOR THE MAINTENANCE. WOULD THAT GO UNDER CIP? SOME OF IT DOES, SOME OF IT. IF WE'RE REPLACING FOR INSTANCE,
WE HAVE AN HVAC REPLACEMENT. 
          RIGHT. SO THAT WILL GO THROUGH THE CIP. IT'S PROCURED THROUGH OUR MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES
AND OUR MAINTENANCE PROCUREMENT PROCESS. 
          AND THEY'RE PART OF THAT MILLION DOLLARS THAT COUNCIL TRANSFERS FROM GENERAL FOUND -
CIP. 
          AND SOME OF THOSE HAVE HAVE CARRIED FORWARD FOR SEVERAL YEARS. 
          RIGHT. I THINK THAT PROJECT HAD $300,000 A FEW YEARS AGO. 
          ONE YEAR THEY'RE ABLE TO DO A FEW, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE STAFF TO BE ABLE TO REPAIR
ALL THESE HVAC SYSTEMS, AND WE TRY TO DO IT METHODICALLY ON WHICH ONES NEED IT THE MOST. 
          SO. THAT'S STILL JUST $1 MILLION A YEAR, AND THIS YEAR. 
          MAYBE WE NEED TO BACK UP JUST A LITTLE BIT IN ORDER FOR SOMETHING TO BE A CIP PROJECT,
OR HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE CIP PROCESS IN THE FIRST PLACE. 
          WHAT ARE THE LIMITS? WE USUALLY SAY CIPS ARE,
AND IT KIND OF FOLLOWS OUR PROCUREMENT, SOMETHING THAT'S CAPITALIZED OVER $60,000. OH, THERE'S A. AND HAS A LIFE. IN THE BUDGET BOOK IN THE TRANSMITTAL LETTER,
WE KIND OF WE KIND OF DESCRIBE OUR THOUGHT PROCESS AS WE THINK ABOUT WHAT GOES INTO CIP AS OPPOSED TO WHAT'S
JUST MAINTENANCE. 
          FOR, AND IF WE TAKE JUST THE MAINTENANCE AND BUILDINGS. FOR INSTANCE,
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE HVAC. JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, WE'RE REPLACING A WHOLE SYSTEM, RIGHT? THAT'S A CIP. 
          THAT'S A CAPITAL EXPENSE. IF THEY'RE JUST COMING TO FIX A LEAK,
REPLACE A HOSE, RIGHT. 
          THAT'S JUST MAINTENANCE OF OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM. 
          RIGHT. SO ARE YOU REPLACING A SYSTEM OR ARE YOU JUST REPAIRING IT? SO I KNOW THERE WAS A CHANGE TO THE CITY CHARTER A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. 
          BUT IN GENERAL, THE CITY HAS SOME REQUIREMENTS OF WHICH PATH THE PROJECT WILL GO DOWN. 
          [01:50:05]
IT'S JUST MAINTENANCE. IF THEY CAN GO OUT AND PATCH A CURB,
OKAY. 
          IF THEY'VE GOT TO TEAR UP 50FT OF CURB AND PART OF THE STREET,
IT GOES OVER A CERTAIN DOLLAR THRESHOLD. 
          AND THE VALUE OF THAT REPAIR IS MORE THAN X NUMBER OF YEARS. 
          IT HAS A LIFE EXPECTANCY, MORE THAN X NUMBER OF YEARS. 
          IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THE CIP. THE MAINTENANCE ALWAYS. 
          SO MAINTENANCE DOESN'T GO TO CIP. 
          AGO, AND IT ACTUALLY DEFINED MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR. 
          AND WE ACTUALLY HAVE AN ORDINANCE NOW THAT DEFINES MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR. 
          MAINTENANCE IS ACTUALLY A MUCH WIDER DEFINITION NOW. 
          RIGHT. SO WHEN WE DO SLURRY THAT'S MAINTENANCE. 
          RIGHT. RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A, I FORGET THE SECTION 2-6.1. 
          IT EXPLAINS ALL THE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR AND THE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR PROJECT COULD
ALSO BE A CIP PROJECT, BUT IT HAS ITS OWN PROCUREMENT PROCESS, RIGHT? IF IT'S A FORMALLY FORMAL CAPITAL PROJECT, IT GOES THROUGH A FORMAL BIDDING PROCESS,
WHICH IS WHAT YOU SEE WHERE WE GO TO COUNCIL TO APPROVE PLANS AND SPECS. 
          WE HAVE A FORMALLY WE HAVE TO PUT IN THE EASY READER OR IN THE PAPER TO ADVERTISE THE
PROJECT. 
          WE HAVE A FORMALLY OPEN THE BIDS AWARDED AND GO THROUGH,
A THE PROCESS OF A FORMALLY BID PROJECT. THE, MY POINT IS THAT THERE ARE THINGS THAT YOU WOULD NORMALLY THINK OF AS
MAINTENANCE. 
          THAT BY VIRTUE OF THE CITY CHARTER, THEY ARE NOT DEFINED AS MAINTENANCE. 
          SO THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE CIP PROCESS. WHICH IS GOOD BECAUSE THEN MONEY DOESN'T COME
OUT OF GENERAL. 
          ON THE FUNDING SIDE, IT COULD BE FUNDED BY THE CITY FROM THE GENERAL FUND IN ORDER TO MAKE
IT HAPPEN. 
          IT COULD BE FUNDED BY A GRANT IF IT, IF THERE'S A COST OVERRUN AND THE GRANT HAS A CAP OF
$1 MILLION. 
          AND FOR SOME REASON, THERE'S A CHANGE IN SCOPE AND IT BECOMES A $2 MILLION PROJECT. 
          THE CITY HAS TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE, AND THAT HAS TO COME OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND. 
          SO THERE ARE A LOT OF REASONS FOR THE CITY TO TRANSFER MONEY INTO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT, AND IT'S NOT AS SIMPLE. WE DECIDED THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO BUILD SOMETHING AND IT SHOULD
COST $2 MILLION. 
          THE CITY'S EXPOSURE IS 100,000 OR NONE. BUT I MEAN,
LIKE YOU SAID, USUALLY IT'S $1 MILLION A YEAR THAT THAT GETS TRANSFERRED FROM. 
          HISTORICALLY, THAT WAS THE CASE? YES, BUT IS THIS THE BEST PRACTICE? IS THAT WHAT OTHER CITIES DO? THAT'S I THAT'S HARD. 
          THERE'S, THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS OF IDENTIFYING WHAT'S A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND
DIFFERENT DOLLAR LIMITS AND DIFFERENT METHODS OF EITHER TAKING IT OUT TO BID OR MANAGING IT. 
          BUT IN GENERAL, YEAH, THEY'RE ALL PRETTY MUCH THE SAME. 
          AND WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING AT WAYS TO IMPROVE OUR PROCESS. 
          YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT A STATIC. WE'RE ALSO BOUND THOUGH FOR,
IF THEY'RE FORMALLY AND THEY'RE CAPITAL PROJECTS. 
          RIGHT. WE'RE BOUND BY OUR CHARTER, WE'RE BOUND BY OUR ORDINANCE AND WE'RE BOUND BY THE
PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT CODE. 
          RIGHT. THIS IS ALL STRICTLY ENFORCED. SO WE'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS ON THE UP
AND UP, AND WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING APPROPRIATELY. AND IT'S,
YOU KNOW, UP TO THE STANDARDS. 
          AND LIKE I MENTIONED, ANYTHING THAT GOES ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WAS AWARDED OR BEYOND THE
APPROVED APP, IT COMES TO COUNCIL. IT'S ALL OUT IN THE OPEN AND WE ONLY MOVE SOMETHING FORWARD IF WE
HAVE THE FUNDING AVAILABLE. 
          AND THAT THAT ENDS UP. SO TWO THINGS. FIRST OF ALL,
THE ONE THING THAT YOU DIDN'T MENTION IS WE'RE ALSO BOUND BY THE PARAMETERS OF THE GRANT, IF IT'S FUNDED BY A GRANT. CORRECT. SOME OF THEM ARE VERY,
VERY NARROW. 
          AND IT'S LIKE YOU'RE ALLOWED TO LAY ASPHALT. YOU CAN'T FIX THE CURB WITH THIS. 
          THERE ARE OTHERS THAT ARE MORE GENERAL. SO YOU'VE GOT THE GRANTS THEMSELVES. 
          SOME OF THEM REQUIRE MATCHING FUNDS. YOU KNOW,
THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE US A $3 MILLION GRANT. 
          WE'VE GOT TO COME UP WITH 300,000 AS A MATCH. 
          SO THERE ARE THERE ARE A LOT OF THOSE. THE PROCESSES IS PRETTY COMPLEX,
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE OVERALL THE CITY MANAGES IT PRETTY WELL. 
          AND IT'S ALWAYS GREAT TO REVIEW IT, I THINK. BUT I DON'T KNOW I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD
MAKE IT ANY DIFFERENT. 
          I. BUT I THINK YOU WERE HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE,
BUT OUR VISITOR, MR. MUELLER, HE TALKED ABOUT THREE SPECIFIC PROJECTS WHERE HE FELT THAT THE COST WAS WAY TOO
HIGH. 
          TWICE AS MUCH AS WHAT. SO WHO DETERMINES IF IT IS REASONABLE ENOUGH TO AWARD THE. 
          SO I'LL SPEAK IN GENERALITIES. I THINK WHAT I FORGET IS YOUR NAME. 
          YEAH. MR. WAS SPEAKING ABOUT. HE'S SPEAKING ABOUT MORE PROFESSIONAL CONTRACTS. 
          YEAH, RIGHT. SO NOT NECESSARILY CAPITAL PROJECTS. 
          RIGHT. WHEN WE PUT SOME. YEAH. WHEN WE, ON THE CAPITAL SIDE,
WHEN WE PUT SOMETHING OUT TO BID, 
          [01:55:04]
WE HAVE TO GO WITH THE LOWEST BID. RIGHT. THERE'S A SEALED PROCESS. 
          THE CITY CLERK OPENS IT AT THE SAME TIME. 9 A.M. 
          WILL HAVE AN OPENING. SHE'S OUT THERE, OPENS IT EVERY BID. 
          READS IT OUT LOUD. WHOEVER THE LOWEST BID IS,
WE ARE BOUND BY BY BY LAW TO GO WITH THEM. 
          RIGHT. AS LONG AS THEY THEY GO THROUGH THE BACKGROUND,
WE GO THROUGH THE REFERENCE CHECK. 
          MAKE SURE THEY HAVE ALL THE INSURANCE, ALL THE REQUIREMENTS. 
          WE'RE BOUND TO GO WITH THE LOWEST BID. WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY WE DON'T LIKE
THAT, THAT CONTRACTOR. WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH THE OTHER PERSON. 
          BUT EVEN IF THE LOWEST BID IS TOO HIGH. WHO DETERMINES THAT? WHEN YOU SAY, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY TOO HIGH? YES. 
          WELL, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO WHAT MR. MILLER SAID. 
          YOU KNOW, WHAT IS REASONABLE AND WHAT APPEARS TO BE,
YOU KNOW, CONSIDERABLY HIGHER. 
          IF I WERE TO HIRE A CONTRACTOR TO PAINT MY HOUSE,
FOR INSTANCE. 
          WELL, YOU KNOW, I'LL GET THREE BIDS. ONE AT ONE,
MAYBE 15,000, OTHER MAYBE 30,000. 
          AND IF I TALK TO NEIGHBORS AND I FIND OUT, WELL,
10,000 IS MOST REASONABLE, I WOULDN'T EVEN ACCEPT THE LOWEST BID. 
          SO IF WE DON'T HAVE THE FUNDING, RIGHT. AND IF IT'S,
THE IF THE FUNDING THAT WE HAVE IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE BIDS. 
          THEN WE WOULD REJECT ALL BIDS, WHICH WE'VE DONE SEVERAL TIMES,
RIGHT. WE'LL COME TO COUNCIL. WE FORMALLY REJECT ALL BIDS. 
          WE EITHER BID IT AGAIN. WE SCOPE, DO CHANGES TO THE SCOPE AND REASSESS OUR APPROACH TO IT. 
          SO WE WILL NEVER AWARD SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE FUNDING FOR TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          SO SOMETIMES, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, I MIGHT NOT REMEMBER IT FROM MY PUBLIC WORKS DAYS. 
          BEFORE YOU EVEN START THE BID. SOMETIMES THEY HIRE A CONSULTANT TO GIVE YOU AN APPROXIMATE
PRICE. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE HERE. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE. 
          YES. THAT'S WHAT. YES. SO AS WE GO THROUGH THE DESIGN PROCESS,
RIGHT. 
          WE HAVE OUR CONSULTANTS THAT ARE DOING THE DESIGN. 
          PART OF THE DESIGN PROCESS AT THE END IS TO PROVIDE US WITH THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE,
RIGHT. 
          SO THAT'S THEIR PROFESSIONAL ESTIMATE BASED OFF OF THE DESIGN THAT THEY'VE PUT TOGETHER. 
          AND WHEN WE ACTUALLY PUT THAT, AND THIS NUMBER IS ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN THE BID THAT GOES
OUT. 
          SO ALL THE CONTRACTORS THAT ARE BIDDING, THEY KNOW WHAT THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE IS. 
          SO THAT'S HOW. AND WE'VE DONE A MUCH BETTER JOB DURING COVID. 
          OUR ESTIMATES WERE WAY OFF. RIGHT? NOBODY COULD KEEP UP,
EVERYONE WAS TRYING TO GUESS. 
          OVER THE LAST YEAR ALL, ACTUALLY, WE HAD SIX BIDS SO FAR THIS YEAR. 
          ALL OF THEM HAVE BEEN UNDER THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE. 
          SO WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REALLY WORK ON. AND THE ENGINEERS HAVE BECOME VERY GOOD AT,
AT UNDERSTANDING THE CURRENT CONDITIONS OF THE MARKET. 
          SO WE'RE PRETTY COMFORTABLE AT THIS MOMENT WITH WHAT,
YOU KNOW, THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATES ARE NOW AND AND BEFORE WE BID IT, WE MAKE SURE WE AT LEAST HAVE THAT FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR WHAT WE THINK WILL BE A ABILITY
TO MOVE THE PROJECT FORWARD. 
          ISN'T IT A STATE LAW THAT WE CAN'T PUBLISH A BID UNLESS WE'VE IDENTIFIED THE FUNDING
ASSOCIATED WITH THE ESTIMATE. 
          IT MAY NOT COVER THE ACTUAL BIDS THAT COME IN. 
          BUT IF WE SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO OUT TO BID FOR A NEW STREET REPAIR,
AND WE ESTIMATED AT $2.4 MILLION, WE HAVE TO HAVE $2.4 MILLION EARMARKED BEFORE WE CAN EVEN GO OUT TO BID. 
          NOW, IF ALL THE BIDS COME OUT AT HIGHER THAN 2.4 BECAUSE COST OF ASPHALT WENT UP IN
BETWEEN THE TIME OF THE ESTIMATE AND THE TIME OF THE BIDS, WE CAN EITHER GO BACK AND, AS YOU SAID, CHANGE THE SCOPE AND GO BACK TO THE BIDDERS AND
REBID IT, OR WE CAN DEFER IT, IN WHICH CASE IN A YEAR OR 2 OR 3,
WHEN WE REALLY, REALLY NEED THE CITY OR THE STREET DONE, THEN WE CAN JUST FIND A WAY TO GET THE BUDGET TO DO IT. 
          YEAH, I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S A STATE LAW, BUT IT DEFINITELY IS A BEST PRACTICE,
RIGHT. 
          IT'S DEFINITELY SHOULD BE A BEST PRACTICE. WE DID HAVE A SITUATION WHERE IN ONE,
ONE PROJECT THAT'S ACTUALLY OUT FOR CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW, AND THAT'S THE SC RIGHT OF WAY, WEST OF PCH,
WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE LANDSCAPING HARDSCAPE BEHIND THE OLD U.S BANK. 
          WE ONLY HAD $740,000 IN THE PROJECT. THE ESTIMATE WAS ROUGHLY $1 MILLION. 
          WE WENT TO COUNCIL AND WE MENTIONED THAT IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT. 
          THE PROJECT IS ESTIMATED AT THIS AMOUNT. WE ONLY HAVE X AMOUNT IN THIS PROJECT. 
          IF THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD,
THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE TO IDENTIFY OTHER FUNDS TO, TO FILL THAT THAT SHORTFALL. SO THAT WAS VERY CLEAR TO THE COUNCIL,
WHICH THEY ENDED UP ACTUALLY APPROPRIATING MORE QUIMBY MONIES. 
          RIGHT. WHICH IS THE MONEY THAT THE CITY RECEIVES FROM FROM DEVELOPMENT FOR OPEN SPACE. 
          AND THEY APPROPRIATED THE THE SHORTFALL TOWARDS THAT PROJECT TO FULLY FUND IT. 
          [02:00:03]
SO THAT WAS ALL OUT IN THE OPEN THOUGH, RIGHT. 
          WE LET THEM KNOW WE DIDN'T HAVE THE THE FUNDING AT THIS MOMENT TO,
TO MOVE IT FORWARD AS IS. 
          BUT WHEN THEY APPROVED IT THEY HAD THE FULL MILLION DOLLARS MILLION. WHEN THEY APPROVED
IT, YES, THEY THEY MADE THE TRANSFER TO FULLY, FULLY FUNDED. 
          IT'S KIND OF AWESOME WORK THE OTHER WAY TOO. IF THEY KNOW HOW MUCH YOU HAVE BUDGETED,
WHAT INCENTIVE DO THEY HAVE TO OFFER YOU A MUCH LOWER PRICE THAN THAT COMPETITION? CORRECT. BUT THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COMPETITION IS GOING TO DO. 
          NO THEY DON'T. YEAH. IT'S BID. IT'S CLOSED BID. 
          YEAH, YEAH. NO ONE CAN SEE IT UNTIL THE CITY CLERK OPENS IT AT A CERTAIN TIME. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT SO. SOMETIMES BIDDERS GET IT,
GET A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. 
          AND IT SAYS THAT THE CITY HAS AND HAS A BUDGET OF $1 MILLION FOR THE PROJECT. 
          AND YOU LOOK THROUGH THE RFP AND YOU REALIZE YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY DO IT FOR $1 MILLION,
AND YOU JUST KNOW, BID IT. AND THERE ARE OTHER CASES WHERE YOU LOOK AT IT AND GO,
I CAN PROBABLY DO THIS FOR 847.50. 
          SO YOU DID IT AT 847.50. AND HOPEFULLY NOBODY WILL BE LOWER THAN YOU. 
          IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT THE CONTRACT SITUATION IS. 
          IF IT'S DESPERATE. IF YOU COULD COME IN AT A VERY LOW PRICE. 
          WELL, IT ALSO DEPENDS ON THE SCOPE THAT THE CITY WRITES. 
          IF THE CITY WRITES A SCOPE THAT'S VERY, VERY LOOSE AND ALLOWS FOR A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY,
THE BIDDER MAY ASSUME, WELL, IT MEANS X, Y, Z, AND THE CITY IS THINKING IT MEANS SOMETHING ELSE. 
          AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, THE TWO, WHEN YOU FINALLY GET TO THE BITTER CONFERENCE AND THE AWARD
CONFERENCE, THAT'S WHEN YOU FIND OUT THAT THERE'S A DISCONNECT. 
          AND THEN THE CITY HAS TO EITHER GO BACK AND,
AND RE SCOPE IT, OR YOU'VE GOT TO WRITE OTHER MATERIAL, DEPENDING ON WHAT THE BIDS ARE AND WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT. 
          SO WHAT DO FOR THE SAKE OF TIME WHAT ELSE DO YOU NEED OR WANT JESTE TO PRODUCE. 
          WHAT ELSE DO YOU WANT TO SEE? WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO TO JUST GO THROUGH AND FIGURE
OUT, OKAY, THERE ARE ANALYTICAL TOOLS THAT WILL GIVE US THE RESULTS THAT WE WANT. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE ANY SOFTWARE ALREADY. 
          YEAH. WELL, THAT'S THAT'S NOT HIS AREA. I'M NOT I DON'T WANT TO PUT HIM ON A ON THE SPOT
FOR THAT. 
          BUT I THINK STEPHANIE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER. SOMETHING THAT CAN GIVE YOU THE ANALYSIS IN
A MUCH FASTER, EASIER WAY SO WE DON'T HAVE TO SPEND HOURS AND DAYS AND WEEKS TO FIGURE OUT,
YOU KNOW, EXACTLY WHAT. 
          IT'S JUST SIX PAGES. THERE'S MORE TO THIS QUESTION THAN JUST NUMBERS IN A SPREADSHEET,
THOUGH. 
          YEAH. YEAH. SO. SO. OKAY, WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO FOR THE SAKE OF TIME? WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO? DO WE WANT TO BRING THIS WITHOUT. 
          I WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF HIS TIME. DO WE NEED JESSE HERE? IF WE WANT TO DISCUSS THIS OR WE WANT TO OBSERVE,
DISCUSS. 
          AND THEN IF LATER WE DO NEED TO ASK QUESTIONS TO JESSE,
THEN WE ASK HIM TO. 
          YEAH. OKAY. AS TIME GOES BY, I DON'T KNOW IF I'M THE ONLY PERSON WHO WILL BE DOING THE
ANALYSIS, BUT I'M SURE OTHER FELLOW COMMISSIONERS. SO SHOULD WE BRING IT A CONTINUATION FOR NEXT
TIME OR ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO WITH THIS RIGHT NOW? I WON'T BE HERE AFTER NEXT TIME,
SO I. 
          WELL NEXT TIME YOU'RE HERE, IT'LL BE YOUR LAST TIME HERE,
SO NEXT MEETING YOU. 
          I'M FINE WITH THE MATERIAL THAT WE HAVE, OKAY? THERE'S A LIMIT TO HOW MUCH. THERE'S A LIMIT TO HOW MUCH DATA WE CAN GET. 
          YES. AND THERE'S A LIMIT TO THE DECISIONS THAT OR THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE CAN COME UP
WITH BASED ON THIS DATA. 
          UNLESS YOU WANT TO LOOK AT EVERY RFP, IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT EVERY DESIGN AND THE RFP AND
THE AWARD, I MEAN, THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT STORY. WE CAN PICK THE TOP FIVE OR TOP TEN AND THEN THEN
GO FROM THERE TO SEE WHAT THE PICTURE. 
          IF WE BRING THIS BACK FOR THE NEXT, FOR NEXT MONTH. 
          WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO WITH IT? I'D HAVE TO HAVE SOME. 
          OKAY. TAKE SOME TIME. OKAY. OKAY. SO LET'S, SO LET'S MAKE THEM. 
          DO WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO BRING THIS ONE SECOND? JUST TO DOUBLE CHECK. WE DON'T HAVE ANY ECOMMENTS OR ANYONE ON ZOOM AND NO PUBLIC
COMMENTS. 
          BUT MAYBE AN IDEA TO ALSO RECEIVE AND FILE THIS FOR TODAY. 
          SO WE HAVE IT AS PART OF OUR RECORD, BUT IF YOU WANT TO BRING IT BACK FOR NEXT TIME AS THE
SAME ITEM, 
          [02:05:01]
ESSENTIALLY. YES, PLEASE. IS THERE ANY EDITS TO THIS FILE WE'RE MAKING? OR ARE WE JUST BRINGING IT BACK FOR NEXT MEETING? THE ONLY ASK I HAVE IS IF WE CAN MAYBE HIGHLIGHT THE ONES THAT INITIALLY WERE COMING FROM
THE GENERAL FUND, OR WHATEVER IS EASIER FOR YOU. I'LL ADD A COLUMN THAT SHOWS THE FUNDING SOURCE. 
          OKAY. IT'S JUST BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY SO BIG. WHATEVER'S EASIER FOR YOU EITHER COLUMN OR IF
YOU WANT TO. 
          YEAH, YEAH. LET ME THINK ABOUT IT. YEAH. OKAY. 
          JUST FOR US. FOR US TO HAVE SOME. OKAY. SO MAYBE YOUR MOTION IS BRING BACK THIS WITH
CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS THAT YOU RECOMMEND TO JESSE FOR NEXT TIME. YES. OKAY. WHAT SHE SAID. AND BEFORE WE DO A MOTION,
WE DO HAVE A PUBLIC SPEAKER. 
          OKAY. YEAH. I WAS VERY IMPRESSED WITH WHAT YOU SAID,
AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER ABOUT THE PROCUREMENT OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WAS NOT THE CONSTRUCTION,
THE CONSTRUCT, THE PROCESS THAT HE DESCRIBED FOR CONSTRUCTION SOUNDS INDUSTRY NORMAL AND REALLY GREAT. MULTIPLE BIDS. 
          CAREFUL ANALYSIS OF THE BIDS CHANGE ORDERS FOR ANY KIND OF THING THAT ARISES DURING THE
CONTRACT. 
          I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THESE ARE THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARE USUALLY THINGS THAT
ARE SOLD SOURCED. 
          THEY ARE MUCH LESS FORMAL. AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. 
          I JUST WANTED TO CLEAR THAT. THANK YOU. MOTION. 
          MOVE TO RECEIVE AND FILE. SECOND. RECEIVE AND FILE WITH CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS FOR JESSE. 
          ADDING THE. YEAH ADDING THE HE'S FINE WITH IT THE WAY IT IS. 
          ADDING THE, WITH ADDING THE SOURCE OF FUNDS. OH,
OKAY. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. AS MODIFIED. SO SAMPLES, AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSE? NON. MOTION CARRIED. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JESSE, WOULD YOU STAY JUST A FEW MINUTES? JUST IN CASE. SO NEXT ITEM WE MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU TO CLARIFY SOMETHING. 
          IT MIGHT TAKE A FEW MINUTES. BUILDING ITEM. I.2. 
          BUILDING MAINTENANCE REPLACEMENT PLANNING. THIS,
INITIALLY, I THINK THIS CAME FROM MR. JIM. I FORGOT YOUR LAST NAME. MUELLER. MUELLER. 
          AND WHAT DO WE. SO YOU HAD A QUESTION THAT. WHY ARE,
WHY ARE WE WAITING SO LONG TO FIX OUR BUILDINGS INSTEAD OF MAINTAINING THEM NOW? I THINK I. YOU WANT ME TO. YES, PLEASE. YES,
YOU'RE PART OF THIS. 
          SO THIS IS AN ITEM THAT I PUT THIS ITEM ON AGENDA FOR YOU,
SO THAT WE CAN, SO WE'RE ABLE TO DISCUSS IT WITH YOU. 
          SO YOU'RE YOU'RE KIND OF THE GUEST OF THIS OTHER SIDE. 
          OH, SORRY. JUST BEFORE WE BEGIN, I'LL LET HIM SPEAK FOR THE THREE MINUTES,
BUT I GOT TO KIND OF CHOP IT UP SO WE HAVE THE SPEAKER TIME. 
          SO HE'S KIND OF THE SPEAKER FOR THIS. HE'S GOING TO SET HIS TIME UP,
AND THEN HE WILL HAVE HIS THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK THROUGH THE DISCUSSION ITEM. 
          HE CAN SPEAK AS LONG AS HE WANTS. HE'S NOT JUST A PUBLIC MEMBER. 
          HE'S A GUEST SPEAKER FOR THIS ITEM. I DON'T THINK THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THAT. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WELL. THE CHAIRMAN,
BY THE WAY, CAN CHANGE ANYTHING. 
          I THINK MY ORIGINAL CONCERN WAS WHEN, YES, WHEN MEASURE FP CAME OUT,
IT WAS SO HUGE AND SO MANY VITAL PARTS OF THE CITY WERE PART OF IT. AND IT CAME OUT THAT THE MAINTENANCE,
THE REGULAR MAINTENANCE OF THESE FACILITIES HAD BEEN NEGLECTED FOR SO MANY YEARS. AND I THOUGHT IT WAS YOU KNOW EVIDENCE THAT EITHER THE CITY DID NOT HAVE A PROGRAM FOR REGULARLY MAINTAINING VITAL FACILITIES OR
THEY, THE COUNCIL OR WHOEVER HAD DECIDED NOT TO DO THE REGULAR MAINTENANCE THAT OTHER PEOPLE HAD
RECOMMENDED. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, I CAN'T BELIEVE THE CHIEF OF POLICE WOULD ALLOW HIS PEOPLE TO BE IN
SUBSTANDARD CONDITIONS FOR YEARS. 
          AND THE SAME WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. AND ANY ORGANIZATION THAT HAS CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
KNOWS THAT YOU HAVE TO REGULARLY MAINTAIN AND UPGRADE YOUR FACILITIES. SO IT WAS I WAS CONCERNED THAT THE CITY MIGHT NOT HAVE SUCH A PROGRAM TO
REGULARLY MAINTAIN AND UPGRADE, AND I THOUGHT, I BROUGHT IT TO YOU BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS A FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION TO
BEGIN WITH. 
          DON'T WE HAVE THE MONEY? IS IT, WAS THAT THE PROBLEM? 
          [02:10:03]
OR YOU KNOW WHAT WAS THE PROBLEM? AND TO MAKE SURE A PROGRAM OF REGULAR MAINTENANCE IS
INSTITUTED. 
          THAT WAS MY CONCERN. SO THIS IS WHY JESSE. THANK YOU. 
          I WAS, WOULD YOU KNOW WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE? OR IF WE HAVE A PROGRAM, IS IT IN YOUR DEPARTMENT OR GENERAL? SO IT'S IT'S NOT. IT'S IN MY DEPARTMENT. IT'S IN PUBLIC WORKS,
BUT IT'S ON THE OPERATIONS SIDE. 
          RIGHT. WE HAVE A BUILDING MAINTENANCE DIVISION AS PART OF PUBLIC WORKS. 
          THEY ARE FUNDED THROUGH THE ISF. AND STEPHANIE CAN GIVE YOU MORE DETAILS ON THE FUNDING
SIDE OF IT. 
          RIGHT. WE ALSO HAVE AN ISF CALLED MAJOR FACILITIES REPAIR WHICH RECEIVES,
I'M NOT SURE, 100 AND $140,000 A YEAR. RIGHT. THEN THAT'S SUPPOSED TO GO TO SOME SUM TOWARDS SOME OF THE CIPS TO
REPLACE SOME SYSTEMS IN THE BUILDINGS. BUT IN TERMS OF A REGULAR MAINTENANCE,
WE DO HAVE A TEAM DEDICATED FOR THE REGULAR MAINTENANCE THAT IS PAID THROUGH ISF. SO WE DO HAVE A PROGRAM. 
          THAT'S WHAT IT TELLS ME. WE DO HAVE PROGRAM CORRECT,
BUT THESE BUILDINGS ARE OLD, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE TIRED AND THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH TAPE AND DUCT TAPE AND YOU KNOW GLUE THAT'S GOING
TO KEEP THEM UP. 
          A LOT OF THESE NEED SOME SERIOUS REPAIRS AND SERIOUS OVERHAULS. 
          SO OUR CREWS DO THE BEST THEY CAN TO KEEP THE KEEP IT GOING WITH WHAT RESOURCES WE HAVE. 
          SO THERE IS A PROGRAM IN PLACE, BUT YEAH, THERE IS A LOT OF,
A LOT OF OTHER NEEDS THAT WE JUST CAN'T AFFORD AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. I'M WONDERING IF MR. HUBERT,
YOU WANT TO CONTACT THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR OR MANAGER DIRECTLY. AND I MEAN, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE A RESIDENT OF THIS CITY,
SO YOU CAN'T SIT DOWN WITH THEM AND UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON. 
          OR WOULD YOU, OR ARE YOU INTERESTED TO HAVE THAT MANAGER? I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO SHARE THE NAME TO COME AND SPEAK TO US. 
          I GUESS MY ONLY QUESTION WOULD BE, WHO MAKES THE DECISION ABOUT PRIORITIZING THE PROJECTS
THAT HAVE TO THE MAINTENANCE PROJECTS THAT HAVE TO BE COMPLETED? COUNCIL. SO HOW MUCH OF IT IS DISCRETIONARY IN THE DEPARTMENT WHERE YOU GET TO TURN TO ONE OF YOUR TEAMS AND SAY, GO OUT AND REPAIR THE PLUMBING IN A POLICE STATION,
AND HOW MUCH OF THIS HAS TO GO TO THE COUNCIL OR THE CITY MANAGER FOR A RECOMMENDATION? I WOULD SAY THAT WE HAVE, I THINK DIFFERENT METHODS HERE. 
          WE HAVE COUNCIL DRIVEN REQUESTS, RIGHT. YOU MENTIONED THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT THE
CONDITIONS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OVER THE LAST DECADE OR MORE, RIGHT. THE COUNCIL MADE AN EFFORT IN PUTTING MONEY TOWARDS IMPROVEMENTS TO
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND THEY DID THAT THROUGH THE CAPITAL PROJECT. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GOING TO GET A WHOLE NEW STATION. 
          BUT OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS, WE SPENT QUITE A BIT AT LEAST SPRUCING IT UP TO A PLACE THAT
IT WAS IN A MUCH BETTER CONDITION. 
          OTHER DETERMINATIONS ARE MADE ON THE STAFF LEVEL,
YOU KNOW, THE MANAGER BASED OFF OF NEEDS, RIGHT? OBVIOUSLY, IF YOU HAVE A SYSTEM THAT'S FAILING AND COMPLETELY FAILS,
THEN THAT TAKES PRIORITY. 
          SO THERE IS ASSESSMENTS. WE'VE DONE ASSESSMENTS IN THE PAST,
RIGHT? WE DID A WHOLE HVAC ASSESSMENT THAT WE HIRED A CONSULTANT TO ASSESS THE FACILITIES OWNED BY THE CITY AND BASICALLY RANK THEM BY NEED. 
          AND THEN WE TRY TO JUDICIOUSLY KIND, YOU KNOW,
GO AFTER THOSE. 
          SO WE TRY TO HAVE A SYSTEM IN PLACE BASED OFF OF ASSESSMENTS. 
          SOME OF IT IS BASED OFF OF EMERGENCIES AND FAILURES IN CERTAIN THINGS. 
          AND THEN SOME OF IT IS DRIVEN BY COUNCIL DECISIONS. 
          SO THE BIG, BIG DOLLAR ITEMS, THAT OF COURSE THAT WILL BE DRIVEN BY COUNCIL,
BECAUSE THEY'LL NEED APPROVAL FROM COUNCIL TOO. 
          CORRECT. SO WE AS A CITY HAVE SOME FUNDS THAT WE SET ASIDE,
LIKE THE VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND, COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT FUND, SOME OF THE OTHER COMPUTER FUNDS,
THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          WE'VE GOT THOSE SET ASIDES. IS THERE SOME PLAN OR PROGRAM WITHIN PUBLIC WORKS THAT
ASSESSES GROUPS ARE CONSIDERED VIABLE FOR X NUMBER OF YEARS, AND IT COSTS X AMOUNT TO REPLACE THEM? DO WE HAVE SOME REPLACEMENT FUND FOR THINGS LIKE THAT AS,
IT'S KIND OF MAINTENANCE, BUT IT'S KIND OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT? YEAH, I WOULD SAY THE MAJOR FACILITIES REPAIR FUND SORT OF SERVES THAT PURPOSE. 
          IT JUST DOESN'T FUND ENOUGH, RIGHT. WE ALSO HAVE A MAJOR FACILITIES RECONSTRUCTION FUND
THAT WAS SORT OF A ONE TIME 
          [02:15:07]
APPROPRIATION THAT THE COUNCILS MADE SEVERAL YEARS AGO OF HALF MILLION DOLLARS,
BUT THAT, THOSE WENT TO CERTAIN CIPS AS WELL. BUT THOSE WERE THOSE AREN'T CONTINUOUS FUNDING. 
          THOSE WERE APPROPRIATIONS MADE BY THE COUNCIL. 
          THE MAJOR FACILITIES REPAIR IS AN ISF THAT HAS CONTINUOUS REVENUE FLOWING INTO IT. 
          THAT HELPS AND IT'S HELPFUL, BUT IT DOESN'T COVER THE BREADTH OF THE NEEDS. 
          SO THERE'S NOT A PROGRAM RIGHT NOW THAT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS,
THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION THAT SAYS WE'RE NOT SURE WHAT'S GOING TO BREAK NEXT YEAR, BUT WE THINK THIS IS THE RESERVE FUND THAT SHOULD BE IN PLACE. 
          TO THAT EXTENT NO. NOT LIKE THE. NO, WE DON'T HAVE A ROOF REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE,
RIGHT. 
          WE DON'T HAVE A FUND WHERE WE ARE SETTING ASIDE MONEY FOR ROOF REPLACEMENTS THROUGHOUT THE
CITY OR FOR PLUMBING THROUGHOUT THE CITY. 
          THAT THAT EXACTLY THE WAY THAT FUNCTIONS. NO,
WE DON'T HAVE ONE THAT MIRRORS THE VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND. 
          IS THERE ANY ASSESSMENT REPORT RECOMMENDATION THAT TALKS ABOUT. 
          THESE ARE OUR RISKS THAT WE ENVISION OVER THE NEXT X NUMBER OF YEARS IF THINGS AREN'T
MAINTAINED? I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A FORMAL ASSESSMENT. YOU KNOW,
OUR MANAGER DOES A GOOD JOB OF OF UNDERSTANDING THE NEEDS OUT THERE. 
          BUT WE DON'T HAVE A, SAY, A CONSULTANT THAT'S PUT TOGETHER A FORMAL ASSESSMENT OF EVERY
SINGLE SYSTEM. 
          SO EXPENSIVE, I REMEMBER EL SEGUNDO DID IT, AND IT WAS $150,000,
BACK, THIS IS BACK BEFORE COVID. 
          150,000 TO DO WHAT? TO DO THE ASSESSMENT. FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF ALL THE FACILITIES. 
          IF YOU'RE A CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE THAT ON FILE. 
          AND YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE A RESERVE FUND TO DO THINGS LIKE FIX THE SEWER,
FIX THE PLUMBING, FIX THE ELECTRICAL, FIX THE ROOF, PAINT THE OUTSIDE. 
          YEAH. SO, I THINK WHAT HAPPENED IN REDONDO, THEY SAVED MONEY. 
          THEY THEY'RE SAYING, WELL, WE KNOW IT'S IT'S FALLING APART. 
          WHY DO WE NEED TO PAY $150,000 FOR SOMEONE TO TELL US? I GET THAT PART. I THINK THAT'S WHAT I DID. I'M JUST SAYING THAT WITHIN THE CITY,
WE KNOW THAT BUILDINGS HAVEN'T BEEN PAINTED IN TEN OR 15 OR 20 YEARS. 
          THEY'RE PROBABLY DUE FOR EITHER BUILDING REPLACEMENT OR PAINT THE BUILDING AND SOMEPLACE
THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THERE'S EXPOSURE, AND THEY CAN ONLY DEFER IT FOR SO LONG. 
          AND RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO VISIBILITY INTO THAT KIND OF PROBLEM. 
          SO THEY TAKE THE MONEY INSTEAD AND THEY'LL SPEND IT ON WHATEVER SEEMS APPROPRIATE BECAUSE
THEY DON'T HAVE ANY ALTERNATIVE THAT THEY NEED TO WORRY ABOUT. 
          SO THEY DON'T HAVE A FACILITY MAINTENANCE FUND. 
          I THINK. THERE'S, THERE IS THAT WE DO HAVE THE BUILDING OCCUPANCY FUND. 
          SO AGAIN, WE CONTRIBUTE TO THAT ANNUALLY. AGAIN,
IT'S NOT A LARGE AMOUNT. 
          IF WE DECIDED TO WE COULD POTENTIALLY INCREASE THAT AMOUNT. 
          AND WE HAVE THE MAJOR FACILITIES REPAIR FUND THAT WE PUT. 
          COUNCIL HAS ON OCCASION PUT FUNDS INTO IN A LUMP SUM. 
          OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD HOW MUCH THEY ARE, APPROXIMATELY. 
          HOW MUCH IS IN EACH FUND. IT'S A HUNDRED OR. IT'S A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS. 
          IT'S. A FEW HUNDRED. A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS,
SO IT'S NOT THAT MUCH. 
          IN TERMS OF THE ASSESSMENT, AND I BELIEVE, JESSE,
YOU MIGHT OR CITY TREASURER MIGHT BE ABLE TO CORRECT ME ON THIS, BUT I BELIEVE IN OUR STRATEGIC PLAN. THIS YEAR,
THE COUNCIL HAS ASKED FOR AN INVENTORY OF ALL CITY PROPERTIES. 
          I BELIEVE THIS IS IN OUR STRATEGIC PLAN. SO THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. 
          THE CITY'S INSURANCE PROVIDER ALSO COMES OUT AND DOES AN ASSESSMENT,
I BELIEVE, ANNUALLY OF ALL THE CITY'S ASSETS FOR RISK PURPOSES. 
          AND WE USE THAT AS PART OF OUR INTERNAL SERVICE FUND COST ALLOCATION PROCESS. 
          AND THIS IS A CONVERSATION WITH OUR NEW PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR,
ANDY WINJE, THAT WE'VE HAD INTERNALLY OF TRYING TO HAVE SOME SORT OF ASSET, ASSESSMENT DONE OF ALL OUR ASSETS IN PUBLIC WORKS. 
          SO IT IS A THOUGHT THAT WE, THAT WE, THAT WE HAVE THAT'S OUT THERE. 
          IT'S JUST HAVING THE RESOURCES TO MOVE FORWARD ON IT AND THE TIME AND THE RESOURCES TO
COMPLETE IT. 
          IT IS AN IMPORTANT IT'S A VERY VALID AND VERY IMPORTANT THING,
I THINK, TO DO TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR EXPOSURE IS ON, ON YOUR BUILDINGS AND YOUR FACILITIES AND YOUR ASSETS. 
          WELL, I JUST THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT THE CITY HAS GOTTEN ITSELF INTO OVER THE LAST,
I DON'T KNOW, 50 OR 70 YEARS, AND WE'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO FIX IT TONIGHT. 
          BUT I THINK MAKING THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS AWARE AND COMING UP WITH SOME
TRANSPARENCY THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, GUYS, I KNOW YOU'D LIKE A NEW PARK,
BUT WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO DO IS REPLACE THE ROOF ON THE FIRE STATION BEFORE IT CAVES IN ON THE FIRE TRUCKS. SO THAT THERE ARE SOME VALUE SYSTEMS IN THERE RATHER THAN WAITING
UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE. 
          [02:20:05]
WE HAVE THAT IN OTHER AREAS. I MEAN, THE FIRE CHIEF WAS JUST IN HERE THIS PAST YEAR WITH A
QUOTE, ONE TIME CHARGE TO REPLACE HIS PERSONAL PROTECTIVE GEAR FOR THE DEPARTMENT. 
          THAT HAPPENED A FEW YEARS AGO. AND I ASKED THE QUESTION THEN,
AND I ASKED THE QUESTION AGAIN THIS TIME. 
          AND THAT IS, WHY IS THIS A ONE TIME CHARGE TO REPLACE ALL THE PERSONAL PROTECTIVE GEAR
WHEN OSHA REQUIRES THAT IT'S REPLACED EVERY FOUR YEARS? SO THAT ONE IS A LITTLE BIT OF A PARTICULARITY OF HOW THE CITY DOES BUDGETING. 
          RIGHT. IT'S BECAUSE IN SOME CASES WE CALL THINGS ONE TIME BECAUSE WE WANT TO BRING IT TO
COUNCIL'S ATTENTION. 
          RIGHT. SO THAT THEY'RE AWARE, HEY, THIS IS HOW MUCH IT COSTS. 
          STAFF IS AWARE THAT THIS IS NOT A ONE TIME COST. 
          I THINK COUNCIL IS ALSO AWARE THAT THIS IS NOT A ONE TIME COUNCIL. 
          THAT ONE BY NOW HOPEFULLY THEY REALIZE IT'S NOT A ONE-TIME COST,
BUT WHEN IT'S A ONE-TIME COST TWICE, IT'S NO LONGER A ONE-TIME COST. AND IT'S THE SAME WAY WITH MAINTENANCE ON OUR FACILITIES. 
          WHEN WE PAINT THEM ONCE, IT'S NOT LIKE WE NEVER HAVE TO PAINT THEM AGAIN OR REPLACE THE
PLUMBING OR REPLACE THE HVAC. 
          I MEAN, SOMEHOW OR ANOTHER, OUR CITY NEEDS TO GET A LITTLE BIT FORWARD THINKING,
AND IT'S PLANNING, ITS FISCAL PLANNING SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THESE SURPRISES,
BECAUSE INVARIABLY, ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, WHEN IT COMES TIME TO DO BUDGETS, WE HEAR THESE,
OH, WE'VE GOT THESE DECISION PACKAGES. 
          AND THIS IS A REAL SURPRISE. WE DIDN'T EXPECT THIS. 
          WELL, YEAH, YOU SORT OF DID EXPECT IT. YOU JUST NEVER IDENTIFIED IT BEFORE. 
          OKAY. JESSE HAS BEEN MORE THAN KIND TO STAY AND ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT ARE NOT EVEN UNDER
HIS UMBRELLA. 
          SO CAN WE ASK. I'M PRETTY DOWN. CAN WE LET HIM SAY GOODBYE? I'M FINE. YOU'RE JUST OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          AND THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THAT SPREADSHEET TOGETHER. 
          APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. GOOD NIGHT. ALL RIGHT. 
          WHAT DO YOU GUYS WANT TO DO? DO YOU WANT TO DO ANYTHING NOW,
OR DO YOU WANT TO THINK ABOUT IT AND COME UP WITH A SUGGESTION NEXT TIME? IF WE HAVE AN ADVICE FOR COUNCIL TO CREATE A FUND OR PUT MORE MONEY INTO A FUND,
A CERTAIN AMOUNT EVERY YEAR. 
          THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO. THINK ABOUT. 
          DISCUSS, WHAT IS THIS? SECONDLY THE RESERVES FOR PENSION FUNDS,
RESERVE FOR UNPLANNED EMERGENCIES AND. SO FOR. I SHARED WITH YOU THAT YEAH. 
          SO LET'S FINISH THIS ITEM AND THEN WE'LL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S NEXT,
BUT I, SHOULD WE BRING THIS BACK NEXT TIME SO WE CAN THINK WHAT WE WANT TO DO FOR THESE FACILITIES. 
          I THINK IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE UP TO US, AND WITH STEPHANIE'S HELP,
WE CAN CERTAINLY DECIDE WHAT NEEDS TO BE THE. 
          BECAUSE IT'S GETTING LATE, THAT'S WHY I'M. AND WE HAVE A LOT MORE ON THIS ON THE,
ON THE AGENDA. 
          THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING IS IT OKAY IF WE JUST BRING IT BACK NEXT TIME AND WE CAN DISCUSS AND
DECIDE SOMETHING. 
          IN A. 
          ALL RIGHTY. CAN WE MAKE A MOTION TO BRING THIS BACK? YEAH. THANK YOU. FIRST. SECOND. OH. SO. MOVED. 
          ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OPPOSED? NONE. SO WE'LL BRING THIS BACK, AND AND WE'LL THINK ABOUT IT. 
          OKAY. OKAY. OF COURSE. AND WHERE AM I, HOMELESS PLAN. 
          I.3, YES. HOMELESS. SO STEPHANIE PUT TOGETHER THE NUMBERS,
AND TO ME, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A COMPLETE NUMBER OF WHAT WE NEEDED. 
          CAN YOU PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN, PLEASE? THE SPREADSHEET. 
          YEP. AND IF YOU CAN KIND OF GO OVER AND EXPLAIN THE NUMBERS. 
          SURE. SO AS WE HAD DISCUSSED SEVERAL TIMES WITH THIS COMMISSION WE'RE GOING TO BRING BACK
FOR THIS MEETING. 
          KIND OF A HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW. SPLIT BY TYPE OF EXPENSE,
BY DEPARTMENT AND BY FUNDING SOURCE. 
          ALSO WITH SOME INDICATION OF THE VENDORS INCLUDED,
WHEN WE'RE PAYING OUT VENDORS. 
          JUST TO GIVE A HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW OF THE CITY'S SPENDING FOR OUR LAST FISCAL YEAR AS AN
EXAMPLE. 
          I ALSO INCLUDED A SHORT DESCRIPTION WITH A KIND OF AN OVERVIEW OF THE CITY'S MAJOR
PROGRAMS. 
          [02:25:01]
I THINK THIS IS HELPFUL TO KIND OF SEE WHAT THE CITY'S APPROACH HAS BEEN,
STARTING WITH THIS ENHANCED RESPONSE TO HOMELESSNESS PROGRAM THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED AS A PILOT IN 1920 AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY MADE PERMANENT. 
          SO THE ENHANCED RESPONSE TO HOMELESSNESS PROGRAM,
THIS IS REALLY THE MAJORITY OF THE DEDICATED GENERAL FUNDED MONEY THAT IS GOING TOWARDS OUR PROACTIVE HOMELESSNESS PROGRAMS. SO THIS KIND OF LIFTS OUT IN PARTICULAR THE POSITIONS
THAT ARE FULL TIME FOCUSED ON OUR HOMELESSNESS OUTREACH PROGRAMS. AND AGAIN, THIS IS MAJORITY GENERAL FUND. AND ABOUT $250,000 OF THIS IS OFFSET FROM OUR
SUCCESSOR AGENCY FUND. 
          I ALSO INCLUDED SOME OTHER SERVICES THAT THE CITY PROVIDES. 
          WE DO STREET OUTREACH. THE CITY MANAGES THE PALLET SHELTER. 
          WE HAVE BRIDGE HOUSING IS A SHORT TERM WE LEASE,
SHORT TERM RENTALS FOR PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS. 
          WE ALSO DO THESE HOMELESS OUTREACH SERVICE TEAMS RUN BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. 
          AND WE HAVE SOME MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMS THE CITY OFFERS. 
          AGAIN, THIS IS YEAH, THIS THIS REALLY ENCOMPASSES THE CITY'S MAJOR EFFORTS ON
HOMELESSNESS. 
          SO HERE AGAIN, WE'VE OUTLINED IT BY STARTING WITH OUR PERSONNEL COSTS. 
          AND THIS WILL MIRROR WHAT YOU SAW ON THE PROGRAM. 
          SO THE MAJORITY OF THIS IS IN OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. 
          I THINK A LOT OF THIS IS RELATED TO OUR FORMER CITY ATTORNEY,
MIKE WEBB. 
          THIS IS A A BIG ENDEAVOR OF HIS. AND THIS IS WHY IT KIND OF ENDED UP IN THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. 
          SO WE HAVE OUR HOMELESS HOUSING NAVIGATOR, HOMELESS HOUSING SUPERVISOR. 
          THIS IS AGAIN SPLIT BETWEEN OUR GENERAL FUND AND OUR HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY FUND. 
          WE HAVE A PROGRAM COORDINATOR PART TIME. WE HAVE SOME OVERTIME BUDGET. 
          AGAIN, THIS ISN'T A CORE BUDGET AMOUNT, BUT IT'S THE AMOUNT THAT WE SPENT LAST YEAR. 
          AND THEN WE ALSO INCLUDED A PERCENTAGE OF SOME OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE STAFF,
TIME THAT IS SPENT IN OVERSIGHT OF THESE PROGRAMS. SO FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY, QUALITY OF LIFE, PROSECUTOR LEGAL SECRETARY,
THESE ARE FULL TIME GENERAL FUND POSITIONS THAT SPEND A PORTION OF THEIR TIME MANAGING AND OVERSEEING THESE PROGRAMS. AND THEN WE HAVE THE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT PART TIME. 
          DOES, A 100% OF THIS PERSON'S TIME, BECAUSE IT'S SPENT AND IS PRIMARILY ON HOMELESS COURT, AND ALSO TO MANAGE THE GRANTS AND FUNDING. IN OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT,
WE HAVE OUR ONE FULL TIME HOMELESS LIAISON OFFICER. 
          THEY SERVE IN THIS POSITION FULL TIME. IT'S A POLICE OFFICER POSITION AND THEY GET A SMALL
PAY INCREASE ASSOCIATED WITH THESE DUTIES. 
          WE ALSO HAVE POLICE TIME AT THE HOMELESS COURT. 
          SO WE, THEY'VE ESTIMATED THAT THEY SPEND ABOUT FOUR HOURS,
THIS OFFICER SPENDS ABOUT FOUR HOURS 12 TIMES A YEAR AT THE HOMELESS COURT. WE HAVE TWO OFFICERS,
BUT ONE OF THOSE OFFICERS IS OUR QUALITY OF LIFE OFFICER. 
          SO AGAIN, THAT POSITION IS ALREADY DEDICATED FULL TIME. 
          SO FOR ADDITIONAL TIME WE'RE JUST SPENDING ABOUT THIS ADDITIONAL $4,000 A YEAR. 
          WE ALSO HAVE. SO THOSE ARE THE GENERAL FUNDED COSTS. 
          WE ALSO HAVE THE HOST PROGRAMS. THIS IS A PORTION OF OUR SERGEANT'S TIME AND OVERTIME. 
          SO THIS IS ON OUR HOMELESS OUTREACH. AND WE GET FUNDING THROUGH THE L.A. 
          COUNTY MEASURE H. THE CITY OF POMONA ACTUALLY MANAGES THIS PROGRAM,
AND THEY ALLOCATE IT OUT TO VARIOUS CITIES. 
          AND THIS IS 100% FUNDED BY THOSE, OR REIMBURSED BY THAT PROGRAM. 
          AND FINALLY, IN PUBLIC WORKS, WE IDENTIFIED A PERCENTAGE OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S TIME
DEDICATED TO OVERSEEING THE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDING IN THE PALLET SHELTER. 
          SO ALL THE CONSTRUCTION, AS I'VE MENTIONED HERE BEFORE,
IS FUNDED THROUGH GRANT FUNDS. 
          BUT WE DO HAVE THE CITY ENGINEER'S TIME KIND OF OVERSEEING THE PROJECT. 
          SO OUR TOTAL PERSONNEL FOR THE COST ABOVE ABOUT $1 MILLION SPENT IN THE LAST FISCAL YEAR. 
          MOVING ON TO CONTRACTUAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. 
          AGAIN, THESE ARE THE VAST MAJORITY OF OR ALL OF THESE ARE IN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. 
          I'VE BROKEN THEM OUT BY THE TYPE OF, BY THE GRANT. 
          SO AGAIN, ALL OF THESE CONTRACTS, SORRY ALL OF THESE CONTRACT SERVICES,
APART FROM THIS VERY SMALL AMOUNT AT THE TOP, THESE ARE 100% GRANT FUNDED, AND WE ARE ABLE TO USE THESE FOR VARIOUS PROGRAMS. SO THESE MAINLY FUND OUR HOMELESS COURT, PALLET SHELTER. 
          [02:30:04]
WE HAVE THESE OTHER TWO PROGRAMS THAT MAINLY FUND OUR SHORT TERM RENTALS. 
          IN ADDITION TO THE LEASES, WE'RE ALSO ABLE TO FUND KIND OF OVERNIGHT MOTEL STAYS FOR
EMERGENCY SITUATIONS. 
          A LOT OF TIMES THESE ARE FOR FAMILIES OUR HOMELESS,
LIAISON OFFICER ENCOUNTERS THEM AND IS ABLE TO PAY FOR NIGHTS IN A MOTEL UNTIL THE CITY CAN ARRANGE OR ORGANIZE A LONGER TERM STAY. AND THEN A FINAL NUMBER ON HERE IS JUST FOR OUR PALLET SHELTER SERVICES. AND AGAIN,
THIS IS A CONTRACT WITH LOS ANGELES COUNTY. 
          THE ITEM ON TOP. WE DO HAVE A CONTRACT ATTORNEY THAT ASSISTS WITH THE HOMELESS COURT. 
          I DOUBLE CHECKED ON THIS NUMBER BECAUSE I COULD NOT BELIEVE IT IS THAT LOW. 
          IT'S BECAUSE THIS PERSON PROVIDES THESE SERVICES PRO BONO. 
          THE AMOUNT IS FOR INSURANCE THAT THE CITY REQUIRES,
AND THE CITY INSISTED ON PAYMENT FOR THIS PERSON. 
          AND THAT DOES COME OUT OF OUR GENERAL FUND. FINALLY,
IN OUR GENERAL FUND, WE DO PROVIDE WE DO PAY UTILITIES FOR THE PALLET SHELTER. 
          SO LAST YEAR IT'S ABOUT $27,000. SO COMBINED PERSONNEL AND OUR NON PERSONNEL,
CLOSE TO 2 MILLION. 
          WE THEN HAVE OUR CAPITAL PROJECT FOR THE PALLET SHELTER EXPANSION. 
          THIS IS 100% GRANT FUNDED. WE SPENT, AS YOU CAN SEE,
A LITTLE OVER $100,000 THIS YEAR. 
          THIS IS FOR DESIGN. AND WE HAVE REMAINING GRANT FUNDS. 
          I THINK IT'S CLOSE TO A MILLION THAT WE WILL SPEND THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THE PROJECT. 
          SO THIS GETS US CLOSE TO $2 MILLION. OF THAT,
ABOUT $600,000 IS IN THE GENERAL FUND. 
          1.2 MILLION IN GRANTS AND HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY. 
          SORRY, THAT SHOULD SAY. 250. IT SHOULD SAY 250. 
          SO I NEED TO. SORRY. I CAN'T BELIEVE I DID THIS. 
          SO THIS 50,000 WOULD OFFSET THE GENERAL FUND. 
          SO BASICALLY, OUR HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY, WE HAVE A MAXIMUM OF $250,000 WE CAN TAKE EACH
YEAR AND REIMBURSE THE GENERAL FUND FOR HOMELESSNESS RELATED COSTS. SO THAT IS AT A HIGH LEVEL,
WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR THIS YEAR. 
          AGAIN, I THINK, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT EXERCISE FOR THE CITY TO LOOK AT. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE, YOU KNOW, WE STARTED THIS A FEW YEARS AGO. 
          WE'VE SLOWLY ADDED PROGRAMS. WE'VE ADDED A HOMELESS LIAISON SUPERVISOR. 
          I WILL SAY IN TALKING TO OUR POLICE CHIEF, HE IS STRONGLY SUPPORTIVE OF ALL THESE
PROGRAMS. HE THINKS THAT THE RESOURCES SPENT ON THESE PROGRAMS SIGNIFICANTLY DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF
TIME AND ENERGY HIS OFFICERS SPEND RESPONDING TO POTENTIAL ISSUES RELATED TO HOMELESSNESS. 
          SO YEAH, I THINK IT'S A GOOD EXERCISE. I THINK IT'S REALLY GOOD FOR THE CITY TO LOOK AT. 
          AND I'M HAPPY TO HEAR YOUR FEEDBACK. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. 
          THIS IS TO ME, THIS IS ADEQUATE INFORMATION THAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR. 
          SO BUT TO ME THIS IS PERFECT. SO THIS IS SO WE'RE SPENDING TO SUMMARIZE,
WE'RE SPENDING $2 MILLION A YEAR APPROXIMATELY. AND YEAH WOULD YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE WE'VE SAVED. 
          HOW MANY. THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE,
THEY HAVE A LOT OF STATISTICS ON THIS. 
          OK. THEY DO COLLECT A LOT OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE HOUSED,
HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN HOUSED. 
          I BELIEVE THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH CURRENTLY HAS FEWER THAN 100 PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS, WHICH IS A STRONG, STRONG, STRONG RARITY FOR,
YOU KNOW, ANY CITY IN CALIFORNIA, ANY CITY IN THE REGION. 
          SO DO YOU KNOW WHAT NUMBER USED TO BE? YOU PROBABLY DON'T. 
          I DO NOT KNOW. HOWEVER, I AM SURE THAT OKAY, BUT WHAT DID IT USED TO BE? I'M JUST TRYING TO CALCULATE HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO
HELP EACH HOMELESS PERSON. 
          THE REPORT I READ WAS. IT WAS. IT HAS SLIGHTLY DECLINED. 
          NOT BY MUCH. OKAY, SO WE'RE SPENDING $2 MILLION HELPING HOW MANY PEOPLE? I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET. IS IT IN THE THIS YEAR'S BUDGET? YOU GOT $2 MILLION IN THE BUDGET? YES. ALL OF THE FUNDING FOR ALL OF THESE PROGRAMS ARE IN
THE CITY'S BUDGET. 
          AGAIN, WHERE IT'S GENERAL, WHERE IT'S FALLS WITHIN THESE WOULD BE IN LINE ITEMS WITHIN
EACH DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET. 
          SO YOU'D JUST BE ABLE TO SEE THEM WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND OR THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL GRANTS
FUND. 
          ON THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL GRANTS IS THAT SOMETHING YOU HAVE TO APPLY FOR,
LIKE EVERY YEAR, OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE FOR A LONGER TERM? SO THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE FUNDING THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DOES APPLY FOR ON AN
ONGOING BASIS. 
          [02:35:05]
AND AGAIN, I THINK THAT SOME OF THE STAFF TIME THAT YOU SEE IS THAT,
YOU KNOW, THEY DO OUTREACH AND LOOK FOR FUNDING FROM. 
          WE DO CONTINUE TO GET FUNDING FROM THESE SOURCES LIKE THE YOU CAN SEE THE SOUTH BAY
COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. 
          WE HAVE TWO FISCAL YEARS OF THAT GRANT HERE. I BELIEVE THE CALIFORNIA THIS IS THE
PERMANENT LOCAL HOUSING ALLOCATION. I THINK THAT WE'VE GOTTEN ON AN ONGOING BASIS. 
          WE DO HAVE THESE KIND OF ONE OFF GRANTS FROM OTHER ASSEMBLY MEMBERS,
AND THESE ARE ONES I THINK THE CITY HAS GONE AFTER MORE PROACTIVELY. BUT AGAIN, I THINK THE, YOU KNOW,
ACTIVITY AND SUCCESS OF THE PROGRAM HELPS US TO GET THESE FUNDS AND THE HOST FUNDING I'D HAVE TO SEE AT WHAT LIKE WHAT AMOUNT OF TIME THE LARGER GRANT IS FOR. 
          I BELIEVE IT'S FOR AT LEAST FIVE YEARS. BUT THIS IS FUNDING THROUGH L.A. 
          COUNTY, SO I WOULD EXPECT THE CITY WOULD STILL CONTINUE TO GET,
YOU KNOW, FUNDING FROM THE COUNTY AND THE BUT THE PLAJ. 
          BUT WE DO NEED TO REAPPLY. THE COST TO THE GENERAL FUND. 
          YOU SAID IT WAS ABOUT $600,000. THE REST. THE REST IS FUNDED BY OTHER THAN THE GENERAL
FUND. 
          SO. YES, IF THAT CONTINUES THEN WE'VE GOT A 600 K COST. 
          IF THOSE IF THE EXTERNAL FUNDING DISAPPEARS,
THEN WE'VE GOT THE QUESTION OF DO WE SUPPORT IT WITH THE GENERAL FUND OR DO WE LET IT FALL. SO JUST WANT TO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR FOR DOING THIS. 
          JUST TWO QUICK QUESTIONS. SO IT'S POSSIBLE TO FIND OUT WHAT THE HOMELESS COUNT IS. 
          IS THAT SO? THAT'S POSSIBLE. YES. I'M NOT SURE THE LAST TIME WE DID THE HOMELESS COUNT
AGAIN. 
          I BELIEVE THE NUMBER CURRENTLY IS UNDER 100. I'M NOT SURE THE DATE OF THAT NUMBER,
BUT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS A LOT OF DATA ON THE PROGRAM. 
          IT'S NOT A, YOU KNOW, WITH THE FUNDING LIKE THIS,
THAT 66 INDIVIDUAL. 
          SO FUNCTIONAL ZERO IS THAT WE THE CITY SAW INFLOW OF 65 HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS AND AN
OUTFLOW OF 66 DURING JANUARY THROUGH JUNE. OKAY. SO ESSENTIALLY THE CITY IS HOUSING PEOPLE AS EFFECTIVELY HOUSING PEOPLE. 
          I SEE. AND JUST ONE LAST THING. IN THE INTEREST OF TIME. 
          SO THESE ARE RESIDENTS OF REDONDO BEACH THAT BECOME HOMELESS AND THEN GET THE HELP OF THE
TRANSIENT THAT COME INTO THE CITY. 
          I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE DATA ON THAT. I BELIEVE THE CITY. 
          IT'S FASCINATING. BUT I'LL STOP. YEAH, YEAH,
BUT, I'LL ASK HER. 
          HOW WE GOT HERE. I'LL ASK OUR CITY ATTORNEY. BECAUSE AGAIN,
I KNOW, YOU KNOW, THEY DID A LOT OF WORK FOR THE FUNCTIONAL ZERO LAST YEAR. 
          I BELIEVE THEY HAVE A LOT OF STATISTICS. I'M HAPPY TO SHARE THOSE WITH THE GROUP. 
          SO AS I RECALL, IN ORDER TO BE A RESIDENT IN THE PALLET SHELTERS,
YOU HAVE TO START OUT BEING A RESIDENT OF REDONDO BEACH. 
          THE CITY. OKAY. BUT THE HOMELESS COURT AND SOME OF THE OTHER SERVICES,
I BELIEVE ARE MUCH MORE GLOBAL. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LIMITATIONS ARE ON THAT. 
          I SEE. I'D LIKE TO KIND OF MAKE A COUPLE OF OBSERVATIONS ON THIS. 
          FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THIS IS GREAT BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO TEASE OUT THE NUMBERS
THAT YOU MANAGED TO TEASE OUT OF THE POLICE BUDGET, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S BUDGET, TO FIND OUT WHAT THE REAL EXPOSURE IS. 
          AND THE QUESTION WASN'T SO MUCH, IS THIS A VALUABLE SERVICE OR NOT? I THINK IT'S A VALUABLE SERVICE, BUT IT'S HOW EXPENSIVE IS IT IF THESE GRANTS GO AWAY? AND WHAT DO WE DO IF THE GRANTS GO AWAY? I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF
THE PERSONNEL IN THIS LIST WOULD NOT LEAVE THE CITY IF WE DIDN'T HAVE A HOMELESS PROJECT, THEY WOULD JUST BE ASSIGNED OTHER DUTIES. 
          SO LIKE THE SERGEANT OR IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT,
HE WOULD BE ON PATROL OR HE'D BE DOING OTHER DUTIES. 
          HE WOULDN'T JUST GO AWAY. THE SAME WAY WITH MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE HOUSING SUPERVISOR AND THE HOUSING NAVIGATOR AND AND SOME OF THOSE
THINGS. 
          IT SOUNDS LIKE THOSE ARE EARMARKED JUST FOR THIS PROJECT. 
          YEAH. SO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THOSE, BUT THE IMPORTANT THING IS MOST OF THOSE PERSONNEL
COSTS WOULD PROBABLY STILL REST WITH THE CITY, WHETHER WE HAD THIS PROJECT OR NOT. WHEN YOU GET BELOW THE LINE AND YOU GET DOWN TO THE
HOMELESS COURT AND THOSE THINGS, I MEAN, THAT'S $855,000. IT'S ALMOST COMPLETELY FUNDED BY GRANTS. 
          SO THAT'S PROBABLY THOSE ARE PROBABLY THE HIGHEST RISK THINGS THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. 
          AND THAT'S OUR BIG EXPOSURE IS $850,000. THAT ISN'T BEING COVERED BY THE GENERAL FUND
RIGHT NOW. 
          AND THE QUESTION IS WHAT DO WE DO WITH THAT? IT'S REALLY PALLET SHELTERS AND SHORT TERM
HOTEL? 
          [02:40:04]
YEAH. SO I MEAN, JUST OBSERVATION FROM THESE NUMBERS. 
          AND I THINK THIS IS AS CLOSE AS WE CAN GET. BUT AT LEAST IT GIVES US AN IDEA OF WHAT THE
EXPOSURE IS. 
          AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE WORK. YEAH. THANK YOU. 
          AND ONE OF THE KEY THINGS HERE CERTAINLY IS,
IS TO UPDATE THIS ON A YEAR, YEAR TO YEAR BASIS SO THAT WE SEE WHAT'S CHANGING. YEAH WE CAN DEFINITELY DO THAT. AND I MEAN YES,
WE'LL DEFINITELY DO THAT. 
          I MEAN AGAIN ANY ANY ADDITIONAL ITEM. YOU KNOW WE SEE IT COME THROUGH BUDGET. 
          THE HOMELESS HOUSING SUPERVISOR THIS CAME THROUGH AS A DECISION PACKAGE. 
          AND YOU KNOW THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED IT INITIALLY OBVIOUSLY THIS WHOLE THING WAS A PILOT
PROGRAM. 
          ANYTIME A GRANT COMES ONLINE, WE'LL SEE THAT AND CAN KIND OF TRY AND ASSESS ANY ADDITIONAL
COSTS. 
          BUT YEAH, THIS IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE CAN CONTINUE TO PUT TOGETHER. 
          AND CONTINUE TO ENSURE TOO THAT WE'RE MAKING THE BEST USE OF OUR GRANT FUNDS. 
          I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS EXCELLENT AT,
BECAUSE THEY ARE GREAT AT FINDING THESE FUNDS, AND THEY'LL LOOK FOR ANY SPENDING THE CITY IS DOING THAT WE CAN APPLY TO OUR GRANT FUNDS. 
          HAVE YOU SUPPLIED THIS TO CITY COUNCIL? NO. YOU ARE THE FIRST ONES TO SEE IT. 
          I THINK I'VE HAD A COUPLE OF CITY COUNCIL MENTION QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS AND WHERE THE DATA
STANDS. 
          I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF INTEREST ON CITY COUNCIL FOR SEEING THIS. 
          SO YOU NEED TO FIND A WAY TO GET IT TO THEM. WE CAN VOTE TO SEND THIS TO CITY COUNCIL. 
          WE AS A COMMITTEE, SINCE WE'VE BEEN REQUESTING IT. 
          YES. AND I THINK WE'RE. I'M SATISFIED WITH IT. 
          FOR SURE YEAH. EVERYBODY'S SATISFIED WITH IT. I THINK WE SHOULD FIGURE OUT WHAT THE
DELIVERABLE IS GOING TO THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          AND WE SHOULD DO THE TRANSMITTAL THAT SAYS WE'VE BEEN EXPLORING THIS. 
          THIS IS WHAT WE FOUND. THESE ARE OUR OBSERVATIONS. 
          JUST FOR INFORMATION, NOT FOR ACTION. SO ONE QUESTION I GUESS IS TRYING TO TRACE OUT IF
THERE'S A FEDERAL COMPONENT TO THESE GRANTS IN ANY WAY BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN CLIMATE. THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO CURRENTLY NO FEDERAL
FUNDS. 
          OUR FEDERAL FUNDS RELATED TO HOUSING ARE SECTION EIGHT. 
          BUT AGAIN, THOSE AREN'T REALLY. IT'S NOT THE SAME. 
          IT'S NOT THE SAME TYPE OF PROGRAM. I'M TRYING TO THINK IF THERE'S YEAH,
I THINK FROM THE COUNTY, YOU KNOW, IT'S A DEDICATED FUNDING SOURCE. SO EVEN THOUGH THE COUNTY IS HAVING THEIR OWN
BUDGET STRUGGLES, I DON'T THINK THAT AFFECTS THE MONEY WE GET FROM THEM. 
          I GUESS IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN IF ANY OF OUR STATE FUNDING IS AT RISK DUE TO ISSUES AT THE
STATE LEVEL, BUT OKAY. SO WHAT IS THE BEST WAY, I GUESS, FOR US TO GET THIS INFORMATION INTO THE HANDS OF THE CITY COUNCIL? I MEAN,
TO YOUR POINT, DO WE WANT TO DRAFT A LETTER? DOES IT COVER NO TO THIS OR I MEAN, AS A GROUP,
WHAT DO WE THINK IS THE BEST WAY OR JUST SUBMIT IT AS IS TO KIND OF JUST FURTHER INFORMATION AND BETTER VISIBILITY INTO WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THE HOMELESS? I THINK IT NEEDS A BIT OF AN EXPLANATION. SO PROBABLY WE SHOULD PROBABLY PUT A COVER
LETTER TOGETHER AND ATTACH THIS TO IT AS THE SUPPORT FOR THE PALLET SHELTER PROGRAM IS GOOD. 
          WE BELIEVE IN IT. WE'VE BEEN WE'VE BEEN WORRIED ABOUT WHAT ARE ALL THE COSTS BECAUSE
THEY'RE SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE BUDGET. 
          AND WHEN YOU SEE IT ALL IN ONE PLACE IT STARTED OUT $250,000. 
          NOW IT'S 2 MILLION. YEAH. IN FIVE YEARS, I WISH I COULD GET MY BANK ACCOUNT TO DO THAT. 
          [LAUGHTER] THE ONLY THING I'M NOT, I CAN'T CONFIRM IS HOW MANY. 
          HOW MUCH IS IT PER PERSON? HOW MANY PEOPLE THAT THIS HELPED? THIS $2 MILLION HELPED THAT I DON'T KNOW. AND I'M SURE THERE IS. 
          I GUESS WE CAN GET THE OFFICE. I THINK SO. YEAH. 
          AGAIN, I EXPECT THAT THEY HAVE THAT DATA. I THINK THAT'S DATA THAT THEY COLLECT. 
          SO WE CAN WE CAN PUT THAT TOGETHER. ANY COMMISSIONER JESTE. 
          DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO. WHAT? I WOULD LOVE TO SEE MORE INFORMATION ON THE PEOPLE
THEMSELVES WHO ARE BEING SUPPORTED. WHERE ARE THEY FROM? AND CAN THEY ARE THEY MENTALLY CAPABLE OF DOING SOME
WORK SO WE CAN PUT THEM TO DO SOMETHING. THAT'S NOT I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY MORE OF A PROGRAM, A PROGRAM QUESTION. 
          [02:45:01]
I'M HERE TO DISCUSS THE NUMBERS. I AGREE, THAT'S A VERY THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. 
          IT'S JUST IT'S ON THE IT'S ON THE PROGRAM SIDE. 
          SO THAT WOULD BE MORE DISCUSSING KIND OF POLICY AND WHAT. 
          YEAH. SO IT STARTS OUT OF THIS DISCUSSION. BUT WE NEED TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION BECAUSE. 
          WELL NOT AS A FINANCE. NO THAT'S NOT THAT'S OUT OF OUR JURISDICTION. 
          YEAH. WELL BUT YOU CAN PERSONALLY CALL THE ATTORNEYS OFFICE AND ASK THEM QUESTIONS AND GET
IN TOUCH WITH THE SUPERVISORS AND SIT DOWN AND ASK THEM TO SIT DOWN AND UNDERSTAND. 
          THE BUDGET FOR ANOTHER PROJECT, LIKE THE CROSSING GUARDS. 
          CAN THAT BUDGET BE CAN THIS MANPOWER BE UTILIZED SO WE CAN CONTROL THE CROSSING OUR BUDGET? WE'RE ALLOCATING YOUR SACRIFICE THE CHILDREN TO SAVE THE
HOMELESS. 
          THAT'S NOT GOING TO FLY. UNTIL. UNLESS. UNLESS WE HAVE ALL [INAUDIBLE]. 
          BUT IT IS TRUE THAT IT HAS NOT. SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE PART OF THE BUDGET OF FINANCE. 
          ALL RIGHT. CAN WE CREATE A SUBCOMMITTEE TO SEND A LETTER? I THINK COMMISSIONER MARIN WANTS TO BE AND WANTS TO BE IN THAT SUBCOMMITTEE. 
          SO BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY WRITES A LETTER,
ANOTHER PERSON READS IT, CORRECTS IT, MAKES CHANGES, AND THEN WE SEND IT TO COUNCIL AND WE'LL SEND IT TO STEPHANIE,
AND THEN SHE'LL SEND IT TO THE COUNCIL. 
          SO WE COULD FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS WE DID WITH THE RESERVES LETTER YOU SENT TO COUNCIL. 
          SO WE WORKED WITH COMMISSIONER SHERBIN. HE SIGNED IT IN THE END,
AND THEN I SENT IT TO COUNCIL. 
          BACK TO YOUR GROUP? YEP. YES. YEAH. SO I'LL DRAFT A LETTER AND SEND IT TO YOU. 
          SURE. OKAY. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU MY OH, BEFORE WE DO A MOTION, WE DID HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT FROM SOMEBODY IN THE AUDIENCE,
AND THERE WERE NO ECOMMENTS. 
          OKAY. DID YOU WANT ME TO WRITE DOWN MY EMAIL? YEAH. [INAUDIBLE] TO DO ON A PERSONAL LEVEL? FIRST OF ALL,
STEPHANIE, THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. 
          REALLY GOOD. VERY IMPORTANT PROGRAM. AND I THINK YOU CORRECTLY IDENTIFIED THE RISK IN THE GRANT PROGRAMS, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT ALL OF THE CITIES IN CALIFORNIA ARE HAVING
TROUBLE WITH FINANCING THEIR HOMELESS PROGRAMS. YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF PUSHBACK FROM THE CITIZENS. 
          THERE'S BUDGET ISSUES AND PRESSURES THAT THEY HAVE. 
          AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE GRANTS PAY FOR THE HEALTH AND SHELTER PART OF THE HOMELESS
PROGRAM, WHICH IS REALLY KEY, BECAUSE WHEN YOU TAKE A PERSON OFF THE STREET,
THEY HAVE TO GO SOMEWHERE. 
          AND WITHOUT THOSE GRANTS TO PAY FOR THE HEALTH AND SHELTER PART,
THE HOMELESS PROGRAM WOULD PROBABLY BE NOTHING MORE THAN SOMEBODY COUNSELING THEM. SO I THINK THAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE EMPHASIZED. 
          MAYBE THEY'RE ALTERNATE SOURCES FOR GRANTS. MAYBE THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO MIGHT
CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROGRAM. WAYS TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S SECURE AND THAT THERE'S A BACKUP. 
          I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. ALSO JUST A NIT. 
          IT WOULD BE GOOD IF WE HAD. OH, I JUST WANT TO MENTION A NIT THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT EMT
PEOPLE ALSO GO OUT ON CALL, SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. 
          I THINK BECAUSE IT WAS SOFT COSTS WERE TOUGH TO ANALYZE WHAT PERCENTAGE OF TIME. 
          I THOUGHT THE SAME THING FOR EVEN POLICE CALLS AS WELL AS FAR. 
          AND THOSE ARE ACTUALLY. SORRY, I WON'T INTERRUPT YOU. 
          GO AHEAD. SO ALSO, YOU KNOW, DOING IT AS A TREND BY THE YEARS,
IF YOU COULD GO BACK AND, AND FROM THE START OF THE PROGRAM AND SO THAT WE COULD SEE THE TREND OF COSTS,
BECAUSE, AS YOU POINTED OUT, IT HAS GROWN BY A HUGE AMOUNT. 
          NOW, I THINK THE CITY WHAT YOU COULD TELL THE COUNCIL IS THIS IS A VITAL PROGRAM OF THE
CITY BECAUSE YOU CANNOT TREAT PEOPLE AND JUST LEAVE THEM ON THE STREET AND NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT AND NOT HELP THEM GET THEIR LIVES BETTER. 
          YOU CAN'T DO THAT. RESPONSIBLE AND CARING COMMUNITY CAN'T DO THAT. 
          SO THAT'S WHY THIS PROGRAM IS SO VITAL IN ALL PARTS OF IT ARE VITAL. 
          SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE VOLUNTEER TO CONTACT MAYBE ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE TO FIND OUT HOW MANY PEOPLE THIS MONEY WAS ABLE TO GET OUT, GET UP, GET OUT OF. 
          I'LL TAKE A LOOK. YEAH, I CAN ASK. OKAY. YEAH. 
          BUT YOU SEE, YOU SEE WHAT? I'M TRYING. OKAY. HELPFUL TO HAVE THE CONTEXT. 
          YEAH. BECAUSE IF I'M. IF I'M READING IT CORRECTLY,
IT ONLY COSTS LESS THAN $10,000 A PERSON. 
          [02:50:03]
IF THEY GOT 130 PEOPLE UP OFF THE STREET. YEAH. 
          WE HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER. ALL RIGHT. NEXT SPEAKER,
PLEASE. 
          MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, CITY STAFF. I'M EUGENE SOLOMON,
REDONDO BEACH, DISTRICT ONE. 
          THERE ARE SOME NON-MONETARY BEYOND THE ALTRUISM OF THE PROGRAM,
AND IT'S WHAT'S ACCOMPLISHING THERE'S SOME POLICY REASONS WHY THIS WAS DONE WHEN WE ACHIEVED FUNCTIONAL HOMELESSNESS THE WAY THAT THE RULES
WERE. 
          ACCORDING TO A SUPREME COURT DECISION AT THE TIME,
YOU HAD TO ACHIEVE ZERO HOMELESSNESS, FUNCTIONAL HOMELESSNESS IN ORDER TO ENFORCE NON CAMPING ORDINANCES. AND SO IN ORDER TO YOU HAD TO PROVIDE SOMEBODY ALTERNATIVE HOUSING AT
THE TIME. 
          SO IT'S A POLICY DECISION BEYOND THE ALTRUISM OF IT. 
          IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO GO AHEAD AND ACHIEVE THAT ZERO HOMELESSNESS WITH REGARD TO THE
HOMELESS COURT AND THE EXPENSE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT IT HELPS THE PROGRAM IN THE WAY THAT A LOT OF FOLKS WHO ARE UNHOUSED COLLECT, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WAY OF PUTTING IT MINOR
VIOLATIONS AGAINST THEM FOR TRESPASSING OR CAMPING OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, AND THE HOMELESS COURT PROCESS IS FOR THEM TO APPEAR THERE AND HAVE THOSE CHARGES
DISMISSED OR ADJUDICATED BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET INTO HOUSING IN MANY CASES WITH THOSE VIOLATIONS ON THEIR RECORD. 
          SO IT SERVES A GREATER PURPOSE IN ADJUDICATING ALL OF THOSE TO MOVE PEOPLE FROM BEING
UNHOUSED THROUGH OUR PALLET SHELTER INTO LONG TERM HOUSING AS FAR AS THAT GOES. SO FROM A VALUE PROPOSITION,
THE OLD EXPRESSION IS THAT NOT EVERYTHING THAT COUNTS CAN'T BE COUNTED. 
          THERE ARE VALUES THAT CAN'T BE COUNTED ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMMUNITY. 
          FOR PEOPLE. FOR HOUSING VALUES FOR PEOPLE THE ALTRUISM OF MIGRATING PEOPLE FROM A BAD
SITUATION INTO A BETTER SITUATION, FROM CLEARING UP SOME OF OUR COURT DOCKET FOR THOSE PEOPLE AND CLEARING UP THAT TIME. 
          AND BEYOND THAT, FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE, BEING ABLE TO IMPROVE THE COMMUNITY AS A
WHOLE. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THOSE OTHER VALUE PROPOSITIONS. 
          I REALIZE WE BOIL A LOT OF THINGS DOWN TO AND JUSTIFIABLY SO. 
          DOLLARS AND CENTS AT TIME. BUT SOME OF THOSE THINGS CAN'T BE MEASURED ADEQUATELY,
AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THAT WOULD BE ACKNOWLEDGED. 
          AND I AGREE THAT THE BEST WAY TO DO IT IS A LETTER TO THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          I THINK THEY REALLY APPRECIATE THAT, THAT SOME OF THOSE OTHER INTANGIBLE RECOGNIZING THEIR
POLICY PREROGATIVES AND HOW THERE IS A VALUE PROPOSITION THERE AS WELL. 
          TO THE CITY, EVEN IF IT CAN'T BE MEASURED IN DOLLARS AND CENTS. 
          THANK YOU. AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO KEEP. 
          THANK YOU. ONE OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND ALSO IS THAT. 
          AND IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO MEASURE IF WE DID NOT IF WE WERE NOT SPENDING THIS MONEY TO TAKE
CARE OF THE HOMELESS, WE WOULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT COST DUE TO THE PRESENCE OF THE HOMELESS AND THE ISSUES THAT
THEY THEN CAUSE. 
          SO WE'RE LOOKING AT $2 MILLION WE'RE SPENDING. 
          IF WE WEREN'T SPENDING ANY OF THAT, THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT COST THAT WE WOULD BE BEARING. 
          WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO SEND A LETTER TO COUNCIL? IN SHARING THIS, THE NUMBERS WITH THEM. 
          I GUESS THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO OR HOW YOU WANT TO. 
          HOWEVER, YOU WOULD LIKE TO. PROVIDE A SUMMARY AND AS A TRANSMITTAL FOR THE CONVERSATIONS
THAT WE'VE HAD. 
          OKAY. SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL OPPOSED? NONE. MOTION CARRIED. NEXT ITEM WE HAVE IS RESERVES AND BUDGET CONCERNS. 
          IT'S 9:24. DO WE WANT TO CONTINUE WITH THIS ITEM NOW OR. 
          THIS IS SOMETHING COMMISSIONER JESTE WAS GOING TO LEAD AND DISCUSS. 
          WOULD YOU LIKE TO PUT. BECAUSE IT IS LATE. I'M GOING TO LEAVE IT UP TO YOU. 
          WOULD YOU LIKE TO DISCUSS NOW, OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO DISCUSS NEXT TIME? I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS IT NEXT TIME. NEXT TIME. OKAY. 
          DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO MOVE TO NEXT? YEAH, WE CAN MOVE IT TO THE NEXT. 
          I NEED A MOTION FOR IT. YES. OKAY. CAN I HAVE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE THIS ITEM AND DISCUSS
NEXT TIME? SO MOVE. SO MOVED. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL OPPOSE. 
          NONE. MOTION CARRIED. ITEM K, ANYONE HAS ANY ITEMS THEY WOULD LIKE TO SHARE? 
          [K. COMMISSION MEMBER ITEMS AND FUTURE COMMISSION AGENDA TOPICS]
          [02:55:01]
VERY QUICKLY I WANT TO MENTION WHAT JIM HUBERT WAS TALKING ABOUT CONTRACTS. 
          I WAS JUST THINKING, AND I'M GOING TO SAY THIS REALLY QUICKLY. 
          MAYBE IF WE'RE SO WORRIED ABOUT CONTRACTS, MAYBE SOMEONE IN A COMMITTEE,
I'M THINKING COMMISSIONER JESTE CAN BE THE PERSON WHO FOLLOWS COUNCIL MEETINGS AND ALL THE CONTRACTS THAT'S GOING ON. 
          AND YOU BRING THE WORTHY ONES TO THE COMMITTEE TO DISCUSS. 
          WHAT DO YOU THINK? OR SHOULD WE PUT THIS ON AN ITEM TO TALK ABOUT NEXT TIME? SHOULD BE PART OF THE CIP PROJECT SO. WELL. SOME OF THEM ARE NOT CIP WAS TALKING ABOUT
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES I BELIEVE. 
          CONSULTING SERVICES. CONSULTING SERVICES. NOW THAT'S. 
          NO, THAT'S GENERAL FUND. IS THIS SOMETHING YOU. 
          WOULD YOU LIKE TO BRING IT OVER AND DISCUSS NEXT TIME OR NO? HOW WE CAN? I MEAN, IT'S A LEGITIMATE POINT. IT'S MONEY. 
          AND AND I KNOW FOR A FACT CONSULTANTS ARE VERY EXPENSIVE FOR US. 
          CIP. I DID THAT FOR FIVE YEARS. SO I DO UNDERSTAND,
OUR CITY HAS ITS OWN CODE, SO WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THAT IS BEFORE WE CAN HAVE ANY OTHER
CONVERSATION ABOUT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. 
          SO SHOULD WE DO SOME RESEARCH AND COME BACK AND DISCUSS NEXT TIME? I'M SURE TIMING YOU'RE STILL GOING TO BE HERE AND YOU'RE WORKING UNTIL YOUR LAST DAY. 
          QUICK QUESTION. IS THIS CONTRACTING PART OF THE BUILDING MAINTENANCE REPLACEMENT. 
          OH NO. SEPARATE. THIS IS COMPLETELY THIS IS MORE I THINK,
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. 
          YEAH, YEAH. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THAT ARE NOT PART OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. 
          YES, YES, AND I DO I'M DISCUSSING THIS BECAUSE I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT. 
          IN GOVERNMENT IN CITIES THE CONSULTANTS CHARGE $650 AN HOUR SOMETIMES. 
          I MEAN THERE IT'S REALLY EXPENSIVE SERVICES. SOMETIMES THEY GIVE AND THEY'RE CONSULTANTS, SO PEOPLE NEED KIND OF THE BLAME TO PASS ON TO SOMEONE AND THEY JUST SIGN A CONTRACT. 
          IT IS SOMETHING I THINK IT'S WORTHY OF US LOOKING INTO. 
          SO CAN WE BRING IT THIS AND DISCUSS ON THE AGENDA? IS THERE A PROPER TITLE THAT THIS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS CONTRACT. 
          PROFESSIONAL SERVICE PROCUREMENT? YEAH. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT. 
          FOR EACH DEPARTMENT. FOR THE WHOLE CITY. IS THERE A LINE ITEM THAT IF YOU ADD UP THE LINE
ITEM FOR. 
          IF YOU ADD UP THE LINE ITEM BUDGETS WILL GET A CITY TOTAL. 
          JUST A NOTE ON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. AS COMMISSIONER SAMPLES SAID,
THIS IS DRIVEN BY OUR CITY, OUR CITY CHARTER, OUR CITY CODE, AND OUR CITY CHARTER CODE DOES NOT ACTUALLY REQUIRE ANY
COMPETITIVE BIDDING FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. THAT IS, REGARDLESS OF THE AMOUNT. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES? NO, IT SAYS YEAH, IT DOES NOT. IT DOES NOT HAVE REQUIREMENTS. 
          WE DO APPLY THRESHOLDS. SO OVER A CERTAIN AMOUNT WE RECOMMEND GETTING QUOTES. 
          AND AT SOME POINT WE DO DO YOU KNOW FORMAL REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS. 
          SO THAT DOES HOWEVER IT DOES, IT DOES GO BACK TO OUR PURCHASING TO OUR PURCHASING
STANDARDS. 
          SO SO I THINK IT'S WORTHY OF US TO IT'S MONEY RELATED. 
          SO WE UNDERSTAND AND THEN WE SEE IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE WITH IT OR WE WANT TO DROP IT. 
          AT LEAST WE LOOK INTO IT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROCUREMENT. OKAY. I WILL ALSO SAY,
AT THE INTEREST OF THE MAYOR, WE ARE. THE CITY STAFF IS SPENDING A LOT OF TIME ON CONTRACTS. 
          THE NEWEST ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER, SHE BRINGS A REALLY STRONG BACKGROUND IN
CONTRACT MANAGEMENT. 
          SO SHE'S GOING THROUGH CREATING A BUNCH OF PROCEDURES CITYWIDE APPLYING TO PUBLIC WORKS
AND OTHER CONTRACTS. 
          AND SHE WILL BE SHORTLY STARTING TO LOOK AT OUR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS AS WELL. 
          AND INTERNALLY IN MY DEPARTMENT, WE'RE LOOKING AT UPDATING OUR PURCHASING ADMINISTRATIVE
POLICY AND PROCEDURE, WHICH IS KIND OF THE LOWER LEVEL. SO I THINK THIS COULD BE TIMELY FOR US MAYBE A LITTLE
BIT LATER ON IN THE YEAR WHEN CITY STAFF HAS DONE SOME 
          [03:00:10]
WORK ON IT. BUT IT IS SOMETHING WE'RE ACTIVELY LOOKING AT. 
          I THINK JUST UNDERSTANDING THE POLICY, WHAT ARE BEST PRACTICES,
HOW IT ALIGNS OR DOESN'T ALIGN WITH KIND OF HOW THE CAPITAL PROJECTS ARE DONE. AND IT MAY OR MAY NOT MAKE SENSE TO LOOK AT IT, LOOK AT THE CHARTER AND MAYBE EMBEDDED THAT TYPE OF,
YOU KNOW, THRESHOLDS AROUND DOLLAR VALUES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          SO TALK ABOUT IT THEN. YEAH. AND I HAVE ONE MORE. 
          WHAT HAPPENED TO ACFER? I AM SO GLAD YOU ASKED. 
          SO WE ARE INCHING TOWARDS THE FINISH LINE ON THE ACFR. 
          AGAIN, I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S PATIENCE HERE. 
          I SHOULD RESIGN IF WE DO NOT HAVE THIS BY OUR SEPTEMBER MEETING. 
          AGAIN, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY INDICATION FROM OUR AUDITORS AT THIS POINT THAT WE HAVE ISSUES. 
          WE JUST HAVE NEW AUDITORS AND A LOT OF STAFFING TURNOVER IN THE PAST YEAR. 
          SO WE ARE WE ARE GETTING CLOSE TO THERE AND I WILL KEEP THE COMMISSION UPDATED. 
          I WILL SEND OUT A REQUEST FOR DATES IF WE HAVE IT MUCH SOONER THAN OUR NEXT COUNCIL DATE. 
          OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? COULD HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING,
PLEASE. 
          I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE ARE, RIGHT? ANY SECOND. 
          SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? WAIT, HOLD. ON. OH. DIDN'T WE? YEAH. SO JUST ONE STEP BACK. OUR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WE'RE BRINGING BACK AS AN ITEM. 
          JUST IN CASE, CAN WE DO A MOTION TO BRING THAT BACK TO THE MEETING? WE DON'T NEED. NO, WE DON'T, BECAUSE. YEAH, WE DON'T NEED. 
          TOTALLY FINE. BECAUSE I USUALLY CAN'T SEND EMAIL TO ANYONE AND ASKING THEM TO PUT ON AN
AGENDA OR ANYBODY CAN. 
          YEAH, THAT ONE I KNOW. OKAY. BECAUSE. AND THEN YOU ARE READY FOR ADJOURNMENT. 
          YES. WE COULD DISCUSS THAT TIME. 9:32. ARE WE READY TO ADJOURN? CAN WE GET A MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR? WE DID. OKAY. 
          FAVOR AYE. NON MEETING ADJOURN AT 9:32 P.M..
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.