Aug 27, 2026 Budget & Finance Commission

MEETING OF THE REDONDO BEACH BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMISSION TO ORDER.

[A. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:04]

HERE. COMMISSIONER JESTE. HERE. COMMISSIONER ALLEN.

PRESENT. COMMISSIONER SHERBIN. HERE. AND CHAIR WOODHAM.

HERE. LET'S STAND AND SALUTE THE FLAG. READY? BEGIN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

COULD I GET A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDER OF AGENDA?

[D. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA]

THAT'S CORRECT. THAT WAS A SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL, BUT NOT BLUE FOLDER.

OKAY. COULD I GET A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR?

[F. CONSENT CALENDAR]

OKAY. THERE ARE NO EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS. ANY PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON AGENDA ITEMS? THERE'S NO ECOMMENTS, AND WE'RE STILL TRYING TO GET THE ZOOM LINK UP.

SO THAT'S ALL FOR NOW. ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS AGENDA.

[I. ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS AGENDAS]

SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION.

[J. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION]

LET ME PULL UP J.1 HERE. WE MAY ACTUALLY WANT TO MOVE THIS AND DISCUSS J.2 FIRST UNTIL WE CAN GET OUR ZOOM LINK UP BECAUSE WE DO HAVE OUR AUDITOR ON ZOOM WITH A PRESENTATION FOR THE COMMITTEE ON THE AUDIT RESULTS. SO. OKAY, WE CAN DO THAT. WE NEED TO MAKE A FEW PHONE CALLS TO SEE IF WE CAN FIX OUR ZOOM SITUATION.

IF THE COMMISSION IS FINE TO START WITH OUR, OTHER ITEM.

OKAY, WE CAN MOVE TO J.2.

DO YOU WANT TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON J.2 BEFORE? YES, SORRY. I'LL DO A LITTLE BIT OF AN INTRODUCTION.

SO THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF A DISCUSSION THAT WE PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION AT THE LAST MEETING.

CONCERNING RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'D LIKE THE BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMISSION TO MAKE ON INCREASES TO ELECTED OFFICIAL SALARIES IN ADVANCE OF THE MARCH ELECTION. AND THIS TIME IT'S THE CITY CLERK, CITY TREASURER, AND TWO TWO COUNCILMEMBERS.

SO WE HAD SHARED A REPORT LAST TIME THAT OUR HR DEPARTMENT PREPARED WITH SOME COMPARATIVE SALARY INFORMATION.

WE HAD, THE COMMISSION HAD A DISCUSSION LAST TIME AND IT KIND OF SETTLED ON A FEW THINGS.

ONE WAS THE IDEA OF INCLUDING SOME KIND OF ESCALATOR POTENTIALLY TIED TO A CPI.

AND TRYING TO THINK IF THERE WAS ANYTHING APART FROM THAT.

I THINK THAT WAS KIND OF THE MAJOR DISCUSSION.

COMMISSIONER SHERBIN IDENTIFIED SOME INFORMATION RELATED TO THE CPI AND KIND OF USING THESE IN AGREEMENTS FOR SALARY INCREASES. SO WE EMAILED THAT YESTERDAY.

WE CAN PULL THAT UP HERE AS WELL. SO I THINK FOR THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT, IT'S AGAIN FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND TO THE COUNCIL.

AND JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS WILL THEN, SO YOU WILL RECOMMEND SOMETHING TO COUNCIL AND THEN COUNCIL ULTIMATELY WILL VOTE AND DECIDE ON WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE FOR THOSE POSITIONS.

SO WE DID INCLUDE AND I CAN PULL IT UP HERE. WE INCLUDED THE ADMINISTRATIVE OR WE INCLUDED THE REPORT THAT WE HAD SHARED LAST TIME. AND THEN WE ALSO INCLUDED THE PRESENTATION THAT WE'D WE SHARED, WHERE WE PUT TOGETHER THE COMPARATIVE SALARY INFORMATION, ALONG WITH A LITTLE BIT OF DATA ABOUT THE CITIES THAT THOSE COMPARISON NUMBERS COME FROM.

[00:05:05]

OKAY. LET ME MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS ON THIS BEFORE WE BEGIN DISCUSSION AND SEE WHERE WE GO.

THERE ARE TWO THINGS THAT ARE IMPLIED WITH THE DATA THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

NUMBER ONE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL INCREASE IN SALARIES OVER TIME AND WHETHER THAT'S TIED TO THE CPI OR NOT, AND IF SO, BY HOW MUCH. AND THERE'S ALSO BY NATURE OF THE SALARIES FOR CITY CLERK AND CITY TREASURER. THE IMPLICATION IS THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THOSE SALARIES COMPARED TO OTHER CITIES IN THE AREA WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF COMING TO SOME EQUAL FOOTING OR RELATIVELY EQUAL FOOTING.

AND IT SEEMS TO ME I COULD I'LL TOSS THIS OUT AND THE COMMISSION CAN THE COMMISSIONERS CAN RESPOND.

I DON'T THINK ON THAT LATTER PART, ON THE RELATIVE FAIRNESS OF THE SALARIES WITH REDONDO BEACH COMPARED TO OTHER CITIES, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYWHERE CLOSE TO ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE THAT DECISION OR TO MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION.

THAT IS THAT'S AN ISSUE FOR HR TO TAKE UNDER ADVISEMENT AND TO DO A WHOLE LOT MORE ANALYSIS THAN THEY'VE DONE JUST BY SHOWING THOSE FIGURES. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE DOING IN THOSE CITIES, I DON'T KNOW HOW CLOSE TO OUR CITY CLERK AND OUR CITY TREASURER. THEY ARE TWO RESPONSIBILITIES, AND THEREFORE, IT MAKES IT, I THINK, IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO TO OPINE ON WHETHER WE SHOULD ASK FOR THE CITY CLERK'S SALARY TO BE INCREASED OR DECREASED AND THE CITY TREASURER SALARY THE SAME WAY.

SO I CAN SEE WHERE WE COULD PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION ON HOW THE SALARY SHOULD BE INCREASED OVER TIME.

TIE THAT TO CPI WITH A FLOOR AND MAYBE EVEN A MAX.

SO OF THOSE TWO ISSUES I THINK WE CAN ADDRESS THE FIRST ISSUE BUT NOT THE SECOND.

SO OPEN THAT UP FOR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS AND SEE WHAT YOU GUYS THINK AND LADIES.

I MEAN I THINK I AGREE, ESPECIALLY ON THE CITY CLERK.

I MEAN THAT'S THE ONE THAT SEEMS THE MOST LIKE THERE'S THE LARGEST GAP IN TERMS OF IF YOU JUST REALLY LOOK AT POPULATION AND REVENUE OF OTHER COMP CITIES, IT SEEMS LIKE REDONDO CITY CLERK IS, YOU KNOW, RELATIVELY UNDERPAID.

BUT THAT BUT I THINK THE POINT YOU RAISED, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, THE AMOUNT OF WORK AND WHAT'S INVOLVED AND ALL THE OTHER SUPPORTING STAFF.

I CAN'T SPEAK TO IT, BUT I THINK IT'S PROBABLY THE ONE THAT NEEDS PROBABLY THE GREATEST ANALYSIS AND PROBABLY HR WOULD BE BETTER SERVED THAN US AS THE FINANCIAL, YOU KNOW, THE FINANCE, BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE OPINING ON IT.

THE OTHER ONES, YOU KNOW, SEEM A LITTLE BIT MORE THE OTHER ROLES OF TREASURER AND CITY COUNCIL, MAY SEEM MORE IN LINE. AND AGAIN, I THINK A CPI AND A NORMAL INCREASE IS APPROPRIATE, BUT I'M OPEN TO THAT DISCUSSION AS WELL.

YEAH. I AGREE WITH THE BOTH OF YOU. I JUST TOOK A LOOK AT AGAIN, THE CITY CLERK AS BEING AN EASIER ONE TO KIND OF WORK WITH, BUT I JUST TOOK A LOOK AND SAID, WHAT WOULD BE THE MOST COMMON CITIES, THE MOST? AND I SAID, PROBABLY MANHATTAN BEACH, HERMOSA BEACH, REDONDO IF YOU WERE TO PICK THREE CITIES THAT WERE SOMEWHAT SIMILAR.

SO I DID THAT. AND THEN I LOOKED AT THE, BECAUSE A LOT OF THE OTHER CITIES THAT ARE PART OF THIS ANALYSIS, I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY'RE THEY'D BE RELEVANT.

BUT MANHATTAN BEACH CITY CLERK, ACCORDING TO THE SCHEDULE IS PAID $21,500 A MONTH.

HERMOSA BEACH IS PAID 16 OR PARDON ME, $13,600.

SO. AND THE MEAN OF THOSE TWO, THE AVERAGE IS $17,500.

SO IF WE WERE TO SAY THAT OUR REDONDO BEACH CLERK AT $11,000 SHOULD BE MOVED UP TO THE MEDIAN SALARY BETWEEN THOSE VERY COMMON CITIES YOU'D HAVE TO INCREASE THEIR SALARY BY 50%.

I MEAN, IF YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT SALARY NUMBERS WITHOUT KNOWING ANYTHING ABOUT THE RESPONSIBILITIES. YEAH EXACTLY. AND SO I DON'T KNOW HOW IT EVOLVED TO THE POINT THAT THERE'S THAT MUCH DIFFERENTIAL. BUT I'D NOT WANT TO MAKE A JUDGMENT ABOUT THE FACT THAT IT SHOULD BE A GAP THAT GETS CLOSED.

[00:10:09]

I AGREE WITH ALL OF YOU. FOR CITY CLERK IT'S A WORKING POSITION.

SO THEIR SALARY. AND JUST LIKE YOU, I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY CLERK IN REDONDO, BUT FROM EXPERIENCE WITH OTHER CITIES, CITY CLERKS IT IS A WORKING POSITION, SO THEY'RE ACTUALLY JUST LIKE OTHER STAFF THEY WORK.

SO THEIR SALARY SHOULD BE COMPARABLE TO STAFF TYPE OF SALARY AND I JUST ELECTED.

I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF ELECTED OFFICIALS RECEIVING ANY SALARY BECAUSE IT SHOULD BE A SERVICE THAT YOU DO FOR, FOR YOUR COMMUNITY BUT CITY CLERK IS DIFFERENT AND CITY ATTORNEY THERE.

AND SO I AM FOR GIVING CITY CLERK A RAISE COMPARABLE TO CPI OR I DON'T KNOW IF THEY DO PERFORMANCE BASED AND NO, WELL, THEY CAN DO PERFORMANCE BASED BECAUSE THEY WHO'S GOING TO RATE THEIR PERFORMANCE.

THEY REPORT TO THE CONSTITUENTS. SO CITY CLERK I'M COMFORTABLE TO SAY TO GIVE THEM AT LEAST A CPI RAISE.

BUT FOR THE TREASURER IT'S NOT A WORKING POSITION.

THEY OUTSOURCE INVESTMENTS. I MEAN, WHAT DO THEY DO? WHAT DOES THE CITY TREASURER DO IN REDONDO THINK ABOUT IT.

AND THEY HAVE A FULL TIME STAFF. AND TO KIND OF REINFORCE THAT.

I THINK THE CURRENT CITY TREASURER ACTUALLY REDUCED HIS SALARY BY A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT.

SO HE MUST HAVE SOME FEELING ABOUT THE VALUE OF THE WORK THAT'S BEING REQUESTED IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

OR HE MUST BE INDEPENDENTLY WEALTHY. YEAH, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I'D BE CAREFUL.

I'M CONCERNED ABOUT MAKING A DETERMINATION IN AN AREA LIKE THAT WHEN THAT.

YEAH. AGAIN, THE, I THINK IT WAS ACTUALLY PRIOR TO OUR CURRENT TREASURER THAT I THINK THE SALARY USED TO BE LIKE $75,000 OR MAYBE EVEN MORE.

AND IT WAS BROUGHT DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY BECAUSE IT'S NOT A FULL TIME POSITION.

AND BUT I KNOW IN THE LAST YEAR, WITH MELESH THE LAST TRANSITIONING OUT THAT OUR TREASURER HAS TAKEN ON A MUCH LARGER ROLE, WHICH IS NOT NECESSARILY WHAT WAS INTENDED. BUT I THINK GOING FORWARD, NOW THAT WE'VE HIRED AND BACKFILLED THAT POSITION, HOPEFULLY IT'S THE LEVEL OF WORK THAT'S REQUIRED WILL BE KIND OF BACK TO NORMAL.

NOW BECAUSE I AM IN THAT BUSINESS AND I WILL TELL YOU IT'S A CEREMONIAL POSITION.

OKAY. WHAT DO THEY DO? NOTHING. I THE ONLY THING THEY DO IS TALK TO THE PUBLIC OR GO TO MEETINGS AND TALK TO, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE A FACE TO THE DEPARTMENT.

OKAY. IT'S A CEREMONIAL POSITION. I AM NOT EXAGGERATING.

OKAY. I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT, BUT. AND I WORK FOR ONE.

OKAY. AND I'M IN THAT INDUSTRY. THAT'S WHAT I DO.

AND I MEET WITH PEOPLE AND I TALK TO WHAT IF THEY'RE ELECTED? THEY DO NOTHING EXCEPT. AND YOU HAVE THE ADVANTAGE THAT WE DON'T.

THE REST OF THE COUNCIL. YEAH. THAT'S WHY I SAID THAT FOR CLERK.

BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT ALL THE FUNCTIONS ARE.

THAT'S WHY IT'S SO DIFFICULT TO TRY TO MAKE ANY KIND OF.

I MEAN, I AGREE CITY CLERK, THEY DESERVE, YOU KNOW, THE CITY CLERKS I HAVE KNOWN.

THEY WORK HARD. THEY WORK JUST LIKE STAFF. THEY DESERVE A RAISE THAT STAFF RECEIVES FOR TREASURERS, IT'S A CEREMONIAL POSITION. I MEAN, AGAIN, I WOULD SAY AGAIN, OUR MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL AND TREASURERS ALL WORK HARD.

BUT I THINK I AGREE WITH IT'S MORE OF A NOT A VOLUNTEER POSITION, BUT IT'S A PUBLIC SERVICE.

IT'S A PUBLIC SERVICE. SO I AGREE WITH THAT. WHERE THE CITY CLERK IS MORE OF A FULL TIME POSITION THAN.

THE OTHER THING I WANT IT'S I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU GUYS TO KNOW A LOT OF CITIES ARE GETTING AWAY FROM ELECTED TREASURER, BECAUSE THEY DO SEE THAT IT'S REALLY A WASTE OF FUNDS, AND THEY'RE GOING TO APPOINTED TREASURER NOW.

AND WHAT THEY DO IS BASICALLY THEY GET RID OF THE TREASURER COMPLETELY AND APPOINT THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO ALSO BE LIKE SLASH TREASURER, BECAUSE REALLY THEY DON'T DO ANYTHING RIGHT AND THEY KEEP THE DEPUTY TREASURER.

NOW, THE ONLY REASON CITIES DON'T DO THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, TORRANCE, IS BECAUSE IT'S WRITTEN IN THE CHARTER.

SO THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO CAN CHANGE THAT IS THE PUBLIC BY VOTE.

SO THE CITIES WHO STILL HAVE THEM IS NOT BECAUSE IT'S THE BEST THING TO DO, BUT IT'S BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO EXPLAIN IT TO THE PEOPLE.

[00:15:05]

SO TO ME, WHAT REALLY, WHAT DO THEY, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO THEY DO? YOU KNOW, I DON'T I DON'T KNOW. IT'S KIND OF A, YOU KNOW, A HYPOTHETICAL.

IT'S A QUESTION THAT THEY DO REALLY. I DON'T I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD HAVE ANY RAISE BECAUSE THERE IS REALLY NO WORK.

AND AND I WANT TO, YOU KNOW, KEEP IN MIND THEY STILL RECEIVE BENEFITS.

SO THEY'RE STILL PART OF CALPERS. THEY RECEIVE MEDICAL BENEFITS.

THEY RECEIVE EXECUTIVE BENEFITS, WHICH CAN BE VEHICLE.

THEY. SO THERE IS, BESIDES THE SALARY, THEY HAVE OTHER BENEFITS.

SO I'M ALL FOR CLERK RECEIVING A RAISE, BUT NOT FOR TREASURER.

I'M SORRY. I WOULD VOTE FOR THE CLERK TO RECEIVE A RAISE, BUT NOT FOR THE TREASURER.

I JUST DON'T THINK THERE IS ENOUGH VALUE FOR WHAT THEY DO TO GIVE THEIR RIGHTS.

YOU KNOW, THIS THIS IS AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION BECAUSE EVEN AMONG THE FIVE OF US HERE, IT'S NOT CLEAR.

IT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME WHAT WHAT THE CITY TREASURER DOES.

BUT I KNOW THAT HE'S PARTICIPATED IN DISCUSSIONS ON THE BOND ISSUE AND ON WAYS TO INCREASE REVENUE FROM CERTAIN SOURCES. I DON'T KNOW. THE REAL QUESTION IS, IS THAT, THOSE RESPONSIBILITIES, ARE THEY COMPARABLE TO ANOTHER CITY TREASURER SO THAT WE COULD LOOK AT AT WHAT THAT PAYMENT IS? THAT GETS INTO THE WHOLE QUESTION OF WHAT IS FAIR PAY FOR EITHER OF THESE POSITIONS BASED ON COMPETITION AND WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING. AND MY POINT IS WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE A DECISION ON THAT.

NOW, THE SALARY IS NOT DYNAMICALLY DIFFERENT THAN OTHER CITIES.

PARDON. THERE'S ONLY ONE. IF YOU THERE'S ONLY ONE OTHER CITY THAT ACTUALLY HAS A HIGHER SALARY.

HUNTINGTON BEACH FOR CITY TREASURER HAS A PRETTY HIGH SALARY.

EVERYONE ELSE IS EITHER. AND THAT'S. I KNOW VERY WELL AND I'LL TELL YOU ABOUT HUNTINGTON BEACH BECAUSE I KNOW THAT CITY.

I'VE NOT ONLY I'VE DONE RESEARCH, BUT I'VE ACTUALLY VISITED AND KNOW A LOT ABOUT THEM.

IT'S A VERY, IT'S SET VERY DIFFERENTLY. THEY HAVE, I BELIEVE OVER 10, 15 STAFF MEMBERS IN THAT DEPARTMENT.

THEY HANDLE ALL REVENUE. THEY SO THEY HANDLE A LOT MORE.

THEY DON'T JUST DO INVESTMENTS. THE COMPARABLE ONE.

SO IT'S MORE, IT'S MORE. I DON'T THINK IT'S THE BEST COMPARABLE ANYWAY. SO I THINK THE SALARY THAT'S EXISTING IS KIND OF IN LINE WITH OTHER CITIES, IF NOT ON THE HIGHER END. IT'S ALMOST. HUNTINGTON BEACH MUST BE MORE FINANCE AND INVESTMENTS THAN JUST.

SO BASICALLY IT'S LIKE FINANCE DEPARTMENT HAS HALF AND TREASURY HAS HALF.

SO IT'S A REAL TREASURY DEPARTMENT WHERE THEY TAKE CARE OF REVENUE AND FINANCE TAKES CARE OF THE PAYMENTS.

SO IT'S, SO THE TORRANCE IS COMPARABLE TO THE DUTIES OF THE TREASURER EXCEPT REDONDO EVEN DOES LESS BECAUSE THEY OUTSOURCE THEIR INVESTMENTS. SO IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, WELL, WHAT DOES A TREASURER DO? WHAT DOES EVEN A DEPUTY DO. THAT'S WHY A FEW MONTHS AGO, I WAS RECOMMENDING THAT THEY DON'T EVEN HIRE A DEPUTY TREASURER BECAUSE REALLY THERE'S NOTHING TO DO FOR THEM. IF YOU'RE OUTSOURCING INVESTMENTS, THEN WHAT DO YOU END UP DOING? SO IF THERE IS A FULL TIME DEPUTY TREASURER. THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO NEED FOR A TREASURER.

I DON'T THINK THAT WE I DON'T THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT AT THIS POINT. YEAH. BUT YOU KNOW, I WAS JUST SAYING THAT FOR THE MONEY, GIVING MORE MONEY TO THE PERSON WHO'S REALLY DOING NOT THAT MUCH, EXCEPT THEY'RE THE FACE OF THE TREASURY.

NOW, HISTORICALLY, TO THE CITY CLERK, CITY CLERK IN 2023 HAD THE SALARY SET AT $10,875 PER MONTH.

SPECIFYING THAT THERE WOULD BE A 2% INCREASE EACH YEAR.

SO 24, 25, 26, THREE YEARS LATER THE CITY CLERK'S POSITION IS AT 11,546.

SO AGAIN, IF WE'RE AGREEING THAT THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE SALARY IS SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION FOR, ARE WE PREPARED TO DISCUSS HOW MUCH OF AN INCREASE PER YEAR THE CITY COUNCIL,

[00:20:02]

THAT'S BECAUSE, AGAIN, HOW FAR BEHIND THAT SALARY IS COMES FROM SOME COMPARABLE CITIES IS MUCH MORE THAN 2%.

AND THEN THE. I THINK THE OTHER POSITIONS, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, WHETHER IT'S TREASURER OR CITY COUNCIL, IS IT THAT WE THINK THERE SHOULD BE NO INCREASE, OR IS IT JUST A CPI? I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON THAT IN TERMS OF RECOMMENDATION, BECAUSE AT LEAST FOR THOSE ROLES, I'VE HEARD TWO VIEWPOINTS. ONE KIND OF A SMALL CPI INFLATION KIND OF COMPARABLE.

AND THEN THE OTHER ONE BEING, NO, THIS IS A COMMUNITY SERVICE.

AND YOU KNOW THAT THIS IS REALLY MORE VOLUNTARY AND THAT WE PROBABLY SHOULDN'T.

AGAIN, WE ALSO DO HAVE SOME REAL BUDGET CONSTRAINTS.

AND THAT'S OF EVERY 1 OR 2% IS A MATERIAL POINT.

SO YOU BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE BUDGET CONSTRAINTS.

SO MY QUESTION WOULD BE WHY NOW THIS IS ON THERE.

BECAUSE IT'S BECAUSE THERE'S AN ELECTION COMING. SO AGAIN, IF WE DON'T DO IT FOR THESE ROLES NOW, THESE ROLES CAN'T BE DONE AGAIN FOR FOUR YEARS.

OKAY. SO THAT'S WHY IT'S BEING BROUGHT FOUR YEARS.

YEAH. SO I THINK THAT'S, THE TIMING ISSUE ON WHY IT'S BEING BROUGHT UP NOW.

BUT FOR BOTH CITY COUNCIL AND FOR CITY TREASURER, THESE ARE PUBLIC SERVICE POSITIONS.

IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, WHY ARE YOU RUNNING FOR OFFICE? YOU CHOSE TO SERVE THE PUBLIC. YOU CHOSE TO RUN FOR OFFICE AND COMPETE.

THEN YOU SHOULD NOT EXPECT A SALARY. THAT'S JUST MY TAKE.

PUBLIC SERVANT. WELL, THE HISTORY WITH THIS CITY COUNCIL POSITIONS AND MAYOR'S POSITION WAS THERE HAD BEEN NO INCREASE FOR MANY YEARS. IN 2007 IT WAS SET AT 927 A MONTH.

AND THEN WE LOOKED AT IT AGAIN IN 2022, THIS COMMISSION BUDGET AND FINANCE AND SUGGESTED AN INCREASE TO $1,669 A MONTH. SO, THEY WERE MAKING $11,000 A YEAR.

THEY'RE NOW MAKING $20,000 A YEAR. SO IS IT AM I HEARING THE VIEW THAT THAT SHOULD NOT BE INCREASED? YES. I MEAN, THE INCREASE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A COST OF LIVING OR AN INFLATIONARY INCREASE PER YEAR GOING FORWARD.

SO THE THING THAT YOU COULD DO IS SAY AN INCREASE OF CPI OR PICK A FIGURE 2%, WHICHEVER IS LESS. SO THAT YOU HAVE A SMALL, SMALL, A SMALL INCREASE BUILT IN EACH YEAR TO TAKE CARE OF INFLATION.

NOW YOU COULD ALSO SAY YOUR VIEW IS THAT THOSE THEY SHOULDN'T BE PAID OR I ASSUME YOU WOULD SAY NO INCREASE. BUT THAT'S THE DISCUSSION ITEM, I THINK.

I THINK THAT'S THE OPEN POINT BETWEEN THE. I THINK THAT THE LEVEL OF SALARY NEEDS TO BE DETERMINED BY SOMEONE THAT HAS MORE OF AN UNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHAT THE JOB ACTUALLY IS.

AND I THINK WE COULD MAYBE SUGGEST SOME MECHANICS, SUCH AS INDEXING TO THE CPI WITH MAYBE A CEILING AND A FLOOR.

IT'S JUST SOME GENERAL COMMENTS WITHOUT ACTUALLY DEALING WITH THE BASE SALARY ITSELF.

AND THAT SEEMS TO BE A FAIR, A FAIR WAY ACROSS THE BOARD.

AND, AND ASSUMING THAT THE PEOPLE THAT SET THE ACTUAL SALARY LEVEL HAVE MORE OF AN UNDERSTANDING THAN WE HAVE.

AND WE'RE JUST SAYING, TAKE THAT ADVICE THAT THEY HAVE, HAVE USED AND, AND MODERATE IT BASED ON AN INCREASE IN IN.

THE INFLATION. AND I THINK NONE OF US CAN SEE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE.

BUT BY TAGGING IT INTO THE CPI, IT MAKES THAT ADJUSTMENT ON A YEAR BY YEAR BASIS, BECAUSE, AS I SAY, NO ONE CAN TELL FOR YEARS IN ADVANCE.

SO ANYTHING THAT WE DO THAT HAS FOUR YEARS OF IMPACT IS BEYOND.

NOW CPI IS FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE A JOB. THIS IS NOT THEIR JOB.

THIS IS THEIR EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITY HAS TO DO WITH THE PURCHASING OF GOODS AND SERVICES WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAVE A JOB, EVEN IF YOU'VE GOT UNEMPLOYMENT. CPI INCREASES IS FOR PEOPLE WHO WORK BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THIS IS THEIR JOB TO PROVIDE FOR THEIR FAMILIES.

THIS IS NOT THEIR JOB. WELL, IT'S AN INDEX. THIS IS YES.

REALLY AN BUT THIS IS REALLY A VOLUNTEER SITE.

IT'S REALLY A MECHANICAL METHOD FOR TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE INFLATIONARY IMPACT OF THE PRICE OF GOODS AND

[00:25:04]

CITY OF EL SEGUNDO. AGAIN, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER ONE THAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH, THEIR PAYCHECK IS $100 A MONTH, AND I AM SO PROUD OF THAT COUNCIL. FOR COMMISSIONERS? BECAUSE THEY'RE. CITY COUNCIL. CITY COUNCIL. THEY NEVER BROUGHT ANYTHING TO THE AGENDA OR TO THE PEOPLE TO INCREASE THEIR SALARY. THAT'S, YOU KNOW, IT IS AN HONOR FOR THEM TO SERVE THEIR COMMUNITY.

AND IT USED TO BE JUST LIKE THAT UNTIL A YEAR AGO FOR CITY OF TORRANCE.

AND THEN SOMEONE BRINGS IT UP AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE, OKAY, SURE, I'LL TAKE THE MONEY.

AND THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN AND THE PEOPLE HAD TO VOTE FOR THAT.

AND THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN WAS NOW THEY CAN RECEIVE A MINIMUM WAGE SALARY, BUT IT WAS ALMOST IMPLYING THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GETTING SOMETHING, BUT WE'RE GOING TO GIVE IT TO THEM.

MINIMUM WAGE WHERE THEY WERE GETTING ONLY $100 A MONTH.

AND NOW THEY'RE GETTING $2,500 A MONTH. BUT IT USED TO BE THAT THEY RECEIVED ONLY $100 A MONTH, ELECTED OFFICIALS. AND NOW WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS TREND THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY'RE GETTING PAID.

AND NOW WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THEIR INCREASES CPIS.

NOW THAT'S NOT WHAT THESE POSITIONS WERE INTENDED TO BE.

THESE ARE YOU KNOW, THESE ARE SERVICE POSITIONS.

THEY'RE NOT JOBS. PEOPLE WHO WORK AT CPI INCREASES OR INCREASES FOR THEIR PERFORMANCE.

COMMISSIONER ALLEN. THEN I WOULD I WOULD ASSUME THAT YOUR POSITION WOULD BE THAT FOR CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR AND CITY TREASURER, THAT WE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND AN INCREASE IN ANNUAL INCREASE IN SALARY.

YES. AND IF I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE A CHOICE, I WOULD ACTUALLY RECOMMEND A DECREASE.

AND WE'RE LIVING IN TIMES OF HARD TIMES, RIGHT? WE HAVE BUDGETARY RESTRICTIONS. WHY ARE WE PAYING VOLUNTEERS TO VOLUNTEER? SO I WOULD ACTUALLY RECOMMEND TO DECREASE THEIR SALARY TO $100 A MONTH.

IN OTHER CITIES, THEY ALSO PAY THE COMMISSIONERS $10 OR $20.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT. IT'S NOT WE'RE NOT GOING TO COME HERE AND SAY, HEY, WE WANT TO GET PAID FOR LUNCH OR FOR DINNER. YEAH, I'M NOT SURE I'M READY TO PROPOSE ANYTHING ABOUT A DECREASE.

I HEAR YOU, I MEAN, I GET YOUR POINT IS NOT LOST ON ME.

I MEAN, YES, YES. BUT I'M NOT SURE I'M AGAIN EDUCATED ENOUGH OR PREPARED TO GO DOWN THAT ROAD.

RIGHT. WELL THE DANGER OF SOME. WELL WE CAN PROPOSE ANYTHING.

BECAUSE YOU CAN NEVER COME BACK. TRUE. THE COMPLEXITY OF THE ISSUES THAT I SEE CITY COUNCIL ADDRESSING THESE DAYS WOULD SUGGEST TO ME THAT TRUE. IT'S A VOLUNTARY POSITION.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU DO TO CONTRIBUTE TIME AND TALENT TO THE CITY.

BUT I DEFINITELY WOULDN'T BE IN FAVOR OF CUTTING THOSE SALARIES, BUT I CAN CERTAINLY GET ON THE SIDE OF NOT INCREASING THOSE SALARIES. I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT AS WELL.

THAT REALLY JUST DIGGING INTO THE CITY MANAGER IS REALLY THE ROLE THAT I THINK NEEDS PROBABLY THE MOST ANALYSIS IN TERMS OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S APPROPRIATELY PAID AND WHETHER THEY INCREASE, IT WOULD JUST BE A CPI INCREASE.

OR THERE SHOULD BE A TRUE UP WITH OTHER CITIES.

I'M NOT SURE. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DEAL BEST WITH THE CITY MANAGER BECAUSE THE OTHER THING IS TOO, IS THAT. OH, WHERE'S THE OH, THERE'S ONE. WHEN THE CITY MANAGER ROLLS UP BECAUSE IT'S SIMILAR TO ANY EMPLOYEE, IF YOU'RE NOT PAYING IN LINE WITH SOMEONE'S JOB, THAT PERSON MAY LEAVE AND TRYING TO REPLACE THAT PERSON BECOMES MORE EXPENSIVE.

OR THE PEOPLE WHO WILL COME TO TRY TO BE ELECTED FOR THAT ROLE MAY BE NOT AS TALENTED.

SO I DON'T WANT TO LOSE, YOU KNOW, WHO IS A GREAT CITY MANAGER BECAUSE WE'RE NOT APPROPRIATELY PAYING THEM.

WELL, OF COURSE. AGAIN, THE POSITIONS WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE ARE THE ELECTED POSITIONS.

THE ELECTED POSITIONS NOT CITY MANAGER. OH NOT CITY MANAGER.

I'M SORRY, I MEANT CITY CLERK. I WAS MIS-SPEAKING. OKAY, OKAY. I KEPT SAYING CITY MANAGER, I MEANT CITY CLERK. EXPANDING THE DISCUSSION A LITTLE BIT. YEAH, I WAS GETTING CRAZY, BUT I MISSPOKE.

I APOLOGIZE. BUT YES, REPLACING CITY MANAGER OR CITY CLERK, I AGREE, YES I AGREE.

SO WE HAVE A CITY CLERK. I THINK THAT'S THE ONE THAT NEEDS THE MOST ANALYSIS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO RECOMMEND.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU HAVE A BETTER VIEWPOINT.

AGAIN, WHETHER IT'S CPI OR TRUING UP TO WHAT SOME OF THE OTHER COMPARABLE CITIES ARE.

[00:30:06]

SO I WOULD ACTUALLY RECOMMEND CITY CLERK TO RECEIVE THE SAME PERCENTAGE THAT DIRECTOR LEVEL STAFF RECEIVES AND I DON'T KNOW AND THEY HAVE A RESOLUTION FOR THAT.

IT, I THINK IT'S USUALLY BETWEEN 4 TO 7%, BUT I THINK SHE SHOULD BE RECEIVING THAT SAME TYPE OF RAISE THAT HIGH LEVEL STAFF RECEIVES.

AND THAT IS A MERIT INCREASE. MERIT INCREASE.

YES. SO YOUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE ON AN ONGOING BASIS.

THE CITY CLERK. YES. MERIT INCREASE AS EXECUTIVE STAFF.

SAME MERIT INCREASE AS. EXEC OR MANAGEMENT STAFF.

OKAY. CAN I GET IT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THE PRESENTATION THEY GAVE LAST TIME ON THE LAST PAGE, IT TALKS ABOUT THE IMPACT OF 1% COST INCREASE.

SO FOR THE CITY CLERK, EVERY 1% IS $2,000 MORE ANNUALLY.

SO AGAIN, IF YOU'RE THINKING LIKE 4 TO 7, THAT KIND OF STARTS GETTING YOU INTO THE, YOU KNOW, INTO WHAT, 8 TO $14,000 ANNUALLY. SO THAT CAN ADD UP QUICK.

BUT AGAIN, THE THING WE'RE VOTING ON ALREADY DISCUSSING IS THE INCREASE PER YEAR GOING FORWARD FOR THAT.

SO YOUR SUGGESTION AND YOU MIGHT WANT TO PUT THAT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION IS THAT WE ADDRESS ONLY CITY CLERK AND THAT THE SALARY INCREASE BE COMPARABLE TO THE MERIT INCREASE EACH YEAR FOR SENIOR.

OTHER SENIOR STAFF. IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? YES.

I THINK THAT'S A FAIR POINT. THEY'RE CALLED MANAGEMENT CONFIDENTIAL GROUP.

SO IT'S NOT A UNION BUT IT'S STILL A. I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST YOU KNOW, AN ADDITIONAL APPROACH BEING THE THE USE OF THE CPI AS AN INDEX, KEEPING THE BASE SALARY THE WAY IT IS AND JUST KEEPING THAT PERSON FROM FALLING BEHIND WITH RESPECT TO THE ECONOMIC FACTORS THAT THE INFLATION CREATES.

SO BASICALLY WE'RE SAYING THE LEVEL OF THE SALARY APPEARS CORRECT OR WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE IT A BETTER ANALYSIS. BUT WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE IS THAT PERSON BEING PAID RELATIVELY LESS AS TIME GOES BY BECAUSE OF THE IMPACT OF INFLATION. AND SINCE WE CAN'T PREDICT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS, FOR US TO COME UP WITH A SPECIFIC PERCENTAGE INCREASE AT THIS POINT ALSO DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME THAT BY USING THE CPI AS A MOBILE KIND OF ADJUSTMENT YEAR BY YEAR, IF IT GOES UP LESS THAN A PERCENTAGE OR PARDON ME, 2% SAY THEN THEY GET THE LOWER OF THE TWO, IF IT GOES UP SLIGHTLY MORE AND MAYBE PUT A CEILING ON IT AND SAY THAT IT, REGARDLESS OF HOW HIGH IT GOES, THE INCREASE WOULD NOT BE MORE THAN 4% REGARDLESS.

AND PERHAPS AT THE OTHER END, TO SAY THAT IT WOULDN'T BE LESS THAN 1%.

SO YOU'RE DEALING WITH THE CPI, WHICH KEEPS HER CURRENT OR KEEPS THE PERSON CURRENT, AND THEN SAYING, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO LET RUNAWAY INFLATION IMPACT OUR OUR BUDGET SPECIFICALLY.

SO WOULD YOU RECOMMEND THAT TO DO IT FOR STAFF TO SAY IF THEY WANT TO GIVE INCREASES TO STAFF, WOULD YOU RECOMMEND THAT FOR STAFF? I THINK NOW BY STAFF, I'M SORRY, WHAT? EVERYONE ELSE IN THE CITY. SO IT WOULD BE LIKE HR STAFF OR FINANCE STAFF OR PUBLIC WORKS STAFF. I WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO CONSIDER THOSE TYPES OF THINGS FOR MAKING THE DECISIONS ABOUT INCREASING PEOPLE'S SALARIES.

OKAY. BUT, SPECIFICALLY, I CAN'T REALLY COMMENT ON THAT BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THAT.

BUT JUST FROM A GENERAL MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE, I WOULD SAY I WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.

BUT WE'RE NOT BEING ASKED TO. YEAH WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING THAT.

TO DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, ELECTED EMPLOYEES.

[00:35:03]

PHILOSOPHICALLY. YEAH, BECAUSE I WAS THINKING OF THE CITY CLERK.

SHE WORKS LIKE STAFF BECAUSE IT'S A FULL TIME POSITION.

SHE HAS DUTIES THAT SHE CANNOT NOT DO. SHE'S HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THOSE.

IT'S, A PRETTY ACCOUNTABLE POSITION. SO THAT'S WHY I COMPARE HER TO STAFF.

SO ARE THERE ANNUAL MERIT INCREASES FOR SENIOR STAFF.

YOU SUGGESTED THERE MIGHT BE. I DON'T IF THERE ARE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE.

CITY COUNCIL VOTES EVERY FEW YEARS AND I DON'T KNOW THEIR RESOLUTION HERE.

USUALLY THEY DO LIKE CONTRACTS. THEY SAY FOR THE NEXT FOUR YEARS EVERYONE GETS BETWEEN 4 AND 6% REGARDLESS.

OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT MOVE TO A MORE MECHANICAL MECHANISM LIKE THE CPI AS AN EXAMPLE, BECAUSE AGAIN, WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH A FOUR YEAR TIME HORIZON, WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE GOING ON FOR THE, YOU KNOW, AFTER PERHAPS. THAT'S WHY THEY DO IT ONLY FOR FOUR YEARS AT A TIME OR THREE YEARS AT A TIME, OR FIVE YEARS AT A TIME. BUT IF WE ASSUME THAT THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY MANAGER STAFF AND HR WOULD SEE TO IT THAT THE MERIT INCREASES GIVEN IN WHATEVER CHUNKS ARE GIVEN ARE REASONABLE AND SATISFACTORY TO THE EMPLOYEES IN THOSE POSITIONS. THEN WE COULD ASSUME THAT THAT SAME PATTERN COULD APPLY TO CITY CLERK, SO WE WOULDN'T NEED TO CHANGE ANYTHING FROM WHAT COMMISSIONER ALLEN IS SUGGESTING THAT WE SUGGEST THE SAME ANNUAL MERIT INCREASES FOR THE CITY CLERK AS FOR SENIOR STAFF, AND THAT WAY WE DON'T WE DON'T INTRODUCE A FORMULA RELATED TO CPI. WE'RE SIMPLY SAYING CITY CLERK IS TREATED THE SAME AS OTHER SENIOR STAFFERS THAT ARE NOT ELECTED. I THINK THAT'S A FAIR RECOMMENDATION.

SO IT, IF THAT'S OUR VIEW, THEN WE'RE SAYING WE'RE RECOMMENDING SOMETHING FOR CITY CLERK ONLY.

YEAH. WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING ANYTHING FOR CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR AND CITY TREASURER.

AND WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING IS THAT FROM THE CURRENT SALARY.

CITY CLERK HAVE THE SALARY INCREASED BY THE SAME AMOUNT AND AT THE SAME TIME AS MERIT INCREASES ARE PROVIDED FOR SENIOR STAFFERS WITHIN THE CITY? I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SAYING.

I'M FINE WITH THAT. I THINK SO, TOO. I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

SECOND. I SECOND THAT. OKAY. FURTHER DISCUSSION? IS THERE ANY ECOMMENTS. ARE WE READY TO VOTE ON THAT ISSUE.

OR DO WE NEED TO ASK FOR ECOMMENTS. RIGHT BEFORE WE VOTE CAN I MAKE A CORRECTION? I THINK ON ONE OF THE SALARIES ONLY BECAUSE I KNOW IT LOOKS LIKE THIS TREASURER SALARY FOR THE CITY OF TORRANCE IT SAYS IT'S $75,000 ANNUALLY, WHICH IS INCORRECT.

IT'S $35,000 THAT WAS CHANGED. AND IF YOU CAN ADD THAT TO THE MINUTES, PLEASE.

SO THE CURRENT SALARY FISCAL YEAR 26-27, IT'S 30 AROUND 35.

FOR TREASURER OR FOR CITY CLERK. CITY TREASURER.

I THINK THEY HAVE LET ME SEE, THAT'S WHAT. THEY HAVE IT.

OKAY. BECAUSE I SEEN YEAH, I KNOW THAT'S WHAT I HAVE IT AS A $2,860 A MONTH.

OKAY. BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THE. MAY BE DIFFERENT.

I WAS LOOKING AT THE PRESENTATION FROM LAST. I'M LOOKING AT PAGE.

WHAT PAGE IS THIS? PAGE FOUR OF FIVE. I MIGHT BE ON A DIFFERENT PRESENTATION.

OKAY. I THINK THE SALARY ON THE FORMER CHART THAT I'M LOOKING AT SAYS IT'S $2860 A MONTH, WHICH IS $35,000.

OKAY, WHICH IS $5000. SO YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

THERE MAY BE A TYPO ON THE. YEAH. BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT SOMETHING.

PAGE FOUR OF FIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT. SO FOR THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TWO TABLES.

THE FIRST IS JUST THE SALARY AND THE SECOND ONE TRIES TO INCLUDE THE BENEFITS AS WELL BECAUSE TO JUST MAKE IT MORE OF.

A NORMAL JOB. AN EVEN COMPARISON BECAUSE THE SALARIES VARY SO MUCH.

SO THAT'S WHAT THE SECOND TABLE IS. OKAY. OKAY.

SO OKAY. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR? I SUGGESTED THAT THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING.

[00:40:02]

AND AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ONLY POSITION WE'RE ADDRESSING IS CITY CLERK.

AND WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT FROM THE CURRENT SALARY THAT POSITION SALARY BE INCREASED AT THE SAME RATE AS SENIOR STAFF IN THE FUTURE ON A MERIT INCREASE BASIS. YES, YES. AND THAT THAT WAS, I WAS REPEATING, I WAS COVERING THE POINT.

YES. THAT WAS A MOTION THAT WAS SECONDED. YES. SECONDED.

AND SO DO WE ASK FOR ANY COMMENTS OR ANYTHING? AND NO INCREASE FOR OTHERS. NO INCREASE. NO INCREASE FOR THE OTHER POSITION.

THAT'S PART OF THE MOTION. NO INCREASE FOR TREASURER OR CITY COUNCIL OR MAYOR.

YEAH. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

MOTION CARRIES. OKAY, WE'RE BACK TO THE AUDIT.

HAVE WE FIXED ZOOM OR. UNFORTUNATELY NOT. STEPHANIE'S CALLING THE CONSULTANT WHO WILL JOIN US VIA TELEPHONE SPEAKERPHONE? OKAY. OKAY. OKAY. WE CAN MOVE ON THEN TO.

THE PAST SALARIES. YEAH. I'M SORRY. BACK TO THE AGENDA.

ARE YOU READY? DO YOU HAVE A SMILE OVER THERE? WE ARE AS READY AS WE ARE GOING TO BE.

SO APOLOGIES FOR THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. WE ARE NOT ABLE TO GET ZOOM TO WORK.

HOWEVER, I DO HAVE OUR AUDITOR ON MY PHONE. I'M GOING TO PUT HIM ON SPEAKERPHONE AND I'M GOING TO PUT HIM CLOSE TO THE MICROPHONE.

AND I WILL PULL UP ANYTHING HE WANTS TO DISCUSS.

SO APOLOGIES FOR THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES AND I BELIEVE WE'LL BE ABLE TO CAPTURE EVERYTHING.

SOUNDS GOOD. SO BOB, ARE YOU THERE? OKAY. YES.

GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. LET ME JUST SEE. I'M GOING TO PLAY WITH THIS TO MAKE SURE.

CAN YOU SAY SOMETHING TO MAKE SURE WE CAN HEAR? TESTING ONE. TWO, THREE. THAT WORKS. IT WORKS FOR ME.

OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU ARE. YOU ARE ON. TESTING.

OKAY. GOOD EVENING. COMMISSION. COMMISSIONERS.

WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS THE AUDIT OF THE CITY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2025.

IF YOU RECALL, I WAS IN FRONT OF YOU BACK. I THINK IT WAS MARCH OR APRIL DELIVERING THE FISCAL YEAR 2024 AUDIT.

AND SO THE CITY STAFF HAS MADE GOOD PROGRESS IN CLOSING UP.

YOU KNOW, WE GOT 24 DONE AND HERE'S 25 IN AUGUST, AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE BACK ON TRACK FOR FISCAL YEAR 26.

JUST WANT TO REMIND YOU, THE AUDIT IS AN AUDIT OF THE CITY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS THAT ARE CONTAINED WITHIN THE CITY'S ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT.

AND WE DO, WE AUDIT THOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, THE NOTES, AND THEN WE DO PROCEDURES ON SOME OTHER COMPONENTS OF THAT FINANCIAL STATEMENT. BUT THE SCOPE OF THE AUDIT IS ESSENTIALLY TO REPORT ON THOSE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, PRESENT A GOVERNANCE COMMUNICATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT OUR FINDINGS AND THE RESULTS OF THE AUDIT AND THEN DISCUSS INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS.

I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE ARE NOT AUDITING INTERNAL CONTROLS OR COMPLIANCE, BUT WE ARE GAINING AN UNDERSTANDING OF THAT PROCESS AND CONTROL STRUCTURES SO THAT WE CAN PLAN OUR AUDIT ACCORDINGLY. AND IF WE WERE TO COME ACROSS MATTERS OF INTERNAL CONTROL, SIGNIFICANCE OR COMPLIANCE MATTERS OF SIGNIFICANCE, THEN WE ARE OBLIGATED TO REPORT THOSE TO THOSE CHARGING GOVERNANCE.

AND LASTLY, WE ALSO DO A SINGLE AUDIT OF THE CITY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENT, SINGLE AUDIT OF THEIR FEDERAL GRANT PROGRAMS FROM YEAR TO YEAR.

SO DURING THE AUDIT PROCESS, WE HAVE SOME IT'S A RISK BASED APPROACH.

WE CAN'T AUDIT 100% OF EVERYTHING. AND THE HARDEST THING TO AUDIT IS SOMETHING THAT'S NOT THERE.

AND SO WE DO HAVE PROCEDURES TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON OUTSIDE OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT, GENERAL LEDGER SYSTEM, AND FIGURE OUT WHAT NEEDS TO BE IN THE CITY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, AND NOT SO SOME KEY AREAS THAT WE ALWAYS STANDARD FOR EVERY AUDIT IS WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT RISKS RELATED TO THE OVERRIDE OF INTERNAL CONTROLS AND THE REVENUE RECOGNITION. THOSE ARE THE TWO SIGNIFICANT ONES, WE LOOK AT ALL THE TIME AND THEN SIGNIFICANT ESTIMATES THAT THE CITY MAY HAVE.

AND IN YOUR PARTICULAR INSTANCE, YOUR FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, YOUR SIGNIFICANT, MOST SIGNIFICANT ESTIMATE IS THE OPEB OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFIT LIABILITY. THERE'S MANY OTHER ESTIMATES BESIDES THAT, BUT THAT'S THE MOST SIGNIFICANT ONE THAT'S MORE SUBJECT TO POTENTIAL CHANGE ON A GOING

[00:45:02]

SO STEPHANIE, IF YOU COULD PULL THAT UP AND GO TO THE INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT I WILL GET YOU A PAGE NUMBER.

JUST A SECOND. I THINK WE HAVE IT UP. YOU HAVE IT UP.

GREAT. YES. YEAH. SO PDF PAGE THREE IS THE START OF IT.

AND OUR OPINION IS IN THE FIRST TWO PARAGRAPHS THERE.

AND THAT'S AN UNMODIFIED OPINION. SO THAT'S THE HIGHEST FORM OF OPINION THAT WE CAN PROVIDE THAT THE CITY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ARE FAIRLY STATED IN ALL MATERIAL RESPECTS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES AND GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS.

WITH THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS I MENTIONED, THE INTERNAL CONTROL AND COMPLIANCE.

AND IF WE COME ACROSS THINGS, IF YOU RECALL, LAST YEAR, 2024, WE HAD FIVE REPORTED FINDINGS IN THERE.

AND I'M PLEASED TO REPORT THAT THREE OF THOSE WERE, WERE RELIEVED FROM LAST YEAR.

AND WE ARE DOWN TO JUST TWO THAT ARE GOING TO RECUR FOR THIS YEAR.

AND IT HAS TO DO WITH THE YEAR END CLOSING PROCEDURES TO GET THOSE IN SHAPE ENOUGH SO THAT WE CAN HAVE TIMELY REPORTING OF THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE CITY. AND THEN WE'RE CARRYING OVER ONE ON DEPOSITS PAYABLE.

THERE WAS SOME PROGRESS MADE IN CLEANING UP THE DEPOSITS PAYABLE, BUT I STILL THINK THERE'S SOME MORE WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN THAT AREA.

AND SO THEREFORE WE HAVE LEFT THOSE TWO SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCIES OF INTERNAL CONTROL MOVING FORWARD.

BUT I'D LIKE TO SAY MOVING FROM FIVE DOWN TO THE TWO, IT SHOWS YOU THAT THINGS HAVE BEEN SETTLING IN AT THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT AT YOUR CITY. STAFFING IS GOOD AGAIN AND THINGS ARE MOVING FORWARD.

SO IF WE COULD GO TO THE DRAFT ITSELF, GO TO PDF, PAGE NINE.

THIS IS YOUR STATEMENT OF NET POSITION. THIS IS A GOVERNMENT WIDE PRESENTATION OF YOUR FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

AND IT SHOWS THAT THE CITY GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES, BUT IN THE TOTAL COLUMN HAS $492.5 MILLION IN ASSETS. AND IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT PAGE, PAGE TEN, YOU CAN SEE THE THE CITY'S NET POSITION AFTER YOU TAKE ASSETS, LESS LIABILITIES. AND WE HAVE SOME DEFERRED INFLOWS AND OUTFLOWS IN THERE AS WELL, IT GETS YOU DOWN TO JUST ABOUT 114 MILLION NET POSITION.

WHAT I THINK MORE IMPORTANTLY, CITY COUNCIL AND YOURSELVES LIKE TO LOOK AT IT AS MORE AS THE FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND THAT IF YOU COULD DEFINITELY MOVE TO PDF, PAGE 14, THAT WILL PROVIDE YOU THE FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

AND OF COURSE, THE CITY'S MAJOR FUND IS THE GENERAL FUND AND SO ON PAGE PDF, PAGE 14, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE GENERAL FUND HAD ASSETS OF 43.3 MILLION, OFFSET THE 12.8 MILLION IN LIABILITIES, COMES ROUGHLY TO THE NET FUND BALANCE IN THE FUND OF 26 MILLION AT THE END OF JUNE 30, 2025.

CLICK ONE MORE PAGE TO 15, 16 EXCUSE ME PDF PAGE 16.

AGAIN, FOCUSING IN ON THE GENERAL FUND IS YOU CAN SEE THAT THE NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE WAS A DECREASE OF ABOUT 10 MILLION THIS YEAR. THE TRANSFERS OUT WERE A LITTLE HIGHER THIS YEAR TO OTHER FUNDS IS ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS FOR THAT.

AND YOU ALSO NOTICED THAT WE HAVE THESE OTHER FUNDS, SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS, WHICH ARE THE OTHER GOVERNMENTAL GRANTS, THE LOW INCOME HOUSING, THESE ARE OTHER MAJOR FUNDS.

AND SO MY, WHEN I TALKED ABOUT MY AUDIT OPINION, MY OPINION IS REALLY ON YOUR CITY'S MAJOR FUNDS.

SO I'M GIVING AN OPINION ON EACH OF THESE COLUMNS HERE.

THE GENERAL FUND, THE OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL GRANTS, THE LOW MOD INCOME HOUSING, AND THEN THE OTHER GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS COLLECTIVELY IS AN OPINION UNIT. SO ALL THE OPINION UNITS ARE UNMODIFIED OPINIONS.

WITH REGARDS TO THIS AUDIT, THERE WAS TWO ACCOUNTING STANDARDS THAT CAME INTO PLAY.

ONE WAS GASB STATEMENT 101 GASB IS GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD.

THEY ISSUED A STATEMENT 101 THAT WAS EFFECTIVE FOR JUNE 30, 2025.

IT HAD TO DO WITH COMPENSATED ABSENCES. THEY WANTED SOME MORE CONSISTENCY IN REPORTING FROM ENTITIES ON THE WAY THEY ACCOUNT FOR COMPENSATED ABSENCES, AND THAT HAD A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE CITY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

ACTUALLY, I'M GOING TO HAVE YOU GO BACKWARDS, STEPHANIE, PLEASE, TO I HAD OVERLOOKED THIS ITEM ON PAGE PDF, PAGE 12. IF YOU GO TO THE LOWER HALF THERE AFTER THE CHANGE IN NET POSITION, IF WE'RE LOOKING IN THE TOTAL COLUMN OF

[00:50:08]

AND THEN THERE'S SOME ADJUSTMENTS BEING MADE. AND ONE IS IMPLEMENTATION OF GASB STATEMENT 101.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT HAD AN $8 MILLION IMPACT ON A GOVERNMENT WIDE BASIS ON ACCOUNTING FOR COMPENSATED ABSENCES.

SO THE MAJOR CHANGE IN THAT IS CHANGING THE PHILOSOPHY OF WHEN YOU ACCRUE CERTAIN TYPE OF LEAVE BENEFITS, AND IN PARTICULAR IT HAD TO DO WITH SICK LEAVE.

SICK LEAVE TYPICALLY IN THE PAST, THERE WAS A WIDE RANGE.

EACH VARIOUS CITIES AND ENTITIES WOULD TREAT SICK LEAVE DIFFERENTLY, SAYING, WELL, IF SOMEBODY LEAVES AND WE DON'T HAVE TO PAY IT, THEN WE SHOULDN'T ACCRUE IT. BUT THE NEW STANDARDS SAY, WELL, IF IT'S MORE LIKELY THAN NOT THAT A PERSON WILL, YOU WILL THAT THE CITY WILL HAVE TO PAY THAT SICK LEAVE, THEN WE SHOULD BE ACCRUING IT.

AND KEEP IN MIND THAT WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR, PEOPLE HAVE ACCRUED SICK LEAVE BENEFITS AND COULD USE IT WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR WHILE THEY'RE STILL EMPLOYED.

AND THAT WASN'T BEING FACTORED IN MANY CASES.

BUT UNDER THE NEW STANDARD, IT'S REQUIRED TO BE HANDLED.

AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE SEEING THAT THERE WAS AN INCREASE IN THE LIABILITY RELATED TO GASB 101, AND THAT'S AN $8 MILLION DECREASE IN THE OVERALL GOVERNMENT WIDE NET POSITION OF THE CITY.

AND SO YOU'LL SEE THAT OUR IMPLEMENTATION IS IN THERE FOR YOUR PROPRIETARY FUNDS AS WELL.

I'M GOING TO STOP BRIEFLY NOW. I'VE BEEN TALKING A LOT, AND SINCE IT WAS KIND OF A LITTLE AWKWARD BACK AND FORTH, I JUST WONDERED IF THERE WERE ANY QUESTIONS OUT THERE RIGHT NOW ABOUT THE AUDIT PROCESS AT THIS POINT.

ONE QUESTION JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU SAID THERE WERE FIVE ISSUES MENTIONED IN THE AUDIT LAST YEAR AND YOU WERE DOWN TO TWO.

SO THERE'S BEEN, THERE WERE NO NEW COMMENTS OR ISSUES.

CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT. AND THOSE TWO WERE AGAIN, IF YOU WOULD REPEAT WHAT THOSE TWO WERE.

CERTAINLY IT HAD TO DO WITH ACCOUNTING FOR DEPOSITS PAYABLE.

WHAT WE HAD ENCOUNTERED, THERE'S SEVERAL GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNTS WITH DEPOSITS PAYABLE, LIABILITIES ON THERE THAT THE BALANCE DIDN'T CHANGE OR THERE WAS A VERY SMALL CHANGE IN THE BALANCE OR JUST BY THE DESCRIPTION POTENTIALLY IT SHOULDN'T MAYBE NOT BE PAYABLE BUT MAYBE RECOGNIZED AS REVENUE.

SO THAT REQUIRES A LOT OF INVESTIGATION FROM CITY STAFF TO GO BACK BECAUSE SOME OF THE I'M SURE SOME OF THESE DEPOSITS PAYABLE GO ON PRETTY FAR BACK. AND TO TRY TO IDENTIFY WHAT'S APPROPRIATE AND NOT AND JUST NEEDS A LITTLE MORE TIME.

AND THAT'S WHY WE FELT WE SHOULD LEAVE IT ON AS A SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY.

ALTHOUGH THERE WAS SOME OF THE BIGGER DEPOSITS PAYABLE WERE ADDRESSED FROM LAST YEAR TO FISCAL YEAR 2025.

THE SECOND COMMENT HAD TO DO WITH THE YEAR END CLOSING PROCEDURES AND TIGHTENING UP THOSE CONTROLS SO THAT THERE'S RECONCILIATION PROCESSES IN PLACE TO SAY, OKAY, MY GL BALANCE IN CASH IS $2 MILLION.

AS AN EXAMPLE, WHAT MAKES UP THAT $2 MILLION? HERE'S A RECONCILIATION TO THE $2 MILLION AND SCHEDULE THAT SO THAT IT'S TIMELY ENOUGH THAT AN AUDIT CAN START IN A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME AFTER YEAR END SO THAT THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CAN BE YOU KNOW, RELEASED AND FINALIZED WITHIN A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME.

AND SO THAT IS ALSO A SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY.

AGAIN, IT WAS IN MUCH BETTER SHAPE. OBVIOUSLY, WE WERE ABLE TO CUT DOWN THE TIME BETWEEN THE 24 AND 25 AUDIT, BUT STILL FELT IMPORTANT. THERE'S A FEW THINGS THAT CAN STILL BE BUTTONED UP A LITTLE BETTER, AND THAT'S WHY THAT COMMENT REMAINS. OKAY, THANKS.

OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. PROCEED. THANKS. OKAY.

I THINK SINCE I WAS TALKING SO MUCH ABOUT THE GASB STATEMENT 101 AND THE IMPLEMENTATION LET ME FIND THE PAGE HERE FOR YOU, STEPHANIE. IN A SECOND.

JUST GOING BACK TO THE AUDIT PROCESS. THIS IS A DRAFT.

AND WHILE I'M TRYING TO FIND THAT OTHER THING IS AT THIS POINT, WHAT WE'RE WAITING FOR IS WE ARE SENDING OUT CONFIRMATIONS TO THE ATTORNEYS THAT THE CITY HAS USED TO DETERMINE IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL POTENTIAL LIABILITY FACTORS THAT NEED TO BE FACTORED INTO THIS DRAFT.

AND SO WE'RE WAITING TO HEAR FROM THERE. OBVIOUSLY, YOUR CITY DOES HAVE AN ESTIMATE OF CLAIMS LIABILITY IN THERE, BUT PART OF OUR AUDIT PROCESS IS CONTACTING TO MAKE SURE THAT SOMETIMES YOU HAVEN'T INCURRED BUT NOT REPORTED ISSUANCE INCIDENT THAT HAPPENS THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE FACTORING IN HERE. SO THAT'S, THAT NEEDS TO BE WRAPPED UP.

[00:55:05]

AND SO THOSE ARE THE LAST TWO THINGS. I'M NOT ANTICIPATING SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THESE DRAFT FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, YOU KNOW, UNLESS AN ATTORNEY COMES BACK AND SAYS THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WASN'T FACTORED INTO THE ESTIMATE, THAT SHOULD BE. AND I'M STILL TRYING TO FIND THE PAGE.

I APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY. I'M GOING TO NOTE 17 AND IT STARTS ON PAGE 84, PDF PAGE 84. JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THERE WERE SOME RESTATEMENTS TO THE NET POSITION AND FUND BALANCE OF THE CITY. AND A LOT OF IT HAS TO DO, OBVIOUSLY, WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GASB STATEMENT 101 FOR THE $8 MILLION.

BUT WE DID HAVE A COUPLE OTHER CORRECTIONS THAT ARE DESCRIBED IN THIS FOOTNOTE OF BEGINNING BALANCES.

ONE HAD TO DO WITH THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY FUND WHERE A DEBT HAD BEEN PAID, BUT IT WAS STILL SHOWING A LIABILITY IN THE BALANCE SHEET AND THE DEBT WE WERE ABLE TO CONFIRM THAT THE DEBT WAS PAID OFF IN THE PRIOR YEAR.

AND THAT WAS THE 3.2 MILLION. THEN THERE WAS THE SOME DEPRECIATION ADJUSTMENTS THAT HAD TO BE MADE. SOME MORE CLEANUP THERE AND THEN THE CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE.

SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE YOU AWARE IS, YOU KNOW, TAKE A LOOK AT NOTE 17.

AND IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO GET THOSE. BUT JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THERE WERE SOME ADJUSTMENTS TO THE BEGINNING BALANCE AND THAT WE DID OUR DUE DILIGENCE AND VERIFIED THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION AND THE REASONS FOR THE NEED FOR THE CHANGE.

OTHER THAN THAT I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER THINGS I WANTED TO POINT OUT.

STEPHANIE, IF I'M MISSING SOMETHING YOU WANTED ME TO SPEAK ABOUT, PLEASE LET ME KNOW AS WELL.

I'M JUST GOING THROUGH MY NOTES. I BELIEVE THAT COVERS THE MAJOR THINGS.

I KNOW ONE ITEM YOU ALSO SPOKE ABOUT LAST YEAR, WAS ANY NEW ITEMS OR WHAT TO EXPECT FOR 25-26? OH SURE. THE NEW GASB. OKAY. YEAH. SO THERE ARE TWO MORE GASB'S IN FISCAL YEAR 26, GASB STATEMENT 103 AND GASB STATEMENT 104. 103 IS REALLY AN UPDATE TO THE ORIGINAL GASB 34 THAT GAVE US THIS NEW FINANCIAL REPORTING MODEL.

AND MORE SPECIFICALLY, IT'S GOING TO IMPACT THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS FOR PROPRIETARY FUNDS AND YOUR CASH FLOW STATEMENTS.

THEY WANTED TO STRENGTHEN UP THE PARTICULAR CLASSIFICATIONS IN THERE.

AND SO YOU WILL SEE SOME SLIGHT DIFFERENCES IN FORMATTING IN YOUR CASH FLOW STATEMENTS IN 25-26 AS IT RELATES TO YOUR PROPRIETARY FUNDS NEXT YEAR.

ALSO, THEY REVAMPED AND ASKED FOR SOME CHANGE TO THE MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS SECTION OF YOUR CITY'S ACFR.

SO THAT WILL BE A CHANGE. THERE WILL BE SOME DIFFERENT INFORMATION THAT WILL NEED TO BE PROVIDED IN THAT.

SO THAT WILL CHANGE FOR 26 AS WELL. GASB STATEMENT 104 HAS TO DO WITH CAPITAL ASSETS.

WE HAVE ALREADY UPDATED YOUR CAPITAL ASSET FOOTNOTE TO CONFORM TO GASB STATEMENT 104 IN YOUR 25 AUDIT HERE, BUT THE ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS THAT WILL COME INTO PLAY NEXT YEAR IS IF THE CITY HAS ANY SIGNIFICANT CAPITAL ASSETS THAT THEY'RE PUTTING UP FOR SALE OR NEGOTIATING THE SALE WITH, THEN THERE'S GOING TO BE A REQUIREMENT TO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES ABOUT THOSE CAPITAL ASSETS THAT ARE FOR SALE.

AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE CRUX OF THAT ONE. SO TWO RELATIVELY WELL, THE 104 IS THE SMALLER ONE.

103 IS A LITTLE MORE IMPACT. JUST UPDATING THE FORMATTING OF FORMER GASB 34.

I GUESS THE OTHER ITEM THAT, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO SHARE WITH THE COMMISSION, BUT I THINK YOU COULD SPEAK TO AS WELL, IS JUST OUR KIND OF TIMING AND PLANS MOVING FORWARD FOR 26 TO AGAIN, GET OURSELVES BACK ON A REGULAR SCHEDULE. YEAH. CERTAINLY. YEAH. UPON COMPLETION OF THESE FINAL STEPS IN THE 25 AUDIT PROCESS AND ISSUING A FINAL FULL CITY ACFR, WE WILL YOU KNOW, KEEP CONTINUING COMMUNICATION WITH CITY FINANCE STAFF TO SEE HOW THEY'RE DOING ON CLOSING THE BOOKS FOR 2026. TYPICALLY, MOST CITIES YOU KNOW, IT'S JULY, AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER.

AND I KNOW WHILE THEY'VE BEEN CLOSING THE 25 AUDIT, I'M SURE THEY'VE HAD THEIR ATTENTION IN MIND TO THE 26 PROCESS.

[01:00:06]

IF THEY'RE MAKING GOOD STRIDES, JUST LIKE WE DID BETWEEN 24 AND 25, I'M CONFIDENT THAT THAT WILL OCCUR.

SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS IS THE AUDIT FOR FISCAL 26.

25. 25. YES. 25 IS THE ONE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT THAT I'M PRESENTING TO YOU TODAY.

WHAT IS THE NORM? IF WE'RE BACK ON A NORMAL SCHEDULE, WE WOULD HAVE HAD THE AUDIT FOR 25 BY WHEN? DECEMBER. OKAY. YEAH. DECEMBER, TYPICALLY DECEMBER, JANUARY IS WHEN MOST ACFR'S ARE FINALIZED.

AND SO WE'RE HOPEFUL TO HAVE THE 26 AUDIT BY DECEMBER? YES. CORRECT. CORRECT. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PLANNING FOR.

OKAY. AND JUST TO REPEAT AGAIN, THIS IS A CLEAR AUDIT.

THE PHRASE YOU USED AT THE BEGINNING, I THINK WAS THIS IS THE HIGHEST RATING WE COULD GIVE THE AUDIT.

COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? YES. SURE. YEAH. THE UNMODIFIED OPINION IS THE HIGHEST FORM OF OPINION THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE IN AN AUDIT UNDER GENERALLY ACCEPTED ACCOUNTING AUDITING STANDARDS IS UNMODIFIED OPINION.

MEANING I'M NOT HAVING YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING IS FAIRLY STATED EXCEPT FOR X, Y, AND Z.

I'M NOT I'M NOT DOING ANY EXCEPTIONS OR ANYTHING RELATED TO THE OPINION.

SO THAT'S THE HIGHEST FORM OF OPINION. OKAY. THANKS.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR AUDITOR.

I THINK NOT. NO. OKAY. WELL, THANKS VERY MUCH, BOB.

APOLOGIES FOR THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. AND YOU CAN GO BACK AND ENJOY YOUR EVENING.

YEAH. MY DAUGHTER JUST TEXTED ME THAT HER CAR STOPPED ON THE ROAD, SO I'M GOING TO GET TO HER NEXT.

OKAY. SO ANYWAY, I. YEAH, YOU GUYS HAVE A GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.

NO SWEAT. THANK YOU BOB. THANK YOU. OKAY. MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE OR.

YEP. YEAH WE SHOULD. MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE.

SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OKAY. MOVE ON TO J.3.

SORRY. DISCUSSION. JUST FOR THE RECORD, THERE WERE NO ECOMMENTS. AND NO ONE ON ZOOM AS WE DON'T HAVE ZOOM BUT.

OKAY. J.3 THE ISSUE OF AT THE LAST MEETING, WE RAISED THE QUESTION OF COULD WE GO TO FEWER MEETINGS THAN ONCE A MONTH? AND THERE ARE VARIOUS WAYS OF LOOKING AT THAT.

WE KICKED AROUND SOME IDEAS, BUT WE KNEW WE HAD TO AGENDIZE THAT ISSUE TO BRING IT BACK FOR FULL DISCUSSION.

NOW WE COULD. CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION. WHO BROUGHT THAT UP? I DID. OKAY. THE ISSUE AND THE ISSUE CAME CLEARLY FROM THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TWO MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION WHO WERE FOR WHATEVER REASON, THEY COULDN'T ATTEND ENOUGH MEETINGS.

CITY COUNCIL BUMPED THEM FROM THE COMMISSION.

SO THE QUESTION IS THEN AND THERE WERE TWO VERY HIGHLY QUALIFIED PEOPLE WHO WERE COULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL TO THE COMMISSION.

SO THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES DO WE HAVE TOO MANY MEETINGS SCHEDULED? AND FOR A RETIRED GUY LIKE MYSELF THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM FOR WORKING PEOPLE IT COULD BE A PROBLEM.

AND SO WE CAN ADDRESS THIS A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS.

WE COULD SIT HERE AND TRY TO DECIDE HOW MANY MEETINGS WE WANT TO HAVE WHEN WE WANT TO SCHEDULE THEM.

THE SUGGESTION HAS BEEN MADE, AND I AGREE WITH THIS NEW SUGGESTION BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THE FOR SURE WHAT THE AGENDA ITEMS ARE GOING TO BE WHEN WE'RE ADDRESSING THEM THAT AT THE END OF EACH MEETING WE, AND WE PUT THIS ON THE AS AN AGENDA ITEM, WE DISCUSS WHETHER WE WANT TO MEET IN THE FOLLOWING MONTH OR NOT.

IF IT'S GOING TO BE ONE ISSUE THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE MUCH DISCUSSION, THEN WE'D SIMPLY SAY NO, AND WE CAN CARRY IT OVER TO THE NEXT MEETING.

THEN WE WOULD NOT HAVE THAT MEETING. FRANKLY, I'D RATHER IN THE FUTURE HAVE A THREE HOUR MEETING ONCE EVERY SECOND OR THIRD MONTH THAN TO HAVE A ONE HOUR MEETING EVERY MONTH.

[01:05:04]

SO THAT'S THE SUGGESTION. FURTHER CARRY THE IDEA THAT BEFORE WE PUT THE FINAL TOUCH ON THAT DISCUSSION WE WAIT UNTIL SEPTEMBER WHEN WE'VE GOT TWO NEW MEMBERS WHO ARE GOING TO COME INTO BEING.

AND WE CAN BRING THAT BACK FOR DISCUSSION WITH THE NEW MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

SO WITH THAT IN MIND, IF THE COMMISSION IF THE COMMISSIONERS IF YOU DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT WE'LL SIMPLY CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT MEETING, TO THE SEPTEMBER MEETING. AGREED. I'M FINE WITH THAT.

AS A COMMISSION. I THINK WE ALWAYS HAD A CHOICE WHAT WE WANT TO DO DURING THE NEXT MEETING.

THAT'S WHAT THE VERY LAST ITEM IS ABOUT, THAT WE CAN WE DECIDE WHAT'S GOING TO BE DISCUSSED.

AND WE DO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SAY WE CAN'T BE THERE.

SO LET'S NOT DO THE MEETING. WE CAN DURING A MEETING, WE CAN ASK, OKAY, CAN EVERYONE BE THERE AT THE NEXT MEETING? AND IF YOU CAN'T BE AT THE NEXT MEETING, YOU KNOW.

WE PROBABLY HAD THAT AUTHORITY. THEN SAY SOMETHING. BUT WE'VE NEVER WE'VE NEVER REALLY DISCUSSED IT IN THOSE TERMS BECAUSE WE HAD A REGULARLY MONTHLY SCHEDULED MEETING.

AND WE, YOU'RE RIGHT, WE DO GO THROUGH DOWN THE LIST OF COMMISSIONERS AND THEY CAN SUGGEST ITEMS FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION.

BUT THAT'S NOT ALWAYS JUST FOR THE NEXT MEETING.

THAT'S SOMETHING TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE FUTURE. SO YOU'RE RIGHT, WE HAD WE PROBABLY HAD THAT.

WE HAD THAT OPTION. WE ALWAYS HAD THAT OPTION. BUT I THINK HE'S MAYBE SAYING MAKING IT MORE OF A FORMALIZED. YEAH AGENDA ITEM.

WE JUST NEED TO BE COGNIZANT OF IT CONSIDER. YEAH.

AND FRANKLY. OTHER OUR COLLEAGUES. FRANKLY, IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS, THOUGH, I'VE NEVER CONSIDERED THE POSSIBILITY THAT WE COULD JUST CANCEL THE NEXT MEETING.

I CONSIDERED I THOUGHT THERE WERE ISSUES THAT WERE COMING UP THAT WERE BY STAFF THAT WE WERE GOING TO TAKE A LOOK AT.

BUT YOU'RE RIGHT WE COULD HAVE. WE CAN DISCUSS IT.

AND IF I KNOW I'M NOT GOING TO BE HERE YOU KNOW, I SAY, BY THE WAY, I'M NOT GOING TO BE HERE THE NEXT MEETING.

IT'S COMMON SENSE BEING POLITE. I'M HAPPY TO DISCUSS IT IF WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS IT TONIGHT.

BUT ARE WE GOING TO DEFER IT TILL THE NEXT MEETING IT'S FINE ALSO, WE SHOULD DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO DEFER IT TO THE NEXT MEETING.

ONE OTHER THING I WANT TO MENTION IS THAT THERE SHOULD BE A MORE OF A COMMUNITY OUTREACH FROM THE COUNCIL MEMBERS OR THROUGH THEIR COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT, TO GET COMMISSIONERS THAT HAVE THE TIME, ARE COMMITTED TO ATTEND MEETINGS AND DO RESEARCH AND DO HOMEWORK. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW THERE IS AN OUTREACH FROM THE CITY TO ASK FOR TO LOOK FOR COMMISSIONERS. AND THE OTHER CHOICE WOULD BE MAYBE IF WE DO NEED SOMEONE, WE ASK THAT THERE IS NO TWO TERM LIMIT, BUT MAYBE THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS FOR IN SOME CASES THAT WE CAN HAVE THREE TERM LIMITS SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A COMMISSIONER WHO IS DEDICATED TO COME BACK AND HELP. THAT'S ANOTHER OPTION.

WE CAN. WELL I THINK WHEN WE DO DISCUSS IT, I THINK ONE OBVIOUS QUESTION IS TO ASK THE COMMISSION WHETHER OR NOT THEY'VE GOT A PROBLEM WITH THE EXISTING SYSTEM AND ALSO UNDERSTANDING THE FACT THAT ONE OF THE TWO COMMISSIONERS THAT'S NO LONGER HERE WAS ONLY HERE FOR ONE MEETING.

SO IT'S HARD TO SAY THAT HE FELT THAT THERE WAS TOO MANY MEETINGS.

YES. I DON'T THINK THE PROBLEM IS THAT TOO MANY MEETINGS.

I THINK IT'S FINDING PEOPLE WHO. BECAUSE IF THEY'RE DEDICATED, THEY CARE.

THEY WILL WANT TO BE HERE EVERY WEEK. NOT EVERY MONTH.

SURE. NO, I UNDERSTAND. I DON'T THINK IT'S A TIMING. BUT SOMETIMES WORK SCHEDULES CAN DEFINITELY GET IN PEOPLE'S WAY. AND I'VE DEFINITELY HAD YEARS WHERE IT'S BEEN.

YES, IT CAN. BE PROBLEMATIC. BUT IF YOU'RE MISSING, IF YOU CAN'T EVEN ATTEND EIGHT MEETINGS IN A YEAR, YOU SHOULD NOT BE A COMMISSIONER. FAIR. OKAY.

YOU KNOW, GO JOIN A DIFFERENT CLUB. IT'S NOT A CLUB.

YEAH, IT'S A COMMISSION. YEAH. I THINK UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE, PERHAPS AT THE FRONT END A LITTLE BIT BETTER MIGHT, HAVE HELPED THAT AT LEAST THAT ONE COMMISSIONER UNDERSTAND THAT THIS ISN'T THE KIND OF MEETING THAT YOU COME TO WHEN YOU FEEL LIKE COMING TO THE MEETING.

RIGHT. YES. IF YOU'RE NOT DEDICATED, YOU DON'T HAVE THE TIME, THEN DON'T JOIN.

YEAH. THIS ISN'T ON THE COMMISSION. THIS IS ON THE QUALITY OF OF COMMISSIONERS THAT WE HAVE.

AND TO BE FAIR, CITY COUNCIL IN THEIR INTERVIEWS OF POTENTIAL MEMBERS FOR THIS YEAR, STRESSED THAT POINT VERY MUCH THAT THEY ASKED THEM IF THEY IF THEY COULD DEDICATE THE TIME.

[01:10:04]

SO I THINK THE UNDERSTANDING FOR THE NEW COMMISSIONERS IS THERE.

STILL I THINK THE IDEA OF DISCUSSING THAT AGENDA AT THE END OF EACH MEETING, BECAUSE WE MIGHT WELL CANCEL A COUPLE OF MEETINGS EACH YEAR WHEN THERE'S NOT A HEAVY AGENDA ITEM FOR THE NEXT MEETING.

JUST A COUPLE COMMENTS ON THAT. REAL QUICKLY, ONE IS THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE BESIDES THE FIVE PEOPLE OR SIX PEOPLE THAT ARE SITTING HERE THAT SCHEDULE THEIR TIME, LIKE OUR SUPPORT ELECTRONIC SUPPORT TEAM AND THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, OUR DEPARTMENT AND VARIOUS OTHER PEOPLE THAT HAVE ALREADY IDENTIFIED THOSE DAYS AND ELIMINATED OTHER OPTIONS THAT THEY HAD BASED ON THAT SCHEDULE.

SO IF WE DECIDE AT THE END OF OUR MEETING THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO MEET NEXT MEETING, THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER SCHEDULES THAT ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY THAT.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT. BUT I AGREE THAT WE SHOULD BE PROACTIVE AND DECIDE DURING THE PREVIOUS MEETING IF EVERYONE CAN ATTEND AND EVERYONE CAN ATTEND AFTER THEY DO THEIR HOMEWORK AND READ THE AGENDA AND READ THE DOCUMENTS ATTACHED AND COME BACK PREPARED. STEPHANIE, YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT.

YEAH, I WAS JUST GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT THAT I BELIEVE THIS AGENDA ITEM FOR TONIGHT IS ACTUALLY JUST TITLED DISCUSSION OF SEPTEMBER MEETING.

SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE DISCUSSION DIDN'T GET TOO BROADLY INTO THIS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T REALLY AGENDIZE THAT.

WE PROBABLY ALREADY AIRED ON THAT ISSUE. OKAY.

THEN LET'S, LET'S DISCUSS THE SEPTEMBER MEETING.

I THINK WE HAVE TWO NEW MEMBERS WHO WILL BE HERE IN SEPTEMBER.

RIGHT. SO I WILL CONFIRM THAT WITH THE. I'LL CONFIRM THAT I KNOW TWO ARE GETTING APPOINTED ON SEPTEMBER 1ST.

SO TWO NEW ONES SHOULD BE APPOINTED SEPTEMBER 1ST.

I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN A DISCUSSION OF THE BUSINESS AT THE MEETING.

I KNOW OF TWO ITEMS THAT I THINK WE COULD POTENTIALLY ADDRESS EQUALLY WELL IN OCTOBER AND THAT WOULD HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE FULL COMMISSION THERE. BUT YOU SAID SORRY, YOU SAID SEPTEMBER 1ST.

SEPTEMBER 1ST IS WHEN THE MAYOR IS GOING TO APPOINT THE REPLACEMENT MEMBERS.

SO THEY CAN ATTEND SEPTEMBER 10TH. YES, DEFINITELY THEY COULD.

OKAY. WELL, I MEAN, I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING.

SHE COULD MOVE SOME OF THE ITEMS TOO. I WAS JUST SAYING, IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL AGENDA WE HAVE TWO ITEMS THAT WE WERE THINKING ABOUT.

ONE IS A DISCUSSION OF THE NEXT STEPS FOR OUR GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FINANCING.

AND THE SECOND IS SOME INVESTMENT POLICY UPDATES THAT OUR CITY TREASURER WANTED TO BRING.

WE CAN ADDRESS THOSE EQUALLY WELL AND POTENTIALLY WITH MORE INFORMATION AT THE OCTOBER MEETING.

JUST AS INFORMATION AND OPTION FOR THE COMMISSION.

IF YOU'D PREFER TO IF YOU'D PREFER TO NOT GO TO THE NEXT MEETING BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY HAD TWO THIS MONTH AND JUST MEET FOR THE FIRST TIME WITH YOUR NEW MEMBERS ON THE.

SHOW. SEPTEMBER IS SEPTEMBER, COMMISSIONER JESTE'S LAST MEETING.

YEAH. SO I WOULD DEFINITELY WANT TO I WOULD PREFER TO ATTEND THAT MEETING.

YOU'RE GOING TO BE HERE, RIGHT? SEPTEMBER 10TH BECAUSE OKAY, SO BECAUSE IT IS YOUR LAST MEETING, I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE THAT MEETING. OTHERWISE WE'RE NOT GOING TO.

BRINGING CHAMPAGNE AND COOKIES? YEAH, EXACTLY. SO THAT'S WHY I'M NOT MISSING A CHAMPAGNE.

CAN WE HAVE A CROWN? EXACTLY. THE BAR WILL OPEN AT 7:30.

OKAY. THESE PEOPLE JUST GOT APPOINTED. THEY'RE PROBABLY EXCITED TO COME AND MEET EVERYONE AND ATTEND THE MEETING, SO I WOULD. I'M HEARING A GROUNDSWELL OF SUPPORT FOR HOLDING A SEPTEMBER MEETING.

SO LET'S KEEP SEPTEMBER. WELL THAT'S OKAY. WE'LL, WE'LL IT'S GOING TO BE NEW PEOPLE.

WE'LL CONTINUE. WE'LL MEET IN SEPTEMBER. THEN TONS OF PEOPLE. OKAY.

OKAY. RETIREMENTS AND AND NEWCOMERS. RIGHT. YEAH.

AND CHAMPAGNE. YES. AND MOTION TO STEPHANIE IS GOING TO BRING CUPCAKES, SO SOMETHING HAS TO GO WITH IT.

OKAY. ARE WE ALLOWED TO HAVE CHAMPAGNE HERE? THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.

NO. WE CAN I MEAN, WE'RE NOT STAFF. YOU CAN PROBABLY HAVE CHAMPAGNE RIGHT OUTSIDE THE FRONT OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

YEAH. PERFECT. JUST HAVE IT IN A DIFFERENT BOTTLE.

I WON'T TELL ANYONE. I THINK THE CITY ATTORNEY MIGHT HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT.

I DON'T KNOW. OKAY. I DON'T KNOW. OKAY. WE CAN'T PURCHASE IT WITH CITY MONEY, BUT.

ITEMS J4 AND J5 WERE THE CONTINUATION OF THE LETTER TO CONCERNING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND THE CIP

[01:15:09]

YEAH, IT'S BEEN SUMMER. AND SUMMERS ARE SO TOUGH ON ME.

LET'S KEEP THOSE ON THE AGENDA FOR NEXT TIME. YOU UNDERSTAND? OH, OKAY. ITEM K ADDITIONAL COMMISSION, REFERRALS TO STAFF, ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE NOT MENTIONED SO FAR THAT

[K. COMMISSION REFERRALS TO STAFF]

WE ARE ADJOURNED. BEAUTIFUL.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.