ORDER-2021-110 : An Appropriation from Free Cash, account number (01-324001), in the amount of $1,150,000 (One Million, One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars), to various stabilization accounts as set forth herein.

Transcript (~20 min @ 3:01:45)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 3:01:41 Jeff McNaught: for being here tonight. Whoever is jumping off, we appreciate you hanging with us. It's been a long one. We're getting there. Next up, we have Order 2021-110, an appropriation from Free Cash, account number 01324001 in the amount of $1,150,000 to various stabilization accounts as set forth herein. Mr. De La Russa, the floor is yours again, sir. I believe you're on mute, sir.

▶ 3:02:16 Speaker 7: Sorry. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I would ask respectfully if the council does have the stabilization fund balance summary in front of them it may be easier to follow by fund there's list eight of them and the amount that is currently in the balance the request this evening and what would be in the fund in the event that the board approved that particular line item thank you this again is an annual event and I consider it internal housekeeping for the city's finances much like we have housekeeping at the end of the year for departments in general. This is really the core of what the city stands on and lives by and makes a representation to the outside financial institutions what our priorities are. I will say at the out front that I want to make it clear that that this year's free cash appropriation of over $5 million includes a $1 million one-time payment on waste management. A one year, $1 million one-time payment that will not be repeated over the next cycle. And what we've asked, we went through and we did measure the different funds and I will be pleased to speak to each one and why that particular dollar number has been requested. And I do wanna point out again that the total amount that we're looking for is less than half of what we looked for a year ago, which is 2.5 when the pandemic hit. So we brought this down to under 25% of the total free cash available to the city. And I believe that that's a measured and a prudent move to make at this time. So, to the chair, if you'd like to go 1 by 1, or would you rather the council ask questions, whatever you'd like to do.

▶ 3:04:31 Jeff McNaught: I think we can probably go to, I've seen a lot of hands up, so I think we'll go right to questions and we'll start with Councillor Migliorelli.

▶ 3:04:41 Leila Migliorelli: Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Mr delivery. So, um, I. My thought for tonight is that these are stabilization account transfers, and they're not something that's immediate need. You know, the items we just voted on are things that we either have to do or really need to do in order to keep the city safe and running effectively. Um, this, as Mr. just mentioned this while this request is less than. Half of what we was put into the stabilization accounts last year, it's still bringing up the balance quite a bit. Um, and last year, I think the emphasis was on trying to keep. The city, you know, on sound financial footing as we were just at the brink of the pandemic and not knowing what direction would be going in. After that, now, we're finding ourselves in a different situation, trying to kind of move into the recovery mode and there may be items that come up between now and the end of the fiscal year that we may want to consider. So, I'd like to put a motion on the table to hold these in committee as I think there's still a lot left in play and and wait until later on this fiscal year.

▶ 3:06:02 Jeff McNaught: So, we have a motion on the table from council to hold this in committee, seconded by Councilor McMaster. We still did have Councilor Grigoraitis in queue. And did I miss anyone else?

▶ 3:06:16 Speaker 3: Councilor Garipay is in queue. Anyone else? Councilor Eccles?

▶ 3:06:23 Jeff McNaught: Okay, Councilor Grigoraitis, go ahead.

▶ 3:06:27 Jen Grigoraitis: Are we going to, Chair McNaught, are we going to, we have a motion that's been made and seconded before, so are we going to Have discussion on that motion, or I'm happy to see my time, given that there's a motion that's been made and seconded.

▶ 3:06:41 Jeff McNaught: Yeah, we can, we can have discussion on the motion.

▶ 3:06:48 Speaker 3: That's fine. Council McMaster.

▶ 3:06:51 Shawn M. MacMaster: Thank you, Mr. chairman and in addition to the, I think very valid points that constantly make the rally made. I think it's. Also important for us to realize as with last year is when an order comes down like this, it has 8 stabilization funds within the order, which leaves us 1 of 2 options either vote to support it. Or vote to oppose it and last year, if you recall, I had made a motion to divide the order because I didn't want to be put in a position nor do I think any of us should be putting in a position of having to vote it up or down. So, the reason, you know, in addition to what constantly indicated in her remarks that I think we should look to hold this is that. I'm really not comfortable tonight, considering the hour of making a motion to divide the order and having 8 separate votes. I think that's something we could potentially do moving forward. I am mindful. Mr. Chairman that there are other there are going to be other free cash orders coming before us. But I'm just not very comfortable making that motion tonight to divide the order, considering it's 10 o'clock and we still have another matter on the agenda before us. Thank you. Mr. Chairman.

▶ 3:08:08 Jeff McNaught: Thank you Council McMaster. Council Garipay, I had you in queue before. Did you want to speak now on discussion?

▶ 3:08:15 Mark Garipay: Yeah, I mean, I was just gonna, I was gonna say I'm okay with moving forward with this tonight. I mean.

▶ 3:08:29 Mark Garipay: You know, we, the stabilization accounts, we all, we need to continue to invest in the community. I think it's a prudent thing to do with the financial situation we're in. We have money. Last year, we weren't know where the unknowns were. I mean, we have not lost any revenue. We have revenue coming in. So I understand that the thought process is we don't know where we're going to be. But we are in a better position now with what we know from the federal government, from the state government. And I'll ask Mr. De La Russo, the decisions are easier now to make, to invest in stabilization funds. These are easy decisions to make. The tough decisions are when we don't have a stabilization fund like we had in 2001, 2002, when we had to close Eastside Fire Station. We had to close the BB schools. We had to reduce the, the hours in the library. Those were tough decisions. This is an easier decision if we don't invest in stabilization, we're not asking for a 1Million dollars. I mean, I think the goal is 5% of the stabilization fund, the main stabilization fund. I think it's about 90Million dollars. I mean, we're not even close to that right now even adding this. This is an easy decision, in my opinion, the top decision is when you have to make a decision, you have to close things. I hope we never have to use these funds, but we should gradually while we have the money. Build that up the other question I have regarding the contract stabilization. We have 4 contracts, I think it said in in the, um, in, in, in Mr. Delarosa's memo. So. I guess my question to this is how many, how many contracts have expired or are expired in? How long have they been expired?

▶ 3:10:20 Speaker 7: We are currently to the chair. We are the fire contractors is expired this year and we are in negotiations with fire. So there was, there's at least a potential 1 year retro there. Going on to police superiors. patrolmen we're going to be negotiating now and the uh dpw the laborers i believe um so one of the um items i was trying to speak to would be the necessity mr chairman point of order there's a

▶ 3:10:58 Shawn M. MacMaster: motion on the floor and respectfully to council garrett i know he has a question but we have to we have to vote on that motion before we can ask questions of Mr. Della Russa.

▶ 3:11:16 Jeff McNaught: Well, I'll entertain what Councilor Garipay said as discussion, because it was said more in the form of a comment than a question. So we can cut it there, but I'm going to keep the discussion open in case anybody else wants to speak on the motion.

▶ 3:11:34 Mark Garipay: Well, I'll just finish up by saying I have not veered from the way I've gone and handle this position all for the last year since I've been a councilor. I think it's a prudent thing to do to invest in our long-term stability. Councilor Tramontozzi probably remembers when those tough decisions had to be made. They had tough decisions. This is an easier decision to be able to invest in the long-term

▶ 3:12:02 Jeff McNaught: future of the community. Thank you, Councilor Garrapate. Councilor Grigoraitis. Thank you,

▶ 3:12:06 Jen Grigoraitis: To chairman not on discussion of this motion before us, I think. I don't see a motion to hold as a failure to make a decision, I think, to counselor through the chair. If you're counting down, I think. There's this body has asked many times for an understanding of what the overarching vision is for the expenditure of free cash and for the. The plan for all of the additional revenue that's coming in and so I think we want to have more time to see what some of these anticipated additional free cash orders are that our investments in our community, which I believe is what residents would like to see. In addition to the external financial folks that we want to make sure are happy. So, I think emotions to hold is allowing us to get a more complete picture of where we see the financial picture of the city going forward. Thank you.

▶ 3:12:57 Jeff McNaught: Thank you. Councilor Gerardus. Councilor Chamaluddin.

▶ 3:13:02 Maya Jamaleddine: Thank you, Chairman. I would like to echo Councilor Grigoraitis, I'm sorry, and Councilor Migliorelli for putting this order on hold. I feel that this is a wise decision, especially for For our residents to make sure that we are taking the right decision. Taking our time to make the right decision. I'm sorry. It's very late and tomorrow. So it's been a long night for us. I am. I apologize.

▶ 3:13:40 Jeff McNaught: No, apology necessary. Council. Did I have you in queue?

▶ 3:13:51 Jack Eccles: I wasn't here to ask a question. I have some questions about the, um, the stabilization fund, but just on discussion. I mean. As far as the urgency, I wouldn't see a problem. I can ask these questions anytime. So. So, my colleagues to to wait for a broader picture, I'm fine with that, especially. Given the hour and having 1 more thing on the agenda. Thank you. Vice chair.

▶ 3:14:21 Robb Stewart: Anyone else counselor Stewart Thank you. Mr. chair. Um, I would. Also echo counsel point of prudence and I do believe that it is quite important to have the financial stability. That being said, I am also comfortable. Holding this in committee for. A period of time only for the. Some of the requests that have come in via our constituents. And I would add a future date, recommend Mr chair that we do re. Think, and this is through the chair to the committee that we rethink. Whether we want to vote on this in the entirety, or if we do as per counselor, McMaster's suggestion. I'll split this into this the separate components of the order so that's that's what I wanted to

▶ 3:15:29 Speaker 3: share thank you Mr. Chair thank you Councilor Stewart Councilor Tramontozzi yes thank you Mr.

▶ 3:15:33 John N. Tramontozzi: Chairman I appreciate everybody's concerns about this I believe in that we know in the past we we ran into situations where the stabilization accounts needed to be authorized and funded. And so, like Councilor Garipay and Stewart before me, these stabilization funds are important to be funded. However, the other Councillors have made a legitimate point about some of these stabilization funds which are not uh immediately in need of funding and i would uh suggest to and i would agree to hold it in committee but i would suggest to mr delarusso uh that um he come back uh with us with them separated out so that um because otherwise we are i i think we're destined to um vote on these individually and i would suggest that maybe it would be prudent for Mr. De La Rosa and the administration to come before us with separate orders on each of the separate stabilization accounts. So that way we can have a better understanding what really truly should be funded and what should not require an emergency funding and the free cash should be better spent elsewhere. So that's just the comment that I have, and I appreciate the comments from all the counselors. Thank you.

▶ 3:17:12 Jeff McNaught: I'm going to let Mr. De La Rosa just.

▶ 3:17:15 Speaker 7: Thank you. I hear the comments and I appreciate it. As far as the breakup of the actual items, I would suggest I'd have to work with Kristen and see how that could be done mechanically.

▶ 3:17:30 Speaker 7: i think that would be actually a motion here right and to make it easy easier for the council however i i will stress i i we've never used the word emergency here um i am not looking this is not an emergency in appropriation i will say that we have until the end of june to pass it be free cash overall and we did try to introduce what we're going to continue to introduce this This request is part of the free cash package. We still have over 3Million dollars after this. That we are working with for allocation purposes. This again is very strategic and I, I look forward to the chance to actually speak to the order. And discuss each 1 separately counselor. So that I think it can shine some light on to what is being requested and why. Because we have not addressed the wide this evening and I want that opportunity to do that.

▶ 3:18:23 Jeff McNaught: Thank you. Thank you. Mr. dollars. So do I have anyone else for the 1st time?

▶ 3:18:29 Mark Garipay: Council care. Yeah, just 1, 1 other thing with. Council of Google writers, I agree with her that we have not seen a plan. For the free cash, which I think is a balance of 3 point. 3.3Million roughly left over, but I don't think. The administration, I think in the has been up front on his view of. Of stabilization and how he likes to use these accounts. So I don't, I think there has always been a plan. He's, you know, we've, we've heard it. We heard it in November. What, what, what the likes to do. We heard it again in, in, uh, in, I think it was January when he came before us on the on the fiscally, uh, see how we are fiscally with the community. See, we were at that point. So, I think the. The vision regarding stabilization funds have always been there and they've been out out in front of us. With regards to the leftover money, I, I agree with council, Grigoraitis that it would be great to see more of a plan to see what they have have coming forward with that regarding the stabilization funds. I don't I mean, I think it's always been out there.

▶ 3:19:43 Leila Migliorelli: Council really? Thank you. Mr. Chairman. I think this is really just an issue of timing and it's not sort of a. You know, issue of not taking the stabilization of the city seriously. I think that the vision that we're looking for is not a financial vision. Um, I think that that is definitely prudent to invest in stabilization accounts. It's proven to do all these things from a financial perspective, the vision that we're talking about is more of a vision for the city of. What are the items that we need to move this city forward that are going to improve the lives of residents? And that that vision is not is not is enforced by financial decisions, but it's not the creator of the financial financial decisions. So, I just want to be clear about that, that it's not that stabilization needs to be put on the back burner until later, because it's not as wise to invest in the stabilization of the city. It's just, it's not. It's not part of the vision. So, we have three point three million, perhaps there's another request from another department that comes in. It just should be something that should be done at the end. I think instead of in the beginning, it just sets a tone for the. For the overall budget discussions for the city. Thank you.

▶ 3:20:55 Speaker 3: Thank you counsel. Do I have anyone else?

▶ 3:21:05 Speaker 3: Okay, seeing none, Madam clerk, please call the role.

▶ 3:21:15 Speaker 3: Chairman, no, no.

▶ 3:21:17 Speaker 2: Vice chair Eccles. Yes.

▶ 3:21:21 Speaker 2: Council of Tram and Josie. Yes, yes. Counselor McMaster. Yes, Council of.

▶ 3:21:32 Speaker 2: Okay, Council of greater writers. Yes, Council of yes. Counselor Stewart. Yes. Yes. Councilor Thomas?

▶ 3:21:44 Speaker 7: Yes.

▶ 3:21:46 Speaker 2: Councilor Jamaleddine? Yes. President Sinella?

▶ 3:21:52 Speaker 7: Yes.

▶ 3:21:54 Speaker 2: Nine yes.

▶ 3:21:56 Jeff McNaught: Motion passes. This order will be held in committee. Ms. Delarosa, thank you for your patience tonight.

▶ 3:22:03 Speaker 7: Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you for being here. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Bye-bye.

▶ 3:22:09 Speaker 3: We'll see you soon. Take care.