ORDER-2020-96 : An Appropriation from Free Cash (01-324001) in the amount of $2,500,000 to various Stabilization Funds.

Transcript (~1 h 20 min @ 3:34)

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

▶ 3:32 Speaker 1: Yes. Chairman Sinella? Yes. Councilor Jamaleddine? And yes.

▶ 3:41 Christopher Cinella: All right, so our rules are under suspension. Our first order this evening is 2020-96, an appropriation from free cash, count 01-324-001, the amount of 2.5 million to various stabilization funds. We have auditor with us.

▶ 4:04 Speaker 6: Yeah, good evening. Can you hear me?

▶ 4:11 Speaker 1: Yes, thank you. You can't see me. No video yet.

▶ 4:15 Speaker 6: Wait a minute. How about now?

▶ 4:27 Speaker 3: Yes, perfect. No, great. Thank you. I appreciate this evening really having the opportunity to talk a little bit about stabilization funds in general I think it's if I have to have an opening state which I want to have this complements the fiscal 2021 operating budget that the mayor had sent down for the council who plays a direct role in the success of the budget program on the operating budget for the city is much more than numbers on a page it's a living document it's one that is used by outside agencies to view us as a community and identify what we consider our priorities and the fact of the matter is that they want to ensure that we're doing things that are prudent and fiscally responsible not just today not just tomorrow but the year after that the year after that and the year after that they want to see us be consistent

▶ 5:45 Speaker 3: so if i may um have some leeway here just for a moment i i do want to speak to this order in the the context of my memorandum dated on May 21st 2020 I'm not sure if the council has it in front of them or those at home that might be listening and if I could I like to just read the second paragraph into the record it states in my opinion this is one of those times we must enhance our stabilization fund balances as the negative economic effects of the COVID-19 crisis will be significant. This positive action of enhancing our financial reserves at this time will go a long way to maintain a AA plus bond rating with Standard & Poor's bond rating agency. There is tremendous value here i think it behooves us to take a step back and look at the bigger picture and what we will be facing this october november when we're rated again by standard employees so it's an annual event and in fact i think i sent everyone an official statement that is also an annual event but if you take a look at the mma best practices series which i did send to you uh out to you folks um i just like to read a couple of sentences into the record again i think it brings into context the what we're talking about this evening and what a big big big deal it is and i want to i can that can never be understated it's what you're doing tonight or considering acting upon is the largest investment in the city stabilization funds in the history of the city of Melrose and I've been here a long time since 92 and I took a short hiatus for seven years as you know to be CFO for the town of Plymouth as some don't know but I've been back since 2004. this is the largest contribution if approved ever in the history of the city and it could not happen at a better time the what are reserves in best practice and why in fact are they so important you look at the MMA fiscal policy committee that outline on best practice recommendations and it says it says adopt best practice adopt as a set policy or practice adequate funding of municipal reserve accounts to mitigate budget risk from extraordinary and unforeseen events and maintain fiscal stability over time. It is widely recognized that state and local governments that have established and funded reserve and stabilization accounts at sufficient levels have been well served because reserves allow states and localities to sustain services in times of economic and fiscal distress and it limits the risk from extraordinary and unforeseen occurrences. Sound policies and practices along with adequate levels of reserves can also have a positive impact on credit ratings and can reduce the cost of borrowing and capital project spending. The Division of Local Services advises that a good reserve policy will establish targeted balances for the local stabilization fund and other reserves and develop a schedule of annual appropriations. I want to stop for one second. The appropriations we're going to be talking about later on this evening on department 942 or OPEB in the regular stabilization fund we call the foundation stabilization fund of the city those are annual events that are part of our budget and they're there for a reason which we can talk about shortly

▶ 10:10 Speaker 3: and again if you take a look here it also indicates on standard and pours rating on October 17th of 2019 and they state the rating reflects the double a plus stable of the city's stable local economy supported by access to the Boston metropolitan statistical area and continued continued maintenance of strong to very strong reserves to balance financial operations

▶ 10:46 Speaker 3: um so what we're looking at here is a continuation of maintaining strong reserves at a time most needed at a time when it's uncertainty in the economy uncertainty of state funding uncertainty of local receipts and as everyone is aware that those communities that um

▶ 11:19 Speaker 3: don't follow good practice and they become more risky to investors the outcome is they end up paying more in interest and their bond rating suffers because as an investor they don't have confidence that that community has planned well for such adverse um conditions now we have gone through the economic crisis uh 2010 as we saw where the city ended up losing uh 2.2 million dollars in state aid we never touched the stabilization fund we suffered the next year we lost another 555,000 and another 513,000 so for three consecutive years we suffered losses from state aid so the key again is none of no one can predict duration of this crisis economically or in the impact on state aid but again what we can do and what we need to do is control what we as a community can control and those that follow that practice are always always in a position of financial strength you take a look at our last standard and pause rating it is phenomenal we are one step away from a triple a rating because the highest rating we can achieve a community that has struggled through many years of loss of state aid um and conditions that were not brought upon us ourselves loss of federal aid we lost um over three million dollars in our funds also at the same time we lost the 2.2 million in state aid and never did we do two things never did we draw on our stabilization funds? Never did we draw on our stabilization funds to cover any deficits in those respects. Also, we've always contributed. What Sienden & Poors finds interesting about Melrose, even in the worst of times, the worst of times, every year, what does Melrose do? consistently, consistently funds its stabilization fund.

▶ 13:56 Speaker 7: Year after year after year after year.

▶ 13:58 Speaker 3: That tells them that we are sincere, that we are diligent, that we are prudent. And that doesn't happen in many communities. We are now on the brink of having seven, seven stabilization funds in one community, created for specific purposes, and what that does, it tells Standard & Poor's, it tells the investment community out there that this community is ready, willing, and able to take on its operating budget for the next fiscal year from a position of strength. They have funded what they needed to fund for stabilization, to protect themselves, to minimize the risk that the operating budget could be impacted because of conditions beyond the city's control. That's what they want to see. That's what this order does. And I appreciate the time and your consideration. I can answer hopefully most questions that you may have on. And if not, I promise I will find out the answer.

▶ 15:09 Christopher Cinella: Thank you. So far in queue, I have a Councilor Stewart. Did I miss anybody else? If you could just raise your hands,

▶ 15:21 Speaker 4: I'm trying to tell us .

▶ 15:28 Robb Stewart: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Del Rosso, for providing that introductory statement to help us understand your position. So a couple of things that I would like to point out and ask in reference to this.

▶ 15:49 Speaker 2: I'm a little confused about how this aligns

▶ 15:55 Robb Stewart: with some of the things that the mayor has spoken about. So just as a counselor, I need to represent my constituents and their perspectives. And I need to look at the people of Melrose and the related businesses in Melrose. So when I hear about the stabilization fund, I think it's great that we have a very strong financial position. I think it's an envy of many towns in the region. But we are now in extraordinary times. Events are happening that have never happened before. I think it is difficult to compare any recent economic downturn to what we're facing. It's pretty well established that the state is going to have a tremendous economic impact. They're talking about a 12 to 13% revenues, which is gonna significantly affect all the towns across the state. So my question is, is that, you know, as the mayor has spoken about, you know, if things continue and we continue to have added stresses that all bets are off the table, he put in his work and we may need to look at uh certain potential cuts um you know and and who if no one can predict the future um but we need to plan for the future so my question to you is when we have such a strong stabilization fund and financial position when do we use it so at what point uh when we're in a situation where we're looking at you know impacting the school system impacting the ability to do work in the town effectively looking at furloughs when do we

▶ 17:57 Speaker 3: use this um use this money that's a great question yeah yeah um a couple things that's a great question there i if we let's talk a little bit about what happened and i think history sometimes could help you get a better view of the tomorrow if you know your history um

▶ 18:22 Speaker 3: When we talk about what happened in 2009, 2010, what changes the dynamic is that in some ways, whether or not people will acknowledge it,

▶ 18:38 Speaker 3: the fact that we knew about the COVID crisis when we did is better than had we been told about this COVID crisis in January, midyear, when we had already set the budget and we would have found ourselves with a state aid shortage mid-fiscal 21, then what do you do? What has happened in the past in the years I talked about previously, we've lost the

▶ 19:03 Speaker 7: state aid in mid-year, they actually came in mid-year and cut our aid because they can

▶ 19:05 Speaker 3: do that at any time throughout the year. And I think it's a great point. need to understand the estimate you get for state aid is a 12-month estimate at any time during the year you have the capacity to cut that or to increase it just because they put it out on the cherry sheet doesn't mean it's going to materialize it that by the time the fiscal year is over so what we did by budgeting the way that we do the last two times that we lost the over half a million and maybe we were able to absorb that because we budget conservatively so the local receipts for example that we had excess of than what we had anticipated covered that shortage so this community has never seen that destruction of services now if we because we absorbed it and the public

▶ 20:00 Speaker 3: wouldn't doesn't even recognize that it happened because we it was so strong in the way we had budget as we did this year but the second point is we did take extreme measures fiscal 10 we brought in the gic for the first time in the city the group insurance we saved 1.2 million dollars almost 1.3 that first year we had a wage freeze the very next year citywide unheard of teachers firefighters police union non-union the very next year we

▶ 20:35 Speaker 3: froze wages across the board that was a dramatic action but guess what we but guess what happened Council Stewart put the notice out that if we were unable to have the wage freeze if everyone didn't buy into it collectively it would be layoffs we have put that out there but we had a remedy for that we didn't have to lay off because we had a rate a wage freeze across the board that was not made up the next year everyone lost that entire year's salary that they had been

▶ 21:10 Speaker 3: you know looking forward to it cetera bowlers whatever the case may be elected by again that was foregone for an entire year the very after that and to this day of the non-union sometimes it gets a misunderstanding out there we senator policy where the increases for non-union members are either a step or a cost of living but not both if you look at this year's budget if you see someone that gets a step they're not getting the 2% cost of living not both unions

▶ 21:46 Speaker 3: collective bargaining they get both just the non-union that don't participate in both it's either one or the other I'm getting a step this year I'm not getting two percent cola if i wasn't getting a step i get a two percent cola example for five years i got a call about one percent that was it and showed that everyone else that was non-human so we took drastic steps in the public um i think you can see that we will do what we have to do the objective counselor and always has been my objective personally and i'm sure it's the mayors as well as as those in the community we don't want to see services cut we don't want to see layoffs with that comes unemployment and a host of other negative consequences um so we did take drastic measures to alleviate that from happening and thank god we hope we're hopeful that that doesn't happen in the future that does not mean that we will not use the stabilization fund should it be some become so um i'll just say over the top that it requires us to use it and there's nothing wrong with that i would argue that if we use a million dollars of stabilization this year for the budget two things we replenish that from the free cash that's getting certified this october for example and restore it the first chance we have whether it's one installment or two installments and that also is okay the end of the poors moody's as long as you can show you have a policy to replenish it that's oh that's fine because those things can happen it's not my hope it's not my expectation i've been doing this my 28th budget i've seen the very good situations and i've seen a lot of bad ones i was in plymouth when it was deregulation we lost uh that was 15 million dollars a year in taxes overnight we have to end up trying to negotiate that down over a longer period of time so in this in this instance we were given notice you're being given notice which you don't always get that things are going to get rocky and hard so what did we do we did the foi 21 budget at the lowest percentage in 10 years the two percent the lowest percentage in 10 years. We cut our expectation of new growth by 50% from 600,000 last year to 300,000. We anticipated 12.5% cut in unrestricted Local A, which is 680,000, and we did not touch Chapter 70. And I'm going to tell you why, because even then, back then, back in 9 and 10 when we lost that 2.2 million, Chapter 70 was pretty much intact. It was reduced, but nothing to the magnitude that local government unrestricted aid was reduced because that's a whole different scenario per student that's involved in that determination for funding. So we held that tight and I'm hearing that that's probably not an unreasonable expectation, but I'm hearing for fiscal 21, that they may just level fund it to fiscal 20 the year that we're in. And we also were using only 75% of the receipts

▶ 25:03 Speaker 7: from local receipts.

▶ 25:06 Speaker 3: from fiscal 19 so there's a 2.2 million dollars less we're anticipating taking in to fund this budget than we did fiscal 19. so we um we're more than conservative that is us in a structured basis that's what we that's how we operate so that if in fact you know god forbid you know more negative comes forward we have already braced ourselves we've already put money aside in this case for these funds should that be necessary we know we can wake up in the morning and have recourse to these funds other communities cannot say that i think if i was a resident in morrow's

▶ 25:52 Speaker 3: i'd be extremely pleased that council and the city embraced this as a serious matter which it has and they also took action to ensure that this year's budget was not overstated or overblown in any way every department is ensuring you know council has said they could use extra money and I'm department is no different I raised my hand but I live in the world of reality and I also understand that you can only pay for what you can pay for period and we all have to share that and I respect that that, but in no way would I feel that we're doing a disservice to the citizens of the city. In fact, we're doing them a service because that's going to enable us to do capital improvements and pay the least cost we possibly can for any bonds that we take. And we can continue our capital program every year like we're doing now with that 5% set aside for capital. We don't have to worry about that getting corrupted. And you still are able to function as a community and bring new things into the community make have progressive ideas may have it grow in ways that other people just wanted the chance to do it so in many many ways we're fortunate that we had notice of it the worst case is when you're not notified it hits you mid year and then you've already set your budget you've already hired people now you have to lay off even more people every one person that you know you would have to lay off typically in a fiscal year you have to lay off two in january to get the same cost saving so that's why i mean it's crazy at the sounds more notice we had this was coming the better and it also different than 2009 and 10. the commonwealth got 1.7 billion dollars i believe in federal aid we ourselves got just under 2.5 million dollars a federal grant that will pay for all our COVID expenses that are related to COVID. 2.5 million dollars that we haven't from now until December 30th to put in for um but it's a grant it's a federal grant it'll be audited as a federal grant is audited that's in addition to any FEMA reimbursement so that the harm that COVID has done to our community financially in the sense that cost us money to buy protective gear and all and all that um saying you know all the equipment you need to to make things uh safe um that's being covered by a federal grant that we now have possession of just under two point we didn't have that 2009 attempt we didn't have anything like that the state wasn't getting any money from the federal government then that's another plus in our column so i always looked at the larger parameters and the dynamics behind that some have argued this will not be long in duration and that works to our favor if this is they thought if this is one of those short-term negative events that happens on this this pandemic and we're able to see light of the day at FBF to January or thereafter and what we would not expect to see the same negative deep roots as you would for something that was more driven by uh other factors so hopefully you know things will get better over time but in the interim i want to wake up and feel that we did everything we possibly

▶ 29:29 Robb Stewart: could to protect ourselves thank you mr del russo and thank you mr chair counselor tramitosi

▶ 29:37 Speaker 8: thank you mr chair hello mr delarusso i have some hello counselor how are you sir all right listen

▶ 29:43 John N. Tramontozzi: um 2.5 million is a lot of money for the benefit of the council and the public when did we become aware of available free cash in the amount of 2.5 million dollars it was at the end of october

▶ 29:57 Speaker 3: of 2019 when the department of revenue certified uh free cash i mean the full amount was just under

▶ 30:07 John N. Tramontozzi: five million dollars okay and so uh and that that occurs yearly so in october of 2020 there'll be another uh review of and we may get certified free cash then i fully i fully expect it absolutely i

▶ 30:23 John N. Tramontozzi: believe we're going to get a healthy balance so if if we don't fund these stabilizations stabilization uh accounts with this money where does the money go well if it was not

▶ 30:31 Speaker 3: if it was not reappropriated for another purpose before the end of june it would close out and go

▶ 30:42 John N. Tramontozzi: towards next year's free cash determination well that means it would go towards potentially any um in this year's budget or next year's budget to feel like that's in other words i said i'm sorry

▶ 30:58 John N. Tramontozzi: i didn't see on the question sir can the money be used to fill in any gaps any shortfalls that

▶ 31:04 Speaker 3: we might have in this year's budget there is an order going down before you for over a million dollars to do just that to fill in overtime for police and fire to purchase some police vehicles is this another order coming before the council to do just that on all of them i'm sorry council of trimitosi so you're absolutely right there is another order going down before you that will address the needs of this fiscal year that can be funded from free cash is that in addition to the

▶ 31:31 John N. Tramontozzi: to the 2.5 million or is that it there's 2.5 million that's in addition to the 2.5 million

▶ 31:40 John N. Tramontozzi: so where's that million dollars held it's not health it's um it's the same as with the 2.5

▶ 31:50 John N. Tramontozzi: million dollars it's a city cash right so if we fund this these stabilization accounts does that leave us for a balance of free cash it would leave you with one million twenty nine

▶ 32:10 Speaker 3: thousand nine ninety six one million two hundred ninety nine thousand one million twenty nine

▶ 32:24 John N. Tramontozzi: thousand nine ninety six all right you just tell us is the other post employment benefit opeb stabilization fund what the money's in there what can that be used for um great question

▶ 32:38 Speaker 3: technically if the need be could be used to pay for retiree health insurance that the that the

▶ 32:43 John N. Tramontozzi: city pays for is that the all that comes up would come out of that account only that okay if because

▶ 32:53 Speaker 3: that is designed to address the um liability of health insurance on the community no different then the pension appropriation is designed to address the normal cost the pension system every year also the liability of the pension system so this opeb addresses the the liability of the health insurance on the city and that that's that's what the fund is designed to do so by

▶ 33:16 John N. Tramontozzi: the way if once the money goes into these stabilization accounts they have to be used for the specific purpose of those stabilization accounts and if it's not used you can't take these the money out and put it back into the general fund is that correct right the only one that can

▶ 33:29 Speaker 3: move any money in or out of these funds is the city council right but can we take money out of

▶ 33:41 John N. Tramontozzi: these stabilization accounts and put it back into the general funds no okay that's the stabilization

▶ 33:48 Speaker 3: trust fund what what is that for would you like to go over the one by one sir i i'll tell you which

▶ 33:51 John N. Tramontozzi: ones i want i know some of them i just want that one what does that one use for that's the we call

▶ 33:56 Speaker 3: that the foundation stabilization fund that's the very first one that we established way back in early 90s that is like the um i'll call it the brick and mortar of the building that's the one

▶ 34:11 Speaker 3: that we um always uh look towards to being able to sustain the fiscal stability of the community that we have the most merit in um because that is the one that uh we count on the most all right

▶ 34:26 John N. Tramontozzi: so it's sort of a potpourri whatever you need it comes from that account if you need something for

▶ 34:32 Speaker 3: the um yeah god forbid should we have to to um utilize that that fund it would principally

▶ 34:41 Speaker 3: probably be for operating needs at some point but i can't see it for capital that's why we have a

▶ 34:49 John N. Tramontozzi: capital stabilization fund okay that that's one of the other ones all right that's for

▶ 34:58 John N. Tramontozzi: that's for capital investments so the other one by the way this that's a special ed stabilization account I did we did get a memo from the superintendent of schools the memo stated May 28 2020 that should be part of the M2 I think it's in there not we'll put it in there yeah I had that

▶ 35:21 John N. Tramontozzi: So, I think, is it fair to say that this is because of unanticipated that might occur because of the COVID memo, that's what she says in the memo.

▶ 35:40 Speaker 3: It's the special ed reserve fund is set up in the event that they incur essentially extraordinary costs in special education as they as we saw this past year if you recall she

▶ 35:56 Speaker 7: didn't come to the council for the 450 000 and she indicated on her april 9th

▶ 36:06 Speaker 3: letter april 9 2020 she said that um the unanticipated costs associated with the two residential placements is an additional five hundred and fifty three

▶ 36:14 John N. Tramontozzi: thousand excuse me excuse me mr de la rosa i'm aware of that but what i want specifically she says this is unanticipated due to the extended closure the district anticipates additional cost because because of the COVID-19 pandemic the traumatic impact of the shutdown and the stress it's going to have on the kids because of this shutdown so funds will be used for that come out of here for that purpose right if it's special ed related yes only

▶ 36:44 John N. Tramontozzi: a special letter across the board in this the schools it's whatever the special ed when you

▶ 36:48 Speaker 3: set the fund up if you look at the purpose for which the phone was established you can fix those

▶ 36:58 John N. Tramontozzi: guidelines it could be used for that purpose well i mean we are you said and i know from the cares act we're getting we have now in our possession 2.5 million dollars but that money can only be used for covid related expenses it can't be used to replace lost revenues or fill gaps in the budget so why couldn't we use some of that funds to fund the special education account because it

▶ 37:24 Speaker 6: relates to covid i wish it was that easy if it if it in fact if the event the way that the um

▶ 37:31 Speaker 3: framework is designed if in fact the expenditure is a result of the covid 19 pandemic In other words, if you would not have had that expenditure, had it not been because of the COVID-19 pandemic, what it's done to your department, for example, then that would

▶ 37:51 Speaker 3: qualify for it. So every item has to be looked at in the context of, was this expenditure just because we had a COVID-19 pandemic, yes or no?

▶ 38:08 Speaker 8: all right thank you that's a good question but because it test it's going

▶ 38:11 Speaker 3: to be audited all the expenses that are submitted by every community it's going to have an audit done on it so they can submit it and if it qualifies and they and they said this is okay then obviously they'll cover the cost so in

▶ 38:29 Speaker 7: every community John let it said everybody has the different needs they

▶ 38:33 Speaker 3: have the COVID-19 has placed them in different dilemmas so I think you're going to see a lot of different requests submitted from different communities for

▶ 38:47 John N. Tramontozzi: these funds and for different purposes well I guess all I'm just trying to say is that if we fund these stabilization accounts with this free cash expenses that come up during the fiscal year that a COVID specifically related I support any any funds from these stabilization accounts to pay for it because we have this extra money

▶ 39:11 Speaker 3: that come is coming in from the cares act to fund it yeah so what happens is that we if we spend what happens technically is you spend in a deficit position okay then you submit it and then you'll get your money let's assume it's 100 qualifies so you say you spend a thousand dollars on cleaning supplies because of COVID and you have the invoice, you submit that regarding the $2.5 million and you said it and if it qualifies then you get the thousand dollars back.

▶ 39:41 Speaker 3: That they cover that cost but you do have to keep an audit. You do have to keep, I would consider detailed records to clearly demonstrate and articulate that this is COVID-19 related. they have not indicated what would happen for example at the end of the time frame you um you do not you know use all your funds up the probability is that generally it may go back to the state for and be distributed in a different way to others who we're not sure they don't know either it's brand new to them but i mean um it's just up to us to be sure that uh whatever we can

▶ 40:24 John N. Tramontozzi: identify is over to 19 related as you indicated we can reimburse okay one final question i'll defer it to some counselors the contract stabilization fund right doesn't that send they the wrong message the city administration message if we're trying to keep union contracts at bay doesn't that send a a bad message to the unions that hey we got money we can uh fund uh your uh your demands for increase in uh the contractual salaries if we don't have the funds available we just simply tell them we can't do it we negotiate and uh and and stick to prior years contractual obligations

▶ 41:11 Speaker 3: right isn't that the message no i don't not at all it's just the opposite in my opinion and i tell you why i first came here in 2004 came back we owe for retro pay retroactive it was approximately nine hundred thousand dollars if i recall that we owed for collective bargaining agreements there was no provision to pay it so from my perspective and for the perspective of a wise strategic move having funds available we can each union knows these are not dedicated to them they could be non-union union fire police whatever case may be it's not no specific union has earmarks on this it does provide the city with the opportunity to say if in fact we do settle a contract because the investment campaign is very aggressive i will say that for collective bargaining we do settle a contract and if it's retroactive which we have and you'll see right now the fire contract is is open what you see in the fire budget is strictly the steps not the cost of the contract as well as the library when those contracts settled it might john they they may not settle for six months a year it could be two years we've had contracts go out literally two and a half years then you have a massive retro obligation how do you fund it good question particularly

▶ 42:35 John N. Tramontozzi: send the unions back to negotiation and you don't fund them you have we can ask them say no you're not going to fund it but i think it just sends a bad bad message to the unions uh in their negotiations if you get the money that you're going to end up paying for it and that's what the the the mediators in my experience will see and they'll accept that oh you've got the city has the funds to pay the union let's give it to them and that's what you're doing but i understand your position and i respect it thank you and likewise thank you council great question mr

▶ 43:12 Jen Grigoraitis: chairman president Grigoraitis thank you chairman snell and thank you mr delaruso for being here this evening i just had two quick questions and the first is on the contract stabilization fund does that fund only cover contracts on the city side or that would that also cover our contracts

▶ 43:33 Jen Grigoraitis: with mea technically it could be any contractual purpose okay thank you and then just to clarify the um osha stabilization fund which i'm happy to see that we're putting money in there given the intense scrutiny around osha and i believe nationwide there's an expectation of increased claims because of COVID-19. If the city were ever, that fund is really preventative, right? Equipment training to make sure we're in compliance with OSHA. And if we were to be found in violation, a payment would come out of the Suits and Claims Fund.

▶ 44:04 Speaker 3: I envision that. One of the things that, I'm so glad you brought that up. One of the issues that you have is sometimes when you enter a new world of regulations and and guidelines there's a lot of uncertainty as to what you as a department or a community required to implement in in time frame so by having this ocean fund this will give us seed money to address programs that the fire department for example has that he wants to implement during the year and then as we lead up to fiscal 22 we may end up um budgeting certain money within department themselves once there's an established training program and not have to access this fund but i think for my position this fund should be liquid it should be there all the time and i don't think a hundred thousand is unreasonable because at any point in time um we may end up mid-year or you know at a point in time we don't have the funds in department for example they need to do something or act on something we need your place to go that's a perfect place to go it requires the City Council approval but to move a dime thank you happy move

▶ 45:23 Jeff McNaught: without your approval absolutely I'm gonna yield my time on stabilization

▶ 45:31 Jack Eccles: thank you thank you mr. Del Rosario for being here I just like to go back to it so we were speaking with with councillor Stewart you'd kind of spoken a little bit about how once you take money out of a stabilization fund it won't hurt your bond rating so long as you have a plan to replenish it so that just kind of had come to the thought in my head of so if we're if we're drawing in the stabilization funds isn't it more than likely that we won't have a lot of free cash left over at the end of the year to replenish them like I guess my question is where does the plan to replenish them come if we are continuously drawing down on them and end up having a net decrease these two parts of that question a great question one

▶ 46:18 Speaker 3: is what for what purpose are you drawing down the funds if you're drawing down let's talk about the capital fund to buy capital equipment like we used for the pumper um that's standalone um that's not

▶ 46:36 Speaker 3: um something that we're using for general operations per se if we were gonna if you were to tell me geez patrick let's use 500 000 of the regular stabilization fund uh to run the sister's department to run it for the rest of the year because there's you know we have a revenue shuffle whatever case may be then at that point i would say well if you're going to use it for operations these that's different that's a whole different scenario then obviously we try to

▶ 47:09 Speaker 3: restore that as urgently and as quickly as we can um the extent to which we draw out will be determine the extent to which we can pay it back if it's a short draw then i would anticipate a short time frame to pay it back structurally every year we set ourselves up so that we do have the billable funds in the fall outside of an extraordinary circumstance so i'm less concerned that we wouldn't have funds available that would be the only concern i would have is um how much we grew down and what duration would it take to pay it back that's reasonable is it two or three your payback and i think all that all that the rating agencies are looking at typically that you have a plan if you're not looking just to um you know take the money and run kind of thing and not pay attention to what you need to pay attention to that if you're going to use it you should have certain percent five percent should be your target that you have out there protecting there's a question five percent of your budget if you move away from that and you don't replenish it then you're not being reasonable or prudent in their eyes and then they start to get concerned why what would cause you to do that why is your community not you know being responsible and that is never a good thing because as you know it takes a long time to get your bond rating upgrade it could be five years and in the event that you get downgraded it takes years to restore confidence and these same agencies that thought to a triple a plus you know last week takes years to restore confidence that hey what we've back on track we're doing the right things again they want to see it year after year after year so it's one of those things where it's difficult to get there when you get there you want to stay there and knowing that the opposite is true as well so

▶ 49:13 Shawn M. MacMaster: Thank you. That's a great question. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good evening, Mr. Del Rosso. Good evening, Council. Thank you for being here. The first question I have is I just want to be clear on what Council Chairman Tozzi asked. We are able, if I understand it correctly, to carry free cash over from year to year. Is that right? No. We can't carry. So we're unable to?

▶ 49:36 Speaker 3: no okay if you can't carry foot what will happen is technically um if you don't use it by june 30th it closes out to the to the general fund at the end of the year it closes out until the state comes back and recertifies or certifies let me take the recertify back and certifies your free cash in the fall you start all over again they look at the whole picture again all the funds that are turned back, all the liabilities and charges against the certification, if there's any outstanding POs, whatever the case may be, you start over again. And then they come up with a new figure based on the new numbers as a result of year-end operations. But we don't lose the

▶ 50:18 Shawn M. MacMaster: money, correct? It can be recertified again in the fall. It just goes into limbo for a period

▶ 50:25 Speaker 3: of time. Is that right? What happens is you close it out, right? It gets recertified. But the thing is that you're never you're never guaranteed let me use that word but you get dollar for dollar okay because there may be more charges against next year's precast certification than you had this year you may not get dollar for dollar but it does close out the law requires us to close it out it's not something you can like these funds here these stabilization funds they don't close out they carry year to year to year that's the difference these things never close out on June 30th in the air literally year after year after year

▶ 50:59 Shawn M. MacMaster: And again, just so I understand this, we cannot, as a city council lawfully transfer money out of a stabilization account. Once we approve money going in. We cannot transfer it somewhere else. We can only. Allocated for specific purposes within the spirit of the stabilization fund. Is that correct?

▶ 51:19 Speaker 3: Yeah, for example, if correct, if we came out and asked you for a 100,000 dollars in the capital fund to buy some equipment for the fight apartment. You would have to approve that from the capital stabilization fund, for example, but it requires your approval. And that's what we would do and he said, no, then it wouldn't happen.

▶ 51:41 Shawn M. MacMaster: I certainly understand the need to put money into our various stabilization funds in light of the current state of the economy and the projected. Revenue loss 1 of the concerns that I do have, though, is just not. potentially having enough money on hand in the future for essential city services especially if we are dealing with the pandemic again in the fall and i do appreciate the establishment of the uh yosha fund because i think that can that can be very helpful um as a word counselor though i i'm also mindful that this is the time of year where uh free cash is usually used for board specific projects um you know in collaboration with the mayor's office so just understand that this is not going to allow any money for those types of projects those ward specific projects because it's bringing the balance of free cash down to zero um if you pass this 2.5 it does not bring

▶ 52:43 Speaker 3: it to zero a million twenty nine thousand nine ninety six thank you so i think council i think

▶ 52:53 Speaker 3: you will see some um i'll just use for example trees and and traffic calming infrastructure cemetery projects etc those sidewalks i think you'll see them both time initiatives coming down councillor so i i think your question is perfect well grounded but there was after this was done there was over a million dollars left for certain types of project etc that with initiatives that i think you would might be speaking to so if that's all how to make has all of that been

▶ 53:25 Shawn M. MacMaster: earmarked yes so there's it's already been decided where that money is going to be spent

▶ 53:30 Speaker 3: The mayor has already allocated the money. What he believes is the good allocation. Based on all the information, he has some public works, et cetera.

▶ 53:39 Shawn M. MacMaster: Okay. Just moving on, I just have a couple more questions. Did we put any money into any of the stabilization funds in 2008 at the time of the recession or in the two subsequent years where we were still feeling the impact of the recession?

▶ 53:55 Speaker 3: My understanding is yes. I can double check that for you.

▶ 53:59 Shawn M. MacMaster: That would be helpful because I'd be interested in knowing if we didn't, how, if at all, that affected our bond rating. And I would presume that it hasn't because we've, as you've said, a very good bond rating and in large part due to your management of finances.

▶ 54:16 Speaker 3: Thank you. But collectively, it's really, it's the council, it's the aldermen, and all those years of prudent planning and discussion like we're having this evening. that collectively what is the best route for us to take and that all came together the bottom rating was actually increased in fiscal year 2013 from a double a minus to a double a plus so after that recession after those initiatives that we had to take to close the gap um we were able to get an upgrade to double a plus that we've had to this day to this day and with respect to

▶ 54:47 Shawn M. MacMaster: the educational stabilization fund we anticipate uh the circuit breaker um that's not seeing the same um money from the state as we have in prior years that i can't answer that i would have to

▶ 55:01 Speaker 3: defer to the superintendent i just don't have that answer counselor okay and um when was the last

▶ 55:07 Shawn M. MacMaster: time mr delarusso that we've had to tap into the contract stabilization fund looks like the balance from your your memo and thank you for that memo by the way is 920 000 when have we ever want to go back into that or when when have we gone into that most recently most recently um most recently

▶ 55:30 Speaker 3: i will go back i'm trying to think if it's uh one or two fiscal years ago let me find that

▶ 55:40 Shawn M. MacMaster: up you know send it off to you and my final thank you my final question mr doloruso is how did how did we arrive at the numbers before us um you know we have we have 100 000 going into a few we have i believe a million going into another what was used to to base uh a decision on how much for each stabilization fund i would assume i would assume that the balance is one factor but how did we arrive at those numbers yeah great great question the first one the foundation

▶ 56:10 Speaker 3: stabilization fund um typically what we try to do you know objective is that we want that to be five percent of the operating budget every year right now the way we stand we're less than less than

▶ 56:27 Speaker 3: that um we also use free cash plus the stabilization fund to meet our five percent and s p is fine with that but ideally you want your foundation stabilization fund to be five percent of your operating budget and grow a little bit every year as your budget goes up so that's what we're trying to reach that goal second one the contract fund um i i do know that we try to keep pace with what we've seen in the past we've had contracts i think i've isolated number two that we've had to pay with this retro alone it's like some 600 650 000 between the retro and the active cost

▶ 57:06 Speaker 3: and these contracts that go two or three years counselor you know candidly five six hundred thousand dollars is nothing and when you have active contracts two two are out right now and then you have the police following etc that the larger groups public works you may be as we are now you're you're negotiating with multiple multiple bargaining units and having said that In order to make a commitment that you're going to be able to meet the obligation you agreed to when you sit down and collect the bargaining, you have to be able to identify in your head saying, geez, as the years go by, we have experienced that this is how much it generally costs just for one union. So, we're saying if we have two or three settled within the same year or two, where are we going to get the money? When you predicate past performance and you look at the fact that salaries go up, Costs go up when you get a change in shift cost. That goes up. The salary you're paying today is not the salary you paid three years ago, and so that also increases the cost of the contract for retro purposes. You're always trying to keep pace with it, whether it's 2% or 3% a year, because those costs go up, no different than other departments. The capital fund, it's always been our target to have between $250,000 and $500,000 at any given time and that allows us counselors to pay for what they call pays you go those those items that you can pay um you know let's talk about a pumper that's something you can pay and you don't have to borrow for you have a truck in public works it might cost 200 sweep up for example 230 000 you want to be able to pay for that an item you can't really borrow for but you want to be able to pay for out of the capital fund and generally as we know that equipment is not inexpensive so between 250 000 and 500 is very reasonable at any time of the year particularly god forbid if something happens we always in the past in particular you would hear that sudden such a truck broke down snow plowing whatever the case may be and they need a new law whatever the case may be it's always that uncertainty so that's a very i think comfortable number for this size community suits and claims i think mississippi and campbell can tell you that in the event that we do have claims and i know that he may have a couple of items that he's concerned about um over time we need a resource to go there and actually fund it outside of i know he has a few dollars in his budget i think it's 10 or 15 000 in general but when you have larger claims or you have deductibles at 25 000 plus you may have to go to the council

▶ 59:56 Speaker 3: for that you need to have something in there that is reasonable other post-employment benefits opeb i mean candidly that i'd love to put three times as much in there as we're putting in however i know it's not practical at this time but opeb plays an enormous an enormous role in our bond rating so the more that we can strive to show that we're serious about funding this obligation which it is then the better it enhances the confidence in the fundraising agencies that were taking it seriously that's why not only we see the 100 000 here that we're requesting but we're also going to keep the we're also requesting the 50 000 for opib in the regular budget because we um indicated to them that we would make it part of a regular recurring item every year in the budget to show that we haven't walked away from our liability or our responsibility number six was the special ed fund because we talked about briefly I think as you heard superintendent those costs are just for a couple of students you know up there four hundred five hundred thousand that's not unreasonable to maintain five hundred thousand I don't know people

▶ 1:01:16 Speaker 3: recall but I believe we set that up we made two distributions back I think it started 2013 or so we put a certain amount in then we add another $155,000 to it so that grew over time that but this was the first time she ever had to access it she's been able to manage without having to use it and that's a wonderful thing but again as we all know if it becomes possible we have that obligation to take care of those those students and the last I think we talked about which I think is real good one I like it's the OSHA at least seeded with hundred thousand that's the training programs for public safety etc that's not unreasonable that you might spend fifteen twenty thousand dollars for a year or whatever but we need something there also for clothing and the like that's a good way to start it and god willing we could fund it as part of the budget next year thank you very much mr de la rusa thank you mr

▶ 1:02:17 Maya Jamaleddine: chairman yes sir thank you for your great questions thank you mr chairman thank you mr de la rusa for being with us tonight um thank you for letting me be here tonight of course it's always our pleasure um um my fellow counselors ask most of the questions i only have one uh question left and um you've mentioned that some of the money that we don't use in free cash um it will be um locked And so, did we carry any of the money from last year to this year, to this fiscal year?

▶ 1:02:53 Speaker 3: No. Nothing. Nothing. Technically, you don't have to. You don't have to expend all your free cash. There's no requirement saying that, that you don't have to appropriate it. But we did not. Last year, we appropriated everything. And this year, depending on council's will, we'll appropriate

▶ 1:03:14 Maya Jamaleddine: all the free cash again okay and can you if we're gonna go back one more year did we have we carried any money from the year before okay so it's been we've been using utilizing all the free cash on a yearly basis every single year yes the

▶ 1:03:36 Speaker 3: and the caveat to that is um and just as a footnote free cash is number one and when it does get certified in the fall, first thing I think of, like I did this year, was setting aside $1,250,000 for snow and ice. That is such an extraordinary item that you just don't know where you're gonna land. And so I think this council has witnessed the fact that we did not come to the council for any significant appropriations till we knew that that liability of snow and ice behind us and after we got through the the winter we were positioned to do something with the funds that you wouldn't attempt to do before then um because you always have to cover your snow and ice cost otherwise otherwise what happens is your bill for the next year but fiscal 21 whatever you didn't cover you'd have to come right off the top of the money for fiscal 21. you lose that because you have to raise that the next year the first item if you don't raise that money in the year it happens you get that liability next year so it hurts you the year after that's why you want to get rid of snow and ice same year it happens you don't want to carry it into the next year it's bad practice and unless you really have to it's um devastating to your budget for next year you're taking away services because of what happened the year before that it snowed i mean that's it's illogical in its own way but that's the truth so can you remind us how much did we

▶ 1:05:17 Speaker 7: have last year and free cash yes can't be cold let me see i should have it let me let me check

▶ 1:05:30 Speaker 3: my mini office here see if i have last year yes 3 million 591 881 and this year we have

▶ 1:05:46 Speaker 3: 2.5 is it true this year you have just under 5 million dollars you have over 49 you have 4,961,081. Okay. Okay. Thank you so much. I'm done. Thank you. Thank you. Great questions.

▶ 1:06:04 Mark Garipay: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. De La Rosa, for being here. I have a question regarding the stabilization trust fund that we're looking to put a million dollars in. What is, to give me I don't have the description of the funds in front of me can that be used at the will of the council if we voted can that go to any and they can transfer it out for any users the restrictions on that no no I mean

▶ 1:06:31 Speaker 3: typically the stabilization if I could be with any lawful purpose lawful

▶ 1:06:39 Speaker 3: purpose which is you know it's wide open and that's why you have it because as we're sitting here tonight god only knows it could be dpw that has an issue public safety you know uh school any lawful purpose and we'll have uh three million in there if this goes

▶ 1:07:03 Speaker 3: through yeah yeah you'll have correct um over three million dollars which is wonderful okay

▶ 1:07:05 Mark Garipay: and to follow up on councilman mcmaster's question regarding 2008 uh and what what funds uh were invested I know we created one of these this year how many of these funds are

▶ 1:07:28 Speaker 3: actually were established in 2008 guys attest to my memory huh yes I know well I know we had the foundation stabilization fund I'm sure we had the contract stabilization time capital stabilization plan I have to check on out but Susan claims it was probably newer other post benefits stabilization

▶ 1:07:50 Speaker 3: fund what we didn't have then we have now special ed stabilization fund I believe was 2013 OSHA is new right now so it's a little bit of a mix but the objective is always risk aversion and I think that's the word of the day is the more you can protect yourself as a community between the risk of contract settling the risk of suits and claims the risk of special education the risk of capital on and on you're telling the outside world which is what matters to us that we have it we have provisions and for multiple events that can occur we have resources to address it and we're not a back is not against the wall we don't have to cut services in order to make to make this payment we don't have to go out and do anything exotic we protected ourselves and I think that's more than over even again this is honestly for me it's it's emotional because this is store I've never encountered such a large deposit on my

▶ 1:08:58 Mark Garipay: entire career when I look at the process I look at the looking at this budget process has it's kind of really a two-year budget i i think 22 personally is going to be a lot worse than we are at 21 and we do have time in 21 to manage the budget properly unfortunately if things get worse we're not going to want to go that way but there there will be tough decisions and we can manage that budget we left time to where in 2022 we won't won't have that so um I'm going to support this free cash appropriation.

▶ 1:09:35 Speaker 3: Thank you, sir.

▶ 1:09:36 Christopher Cinella: Anybody else for the first time? Councilor Stewart for the second time.

▶ 1:09:43 Robb Stewart: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Deller, thank you for all of your clear explanation of this is well received and appreciated. I just, I have one clarifying question for you. Yeah, so the calculation of 5%, what is being used in the numerator?

▶ 1:10:04 Speaker 3: what's the top line number you say in this case it would be the eight say the fiscal 21 budget

▶ 1:10:10 Robb Stewart: would be five percent of the 88 million right right and what's so what's being used so the

▶ 1:10:16 Speaker 3: foundation stabilization fund plus the free cash that that right to come up with i think our number now is approximately 8.05 percent because we're using the fiscal 20 budget plus the free cash that's always a year behind but so we have met that five percent threshold because we're combined with funds ideally ideally you'd like to do it just based on your stabilization fund itself because you're not assured of free cash every year you have certainty with your stabilization fund because you as a council and as a community you you actually dictate how much you put in there and how much you'll retain there you don't have you don't have the same control as to what free cash will be certified at it free cash can come in zero it can come in negative i've been there both times you don't control that you only control your stabilization fund department of revenue controls the cash so the way you can't control you want to control you want to make that the five percent target you don't have to count on some something else that may happen to make you reach that five percent and that's why it's telling all right and and so we use the the

▶ 1:11:21 Robb Stewart: pre-distribution free cash number so that 4.9 million in combination with what's currently in the stabilization which is the 2 million so it's the the 6.9 over 88 is how you get to the 8 okay and then you distribute and then uh we get free cash the following year and we're going to rely on the foundation stabilization fund plus whatever is in free cash the following year

▶ 1:11:48 Speaker 3: which to re-certify it's always a year behind okay all right that's my life all right i just

▶ 1:11:55 Speaker 7: want to make sure i just haven't looked a year behind counselor it's just the way it is all right

▶ 1:12:00 Speaker 3: thank you mr delver so thank you anytime great questions i like your questions they're great

▶ 1:12:05 Speaker 4: thank you i wish you could divide i'm sorry for the second time i'm mute i'm sorry i'm

▶ 1:12:14 John N. Tramontozzi: you sorry i'll defer to council mcmaster i think he had a question council mcmaster thank you mr

▶ 1:12:18 Shawn M. MacMaster: chairman thank you council chairman tozy mr chairman i was just going to make a motion at this time to divide the questions so we can vote on each one of the funds separately i'll second

▶ 1:12:34 Shawn M. MacMaster: that motion i think that's uh that's appropriate a motion to divide you just repeat that state the motion to provide the question so we could vote on each one of the the stabilization funds individually and if that uh is uh approved by the council just ask is that each number in the actual corresponding fund would be read into the record so we're clear exactly uh on each one that would

▶ 1:13:00 Christopher Cinella: be voting on thank you mr chairman seconded by council trying to chose me clark great actually

▶ 1:13:10 Leila Migliorelli: jim Migliorelli we have a question through through the chair um could i have some clarity on why we're separating the orders just for the benefit of the council yes through the chair we have we

▶ 1:13:21 Shawn M. MacMaster: have seven stabilization funds in front of us it shouldn't be up or down some counselors may be inclined to vote all the way you know for the seven some may vote the seven down some counselors may vote on some uh not others so i don't think it's an up or down vote

▶ 1:13:42 Christopher Cinella: thank you mr chairman on discussion actually i don't know if anybody else has anything that none Adam Clark vice-chair Migliorelli yes councilor Tramontozzi yes councilor McMaster

▶ 1:13:53 Speaker 1: Yes. Councilor McNaught. Yes. Councilor Esselstyn. Yes.

▶ 1:14:03 Speaker 9: Councilor Garipay.

▶ 1:14:04 Speaker 1: Yes. Councilor Stewart. No. Councilor Thomas.

▶ 1:14:08 Speaker 2: Yes.

▶ 1:14:10 Speaker 1: Councilor Jamaleddine. Yes. President Grigoraitis. Yes. Chairman Cinella. Yes. 1, no, 10, yes. Motion passes to divide the question. Do you want to vote? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

▶ 1:14:34 Christopher Cinella: the question you want to break that down yeah that in front of you I have

▶ 1:14:39 Speaker 1: numbered one through seven but councillor McMaster if you could confirm you want the dollar amounts and the account numbers I just want to make

▶ 1:14:47 Shawn M. MacMaster: sure that when we read the number for I'm sorry through the chair that when we read the I'm not sure how you were planning to read it but I think the actual number for each one of the stabilization funds should also include the corresponding fund so it's not just clear to counselors but it's also clear to the public exactly which one we're voting on at a certain time i'm going to bet the indulgence because my

▶ 1:15:12 Speaker 1: screen is this big i have not the council on here and a bunch of people in the attendee list i don't even have the agenda up i have a paper copy of it i want to hold this in committee until we can

▶ 1:15:22 Christopher Cinella: break it down that way and then or do you have this something that you have i have i have them them in front of me Mr. Chairman want me to read off each one as we as we go or however you however you Mr. Chairman yes if you want to motion make those

▶ 1:15:42 Shawn M. MacMaster: motions so at this time Mr. Chairman I would we're moving to vote on each one individually I just want some clarity on that is that so I would move at this time mr. chairman to vote on eight four zero one four which is the fund I think it's listed as the foundation stabilization fund the amount of one

▶ 1:16:14 Speaker 1: million well vice-chair Migliorelli yes chairman councilor Tremont easy yes

▶ 1:16:26 Speaker 1: McMaster yes McNaught yes that's our Eccles yes that's our Gara pay that's our Stewart yes sir Thomas yes Jamala Dean yes Grigoraitis chairman

▶ 1:16:43 Speaker 1: Cinella so foundation stabilization 84014 passes mr. chairman at this time I

▶ 1:16:50 Shawn M. MacMaster: I would move to, uh, vote on eight four zero eight four special education stabilization fund. And if, uh, for you, Mr. Chairman of council chairman toes, he could help me with the amount. I don't have the amount in front of me for, for these subsequent ones.

▶ 1:17:06 Speaker 8: 500,000 vice-chair.

▶ 1:17:09 Speaker 1: Migliorelli. Yes. The treatment Josie.

▶ 1:17:16 Speaker 8: No.

▶ 1:17:17 Speaker 1: Counselor McMaster.

▶ 1:17:19 Speaker 4: Yes.

▶ 1:17:20 Speaker 1: Counselor McNaught. Yes. Counselor Eccles. Yes. Councilor Garipay? Yes. Councilor Stewart? Yes. Councilor Thomas? Yes. Councilor Jamaleddine? Yes. President Grigoraitis? Yes. Chairman Cinella? Yes. 10 yes, 1 no, 84084, special in the amount of 500,000 passes.

▶ 1:17:52 Jen Grigoraitis: Can I just make a point of order? Can I ask my fellow Councilors, if you're not speaking, to mute your mic. There's some feedback that's coming through.

▶ 1:18:02 Shawn M. MacMaster: you mr chairman at this time i would make a motion that we move to vote on eight four zero five capital

▶ 1:18:13 Speaker 1: stabilization five hundred thousand counselor i'm sorry vice chair Migliorelli yes council

▶ 1:18:26 Speaker 1: Tramontozzi no councilman mcnaught sorry council mcmaster yes councillor mcnaught yes councillor

▶ 1:18:32 Speaker 1: Councilor Eccles? Yes. Councilor Garipay? Yes. Councilor Stewart? Yes. Councilor Thomas? Yes. Councilor Jamaleddine? Yes. President Grigoraitis? Yes. Chairman Sonella? Yes. 10 Yes, 1 No, 84054, Capital Stabilization, 500,000 passes.

▶ 1:18:53 Shawn M. MacMaster: At this time, Mr. Chairman, I would make a motion that we move to vote on 84044, Contract Stabilization.

▶ 1:19:01 John N. Tramontozzi: 200,000. Vice Chair Migliorelli? Yes.

▶ 1:19:04 Speaker 1: Councilor Tramontozzi? No. Councilor McMaster? No. Councilor McNaught? Yes. Councilor Eccles? Yes. Councilor Garipay?

▶ 1:19:12 Speaker 6: No.

▶ 1:19:15 Speaker 1: No. Councilor Kate? No. Councilor Kate? No.

▶ 1:19:19 Speaker 9: Councilor Kate?

▶ 1:19:20 Speaker 1: No. Okay. Yes. Councilor Stewart. No. Councilor Thomas.

▶ 1:19:27 Speaker 2: Yes.

▶ 1:19:29 Speaker 1: Councilor Jamaleddine.

▶ 1:19:32 Speaker 10: Yes.

▶ 1:19:33 Speaker 1: President Grigoraitis. Yes. Chairman Cinella. Yes. Reno, rest yes, 84044, contract stabilization, 200,000 passes.

▶ 1:19:48 Shawn M. MacMaster: Mr. Chairman, at this time I would make a motion we vote on eight four zero six four suits in claims stabilization 100,000

▶ 1:20:01 Speaker 1: vice-chair Migliorelli yes councilor Tramontozzi yes Councilor McMaster yes Councilor McNaught yes Councilor Eccles yes Councilor Garipay yes Yes. Councilor Stewart? Yes. Councilor Thomas? Yes. Councilor Jamaleddine? Yes. President Grigoraitis? Yes. Chairman Cinella? Yes. 11 yes. 84064, suits and claims, 100,000 passes.

▶ 1:20:35 Shawn M. MacMaster: Mr. Chairman, at this time I would make a motion that we vote on 84074, OPEB stabilization.

▶ 1:20:43 John N. Tramontozzi: 100,000.

▶ 1:20:46 Speaker 1: Vice Chair Migliorelli? Yes. Councillor Tramontozzi? No. Councillor McMaster? No. Councillor McNaught? Yes. Councillor Eccles? Yes. Councillor Garipay? Yes. Councillor Stewart? Yes. Councillor Thomas? Yes. Councillor Jamaleddine? Yes. Yes. Chairman Sonella? Yes. 2-0-10-yes. 8-4-0-7-4. Goal peb, 100,000 passes. Chairman, at this time, I would make a motion that we vote on, and I'm sure I have

▶ 1:21:29 Shawn M. MacMaster: the number correct in front of me. I might need some assistance from Council Chairman Tozzi, 8-4-0-9-4. This is the OSHA stabilization.

▶ 1:21:39 Speaker 8: 100,000.

▶ 1:21:52 Jack Eccles: I'm sorry, I thought it would be important to mention just as a before voting. This doesn't currently has a balance of $0 is my understanding. So that a no vote, a no vote would essentially keep this fund any of the things that were by Bruce earlier. So I'll be voting in favor of this.

▶ 1:22:16 Speaker 1: thank you councillor vice Jim Migliorelli yes councillor Tramontozzi yes councillor McMaster yes

▶ 1:22:27 Speaker 1: councillor McNaught yes councillor Eccles yes councillor Garipay yes councillor Stewart yes councillor Thomas yes councillor Jamaleddine yes yes president Grigoraitis yes chairman sanella yes 11 yes 84094 osha and 100 000 stabilization fund

▶ 1:22:59 Speaker 3: passes that's the final one final one thank you very much thank you divided order of 20 times

▶ 1:23:03 John N. Tramontozzi: maybe there's a motion to move the bottom line in that is that in order

▶ 1:23:08 Christopher Cinella: Nope. So number two, 2020-89, we'll get to the budget on the auditor and the stabilization fund. So no, we just voted that in.