[Music] [Music] All right, it's 2 o'clock. The city council will now convene in uh work session uh regarding items for presentation and discussion on issues that may require indepth consideration by the city council. And uh before we get started here today, I think uh it'd be appropriate to just uh ask us to pause and uh uh sometime during this day say a prayer for Jordan Wheatley. Uh he's experienced a really uh terrible accident. Uh he's a person who served on our planning and zoning commissions, on our road bond commissions. Uh is always willing to serve wherever he can our city. uh he needs our prayers at the moment as he's trying to recover uh from an accident. So uh let's uh continue to keep him in our prayers and um we will pick up one other thing is if you haven't seen it and this is for going out of these walls. I know all of you in here probably know about it. We are under a little bit of an um water emergency and uh we're asking all of our citizens to restrict their water use as much as possible while we locate where this problem is. We have not been able to do that. But we've taken a number of steps that have uh helped to stabilize the water pressure on the western side of our town. Um but until we find the source of that problem, we just need to ask our citizens to uh not run their irrigation systems. uh maybe not take a shower uh for the time being, just a day or so till we find it, wash the clothes, just it's not not long term. Uh just do something to help us to make sure that we don't have a a crisis with the water on our west side of our city. So uh uh we'll get through it. We'll figure out what it is and get that uh stabilized. So those are the two things. Um, and now we will pick up where we left off on such a happy note two days ago uh with that final uh announcement uh from our city manager. And uh we're going to try to explain the situation as well as we can that we are facing as far as uh a budget. All of us here, everybody up here is affected by this uh um news that we've received from our appraisal district and uh we've got to figure out how we're going to deal with it. uh each one of us in our own way, how we plan to try to deal with it when it comes to time voting on a budget. But the most important thing in doing that for all of us is knowing what has happened, what's occurred, what the effect of it is on us, on uh the money that we have available to fund our city this uh next year and what we think we need to do. And so we need all the facts and we need those facts as clearly explained as possible uh so that we understand them and so that our citizens understand them as well. Transparency is very important. These kind of things are difficult enough for us to understand. We will try to make them comprehensible to the public as well. And I think uh Jarrett, I saw sort of a preview of what he was going to try to do here today. So I think he's got a good handle on it. Uh but uh Jarrett, I turn it over to you now. >> Thank you, Mayor Council. Appreciate everybody coming back. I'd like to follow up just a bit on the announcement on the water system. um our public, our schools, our entities have responded very well to our request to curtail the outdoor watering. So, we're stabilizing. Um, of course, that includes Wolff since they're part and parcel of our system. If we take an action, they take it the same action. Um, they have done that. All right, jumping into this. Um, also just a few things. We've chewed up quite a bit of time. Uh, quite a few people. Um, what you're going to hear today, this is all based on information that is calculated for us. It's required to be calculated for us by law by ECAD or the love central appraisal district. Um, the chief appraiser has spent over eight hours here since we left Monday night with us. Certainly Joe, Cheryl, um, the mayor got nearly four hours of this yesterday, so he's got a little bit of a head start. council. I'm going to do my best to bring it to the most simple way I can explain it. Please stop and ask any questions. Let me say this upfront. This is a this is largely a paper issue. Okay. The budget that we presented and the rates that we presented with it still match. It's the deltas in here. And the deltas are mathematically calculated, not against actual numbers. I'll try to make more sense of that here in just a moment. Okay. To get where we are today, I need to take you back to where we were one year ago. So, one year ago, August of 2024, city council was working their way through the fiscal year 2025 budget, the budget we're living in right now. We came to you with a number called an adjusted taxable value of 23 billion232 million. That was the base number and your no new revenue rate a year ago was 466749. [Music] That was the framework for all the work that you did as we set budgets. So those were the numbers. Then council ultimately did adopt a tax rate and you set a levy and that levy is the amount of money that you're going to get from your tax rate. Okay. I'm going to try to stay on the maintenance and operations portion because that's really where all of this applies. There's going to be a few other bigger ones that come in, but this is really maintenance and operations. Council, you set the M rate at 357456. And if that's familiar, that's in all the tables you looked at Monday. 357456. You really did do that. And that really did create a levy of just over $83 million. That's an approved number. That's a real number. you actually over the course of this year have collected that in your M. All right. So that's where you sat last year. Let me go forward to where we are now, where we are today. So at each of your places, you have a copy of a 10page worksheet. You're not going to need to refer to it today, but you're welcome to to have it. This is what I meant when I said by statute the appraisal districts have to fill out this worksheet and give it to every taxing entity. The rules, let me say that again, the statute and thus the rules changed two sessions ago to get this spreadsheet where it is before. It's really only been used for two years running just because of how the time works to catch you up. So what happens now is a sequence of changes that are mathematical. They don't change the action you took last year. All right. Reminder, you started at 23 billion 232 in net taxable value. You really did do that. Over the course of any year, for as long as we have had property taxes, adjustments get made to taxable values. Things like somebody first qualifies for a homestead exemption, which really won't apply to us, but applies to schools. You have your various tax freezes, the most common being the senior tax freeze. You have things like agricultural exemptions. That always happens. It's not new. What's different now is in August of 25, everything that happened over the course of 24 gets recalculated mathematically. So they're picking all of those changes up after the fact, which they've always done, but they've always applied it to your new year. That's how everybody gets their credit for those exemptions. Now they're also applying it backwards one year. The net result of that is that mathematically what you did last year is no longer based on 23.232 billion. Rather, it is based on 23.0 billion. It's a $25 million reduction in values that applies both now backwards and forwards. So, it's fully accounted for in the new numbers that we worked on Monday. But now you're going to go backwards and recalculate everything a year ago. And what this is going to do is change your the no new revenue rate that we work against. Okay? So take 205 million out of the values both for the new year because it's already in the number I showed you Monday, but also go back and redo them for what we did 12 months ago. So with 23.0 0 billion being the new base, the after the-act base. They also go back and recalculate what should have been your levy. And I disagree with that because should have been doesn't mean anything. You had a real number in August. Some of these exemptions may have hit in October, November, December, January, etc., etc. They didn't all hit at once. They hit over the course of a year. But regardless with that new value they recalculated also your M maintenance and operations. So your rate when they did that this document this spreadsheet will now tell you that your fiscal year 25 M levy was 81.1 million not the 83 that you voted and ordered and received. So that is a reduction of just right at $1.9 million. That's on paper. You really did receive the 83. I think it's important to know that. So when they did that, your M calculated rate is now that 345378 rather than the 357456 that you adopted. You with with me so far? Because that last line is really the sub the the operative piece. No new revenue is now compared to 81.1 rather than the 83 that you ordered and received. >> We're still together. >> No. >> Thank you for being brave, Mr. Rose and admitting that. >> All right, I'm going to go to the next page unless you want to stop here for questions. >> Please do. Mr. Collins. Oh, Mr. Excuse me, Mr. Gusheen was up. No, Mr. Collins first. >> Okay. Thank you. So, when when we look at no new revenue and and again, this is our second. Uh the first time we did a budget, I didn't know how to find the office. So this makes it a little maybe understand a little bit better, but maybe not. The rate is the last number you get. We really we don't necessarily set a rate. We're looking to set a levy. >> Correct. >> And then the rate is of the levy. That is correct. Backed into it. >> And so what we're saying now is the same. No new revenue is based on the levy or is it based on the rate? >> It's based on a recalculated levy. >> Okay. in the current under the current set of rules because if you take the recalculated le the recalculated values and the levy that recalculated you'll get that new M rate the 345378 and it works but it's going to produce 81 not 83 >> and in and in doing that is there an expectation that but we've gotten the 83 >> that's correct How are we lost? >> So, we haven't lost real money. Essentially, we've lost our room as we need to grow. If we if we need to grow, if we could grow, however, whatever the council votes to do, we've lost room between the no new revenue rate and the cap that would require us to go to the vote. >> Yes. >> Is that >> Yes. >> Clear as much. And I think there's a slide in a moment that may quantify that a little bit. >> And I'm ahead of myself again, but thank you, >> Mr. Gosh. >> So, I'm trying to summarize this to make sure I understand it, but it sounds to me like based on a change in state law, the baseline that we use to calculate the new new revenue rate is retroactively lowered. >> Well said. Well said. What what is the change in state law if you know? >> I'm sorry. >> But what is the change in state law that read leads to that recalculation? >> It was a revision to how we're allowed to set and but not just us, all local taxing jurisdictions and I believe it was in 21. We have that statute printed if anybody would like to have it. And we did lay the statute against the worksheets and the worksheets correct. This this is not LCAD or any other appraisal district. This is the the rule we're under. It is very noticeable this year for for a few factors. One is a very large amount of exemptions that got that got applied. Two, we we didn't bring anything significantly in i.e. annexations. In the prior year, you had a pretty large one. Um remember all annexations are voluntary. It's not us to go get it. They bring it. You're going to have an annexation that'll show up next year when we sit here next August. But this is this will always be compounded when you have a relatively stable value because there's always going to be exemptions. Someone's always going to move into the over 65s. A piece of property that wasn't a exempt going to become a exempt. You're going to have all of that. But Councilman, I really like the way you said that. >> Thank you. And uh I believe from our discussions yesterday uh Mr. Atkinson, you've dealt with this for the past few years, but that difference has never been very large. It's it's didn't really require you to do much of anything uh when you were working on your budget. It's just that this year this $200 million in value loss is >> something we've never faced before, never seen. It's it's the retroactivity that that's what caused it. >> And and we spent quite a bit of time yesterday with Mr. Radloff just trying to figure out where in the world that loss occurred and we still are not sure. >> Uh we've got a better handle on it again this morning. We we can show where the exemptions and stuff. The work in this worksheet's correct. >> Yes. >> Um including I mean we we've tracked it every which way but loose. It's it's correct. It's been confirmed by the outside law firm. It's largely in a pretty incredible amount of exemptions that rolled on over the course of the year, which remember prior to this change in statute, those are picked up for the new year. They're still being picked up for the new year. They're just being mathematically applied against you in the past year. And what that's going to do in almost every case, even if you've got good growth, good numbers, good value increases, your no new revenue is most likely when you reapply it to be just less than what you had the year before. So I'm going to move in and try to try to show that, but again, please please keep stopping me. >> Mr. Collins, you okay? You go. You okay? So understanding in hearing what you're saying if we are faced with and and projections would look like we will have a slow growth here in property taxes uh or or property gains through this next budget. And so this retroactivity is going to continue to occur and in all likelihood while it might not be 1.9 million, we're going to see a reduction >> in that levy amount again next budget session. It's >> highly likely. >> Okay, Dr. Wilson, >> I say so what it appears to me is that our some of our state lawmakers don't know how to do math and we're never properly taught how to balance a checkbook. Um, so essentially no matter what rate we set in the future, if we're down and we even set a no new revenue tax rate, which would essentially in real dollars not be a tax increase, it is going to be presented to the public as a tax increase. >> Yes, >> that's unfortunate. >> I've got that on the next slide. Okay, you have a no a new no new revenue rate. You have a no m rate and remember no new revenue really applies to M. And we've done the math. Their recalculated rate 345378 multiplied by the recalculated value 23.0 zero is going to produce the 81 million, not the 83. Thus, for this year that we're talking about, for the new year, if you adopt the no new revenue rate that is now in front of you, you're $1.9 million less than you were the year before. Or right underneath that, a $1.9 million tax increase. And remember, this is on paper. $1.9 million tax increase will give you the exact same thing you had even though you actually already had it. Okay, I want to be really clear that 83 is real. You really did levy it and collect it. >> Mr. Gene, >> does this affect um the calculation for any of the unused increment calculations? >> It does not for this year. In fact, it never really does. But what I think it's going to cause, and I'm speaking in broad generalities, nobody's made a decision. What I think it's going to cause is a whittling down of the increment for lots of entities. So I said Tuesday when we sat here, I've never seen this before. Not like this. The staff at LCAT has never seen this before. We had a very good article written by KCBD that I thought was a good summation of what we talked about Tuesday evening. So that hit the statewide what we call the clipping services. This morning I got the first email from another city that said, "Hey, you said you've never seen it. Neither have I, but it got us too. And now that the deadlines are coming, I wouldn't be surprised if I don't get a few more of those." So again, if you adopt the new no new revenue rate, you'll have $1.9 million in the general fund, less than you did the year before. If you correct that on paper, that's a $ 1.9 million tax increase. It's the same dollars, still 83 to 83, but it's a tax increase. So, go to the bottom there. The new B voter approval rate without increment is now 471053. The rate that I provided Monday is 479365. And we'll stop there. We derived that rate off of the certified values that we received from ECAD. And when you receive certified values, included therein is a recommended formula that you use to see where are you, are you above, below, are you at no new revenue, voter approval? It gives you all that. Joe and Cheryl and the team when they did this and when all the final numbers came out, they were less than $300,000 spread from the rest of this. It's the hit of the $25 million in value and the recalculation of the rates that puts us here. So the point is that 479365 that we proposed, you have not acted on, it still fully funds the budget. That that that hasn't changed. It's just now instead of that being at your voter approval rate, it's 8/10 of a cent over the voter approval rate. With me? >> And at the bottom it says above the NNR. Do you mean the vote VR? >> I'm sorry. That should be the VR. I will correct that and we'll rescend it. >> My head is somewhat spinning. It's 8/10 of a cent over the voter approval rate >> without the increments. >> Without the increments. >> And does everybody know what we're talking about up here when we talk about increments? Unused increments. Okay. All right. You've got uh a little over two cents, a little over two full pennies. This represents 8/10 the way it sits right here. >> They're on a three-year roll. So, yes. And and we've expired. Well, I don't believe we've ever used an increment. So, they've always been rolling off since that law changed. The purpose of the increment, the unused increment is what it's called in statute. The purpose of that was good and noble. When you tell an entity, look, here's your collar, but we only want you to use what's appropriate to use. We want good budgeting. So, if you don't use it all, you can carry it over. In the absence of that, it would encourage a lot of entities, well, if that's the cap, let's go to the cap. And and that's not good budgeting. And this council and prior councils have always done good budgeting. You've always carried a very big unused increment. We talk about it. It's a little over two pennies. That's even a little bit backwards. The mayor said that all this is backed into the pennies are also backed into the increments represent a dollar value and they represent the dollar value that was assigned in the year you didn't use it. So they freeze. They don't grow over time. But then they also expire. It's a three-year role. You get a new year, an old year goes. You get a new year, the old year goes. >> And so if a portion of this is used this year. >> Can you turn on your microphone? Miss >> Thank you. >> So if a portion of the increment is used this year, essentially two years from now, that increment won't exist. >> Yes. Because you will not if if the proposal on the on Monday's presentation stays, you will not generate an increment from this year and you will use a prior increment. So yes, that will whittle itself down. So no increment gain this year and we've used prior and so as this progresses year-over-year if we have no property tax increase property valuation increase then our increment will essentially over a short period of time go away and we won't have >> I mean we won't have any leeway. >> Yes. If the same situation or one similar occurs that is correct. Okay, let me talk a little bit about next steps. And I don't have every answer that I had hoped to have for you today. Um, we've now got to go backwards and get some guidance on how to correctly state our calculations and our percentages. So, let me give you an example. The language the council uses when you adopt the budget says this new budget will raise x more than last year's budget. That's already $1.9 million in conflict with what's happening. Contrast that with the public notice that goes out in the newspaper and goes on our website that talks about how you're raising taxes. Since it's a different no new revenue rate, that's going to look dramatically different than the statements you'll make as you adopt a budget. Again, it's a paper difference, but that's what's going to happen. So, we we've got to find some guidance as to how to correctly do that. When I brought the budget forward on Monday, I told you we were at the voter approval rate, which was 3.5% over no new revenue. We're still at the same dollar. No new revenue dropped on paper. So, I'm about 3.77%. I'm just not sure that's going to actually be the number that we use yet. I hope it is, but I'm not telling you today that that's a number we can be comfortable with. Just telling you mathematically that's what it is. Okay. So, we're going to work on that. We are required to file the budget with the city secretary by tomorrow. And we're prepared to do that. May have actually already done it. Do you already have it, Courtney? Okay. Well, it's ready. I've already signed it. Um, I'm going to file that budget as that budget is proposed. That is what I made public. So, I feel that that's what I need to file. that obligates you to absolutely nothing on any of those numbers within. But I got to file it to stay on the budget adoption calendar that you're on this year. We have to ask you to propose a maximum tax rate Tuesday, this coming Tuesday. That's not adoption. That is just that here's our ceiling. We're not going to go above this rate. You could go below this rate. And in fact, most years you have, but we've got to set that marker and that's going to start driving all the publications. So, we got a lot to do between here and Tuesday. I do want input, any and all input that you have. I don't expect it today. This is a giant load to drop and and I understand that. Um, but just know that my door is open. So, any thoughts, comments, suggestions. I will say this, when we do this next year, I want to delay your budget workshops until after this has been provided, which means the earliest you would do budget workshops is the second week of August, which will also push your adoption. Right now, in fact, the whole time I've been back in love, you've adopted the budget at the first regular meeting in September. This is going to push that back by the same amount of time. I don't think it'll be an additional special meeting. I think special meeting will just be on the back side rather than the front side. So my next one is going to be sales tax. So mayor, I'd like to stop here and whatever questions I have not answered, I will try to do so. So the um maximum tax rate that we will be proposing next week will be the tax rate that would be set to meet the budget you have proposed. Is that correct? >> I expect that that will be what I ask you to do. What you ultimately do is the council's choice. >> Okay. But there will be a number. >> Yes. >> And that will match your budget. >> Yes. >> And unless any of us have any ideas about going beyond your budget and spending more, >> that's probably the number we will go with. >> Yes. You you will decide that Tuesday on the DAS. >> And all that means is we will not go above it. We're not adopting a tax rate. We're not even adopting a budget. We're just saying for purposes of transparency and public expectation, it will not exceed this. >> Yes. >> Okay. Mr. Gosh, >> you my initial thought on the the language that we need to use and and the public notices and and the publications that go about this is that it's probably best to follow the statutory increase describing this as or the statutory language describing this as a as a tax increase. >> It it will be. Yes. and and same with the other public notifications that that we send out on the subject because you the exemptions are going to have the effect of shifting the property tax burden between different classes of property and so I think you're going to see some property owners are going to be paying more um even though the city is not going to be collecting more revenue. So probably just for the sake of consistency and to heir on the side of informing people about the consequences of the decision, best to describe it as a tax increase to totally agree and I'm more certain on that one than on your budget adoption language because it says the revenue you received and that's going to be different than what's in the tax notices. I think we will have a lot of explaining to do. >> Mr. Rose, >> thank you, Mayor. Uh, just so I can get this straight, can can we go off of just straight dollars that we're So, um, we collected 83 last or this year. We we set it at 83 this year, right? What what are we what are you proposing to us this year in terms of dollars? >> It's um I'll have to go back and look at that. It's 83 plus the 3 and 1/2%. And I believe, please don't hold me to this. That's roughly 3 and a half million. >> So maybe 86 and a half >> something. I will have that number by Tuesday for sure. >> I had that sheet, but I don't know what I did. >> Yeah. And hang on. 85.9. Tim's doing math up here on the DIS. >> Better. Be careful. >> Yeah. And that one's not quite as easy as simple math because you have to put in the value of your frozen levies and exemptions and then take them back out. We will have the number Tuesday. >> Okay. >> If if you look in the in the actual budget document, it's going to say 88.1. >> Yeah. I'm just trying >> all generated off of this. If we can get down to just strictly dollars and get out of this confused just just so we know, you know, how much more of a tax increase in terms of dollars it is, >> okay, >> that we're bringing in. >> Give me just a moment. >> It's still going to be very close to that $31 for the average home. Remember, what you're going to get in the new year with the new budget isn't different. It's what you're comparing it to that's different. >> Right. >> And that that's where the whole thing goes off the rails. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Mr. Collins, >> having uh with you guys having done this for many many years, do you is there anything that might help you to understand or project what 2627 looks like? >> We talked with Mr. Radloff about that. This is a killer for this to come up after certified are done and the budgets are done. Um he's committed that month by month they will give us a running tally of what they expect. So it's not what was on the roll at August of 25, but what they think it's going to change by. That'll get me closer. It's not going to get me there though until this comes out because this is where the recalculation of the rates occurs. It'll help. It's not going to give I will not be able to have the answer without this worksheet being completed. >> But I think that we're fairly comfortable in projecting and and we've said this earlier in the in the week. We're fairly comfortable in projecting that uh new property value is not going to grow uh the way we've seen it in the past. It should be very similar that we have this year. There's no indication that sales tax is going to increase. Uh there's hope. There's but there's really no nothing that tells us that we're going to go back to 6% sales tax increase like we've had um the last four or five years prior to this one. And so every indication would be that our budget or our revenue stream for 2627 is going to be flat. >> It can be pretty close to it. It may go up slightly. You'll have one annexation that'll hit the rolls that'll carry a value. But what you net out of that value will be based on what ultimately got subtracted mid year. Okay. >> All right. Now you want to go on to the next bit of good news. >> Not really. >> All right. >> So here's just another way of I'm sorry we we flipped backwards. Here's sales tax. So, direct your attention to the line that starts with June. So, this came in yesterday, yesterday evening, or at least we got it yesterday evening. It may have come out earlier. We were doing something else. So, your June line, your budgeted collections were 10.0 million. Your actual collections were 8.7. So, budget to actual 1.3 in the negative, 1.3 in the red year-over-year. So actual to actual would be 8.9 versus 8.7. So on an actual basis, it's down about $200,000. June is usually one of your bigger sales tax months. Um and and it was not. So you recalculate the remaining three months in the year. you reset all of that and we predict 100.1 in collections nearly 100.2 versus the budgeted 105.6. So it's still really close to where we are. It's just whittling itself down by 100 or two uh each month. We were a little over a hundred that it whittleled down last month. So August didn't turn the tides just yet. I've still got those remaining three to finish out this fiscal year. We will stay where we are with the changes that we have put into place, the freezes and so forth. Um had already told senior staff last Thursday. Come October 1st, I'm not lifting all of those things. Those will stay in place till we start seeing something change. Obviously, if there's a critical need or a critical position, we'll open that back up, but we'll keep our foot on the brake. I'm still all right at the moment with the 103 million that's in your new budget. Um because I do think it's going to change. I don't think it's going to change in the 6% which is really equal 6 million per year. Any questions about sales tax? Try to always end on a good note and I'm kind of running short today. Mr. Rose. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, so looking at this, not versus the budget, but actual numbers collected last year to this year, do you have the numbers of what we're down? Um, right now you would come >> not versus the budget, but actual numbers, >> actual predicted collections versus actual collections, you'd be $1 million to the good. >> So sales taxes improved 1 million over >> last year. >> Over actual. Yes. >> Okay. >> 100%. >> So about 1% typically in the last four years, you've seen what >> six plus million dollars. 6% increase or so. Okay. >> And we didn't budget for that big of an increase last year anyway, did we? >> No, we did. >> For 6%, did we? >> Five and a half. >> Five and a half. Wow. All right. Other questions, comments, any input for our city manager as he tries to figure out what to do next? Mr. machine. I think this is an appropriate time to re-evaluate budget priorities and and look at some areas that we can reduce spending as the budget is going to represent the collective priorities of this council. And there has there has to be something at the bottom of the priority list that made it under the previous projections that now with facing limited revenue, it's appropriate to drop that off of our spending projections. And it's what you know when businesses and households receive less income than expected, they're going to adjust their spending accordingly. And I think that those are appropriate principles for us to try to guide this budget on. And so, um, if you have recommendations, Mr. Atkinson, for the for the most appropriate areas to reduce spending, uh, I think that we would all be interested in your perspective. >> Certainly. And likewise, whatever y'all would like to consider cuz you're talking now about reducing or eliminating service. So tell me what you want us to evaluate and we will absolutely do that. We're working on the same on our side. But and I I would agree with Mr. Kusheen's comment that if you talk about eliminating services, you need to pick the lowest priority items. and the budget that you have presented to us. Even though we had thought we were going to be going and having a meeting and converted to uh approve this year at least discuss and possibly approve, we don't have and appreciative of our police force and our firemen here in our city for understanding the budget constraints we're working with. We're still attempting to give them a significant I use that word relatively um increase in their pay in this budget because I think we all agree up here that public safety is our top priority. And so I would say that is not where we go to cut. Um uh when we look at a budget uh we have to look and all of us up here may have other priorities or ideas about what priorities under that are but I I believe we all have at some point stated that public safety is our top priority. Um I guess this maybe is not a question you're prepared to answer today, Mr. Atkinson, but uh if you had waited a week and knew these new numbers, would you still presented us with the same budget you presented us with? >> Don't know that I can answer that. It the budget that we presented is very tight >> and and I do see where where you worked hard on that as you go through all those pages and pages of numbers. Um, but this is a, you know, this is a reality. None of us can escape and, uh, the facts are the facts. We don't get to choose our facts. We just get to choose how we respond to them. Uh, and we all will have our own ideas. Mayor Pro Tim. >> Thank you, Mayor. No doubt that when we're talking about trimming, which I know a lot of departments have already made quite a bit of adjustment, um priorities are definitely based on perspective. And I think it's important that if we're going to impact one area, we should impact all areas. I think that is always fair because we need everything that we've put out there. I know that you put a lot of time into that, Jared, that the staff worked very hard to make those cuts, to make those adjustments, but I just think that we need to be very careful because it's, you know, one will impact the other. So, I think that's very important that we're looking across the board if you're going to do make any cuts. That's all I have to say. All right. Any other questions or comments? All right. Don't want to cut the conversation off too early. I know Mr. Atinson would love any input we would be willing to give him. All right. Well, we will see everybody back here on Tuesday. Thank you very much. [Music] [Applause]