I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. you Music you you you you I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. you you you you you I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. you you you you you I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. you you you you you I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. you you you you you I'm going to go to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. you you I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to start with the first one. I'm going to start with the first one. I'm going to start with the first one. I'm going to start with the first one. I'm going to start with the first one. I'm going to start with the first one. I'm going to start with the first one. I'm going to start with the first one. I'm going to start with the first one. Sometimes they don't work. What is it? Check one, two. What is it? Check one, two. Good morning. I'm going to get you a little bit more. I'm going to get you a little bit more. I'm going to get you a little bit more. I'm going to get you a little bit more. I'm going to get you a little bit more. I'm going to get you a little bit more. I'm going to get you a little bit more. I'm going to get you a little bit more. I'm going to get you a little bit more. That's why you need to use these pieces. How old are you? You need to use these pieces. You need to use these pieces. You need to use these pieces. You need to use these pieces. I'll do it. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. Yes. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the the world. I don't think this to the next slide. Thank you. I'm going to go to the board. I'm going to go to the board. I'm going to go to the board. I'm going to go to the board. I'm going to go to the board. I'm going to go to the board. I'm going to go to the board. I'm going to go to the board. I'm going to go to the board. I'm going to go to the board. I'm going to go to the board. I'm going to put my old text back in here. Still a text without a word. Yes, text is coming in. Great. I'm not going to let you go. I'm not going to let you go. I'm not going to let you go. I'm not going to let you go. I'm not going to let you go. I'm not going to let you go. I'm not going to let you go. I'm not going to let you go. I'm not going to let you go. I'm not going to let you go. I'm not going to let you go. So, my name is the Sol of the Sol of the Sol of the Sol of the Sol of the Sol of the Sol of the Sol of the Sol of the I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. or you can see very good to make that space here. I don't know. I just need something about the crowd. You're okay, I'm okay. I'm okay. But yeah, I'm okay. I have a... I have a... I have a... I have a... I have a... I have a... I have a... I have a... I have a... I'm sorry. I think this is a very good question. I think it's a very good question. I think it's a very good question. I think it's a very good question. I think it's a very good question. I think it's a very good question. I think it's a very good question. I think it's a very good question. I think it's a very good question. I think it's a very good question. I think it is something like I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm trying to push it. I'm just trying to keep it working. And then you should remember that when it just brushes whatever, and you right-way can be that it doesn't feel as good as it seems. I'm just I'm not sure. No, I was kidding. You have a demeanor? Yes, sure. Yes, she's a man. Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, she got her head cut. That's why I didn't recognize her. I was kind of like going through and she made a job to me. Yeah, I was getting home. You should be around. I can't afford everything that I didn't want to go up. I call I'm going to go up and write. I'm going to go up and write. I'm going to go up and write. I'm going to go up and write. I'm going to go up and write. I'm going to go to the other side. Very good case. Very next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. Okay. Yeah. I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm sorry. Thank you. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm facing every issue and then we'll have a little bit of a second. I think that's why we're doing it in the pressure. And it's a point. I'm facing a every single and every single and every single I'm going to take a look at the other things. I'm going to take a look at the other things. I'm going to take a look at the other things. I'm going to take a look at the other things. I'm going to take a look at the other things. I'm going to take a look at the other things. I'm going to take a look at the I'm willing to look at these ideas. I don't know that I take the human mind to the side. I'm willing to look at these ideas. I don't know that I take the human mind to the side. I'm willing to look at these ideas. I'm willing to look at these ideas. I don't know that I take you are. I don't know that I think you are. I'm one of the people who's been putting me behind this. I think you're extremely annoying. What do you want to do? I'm still on the street. I don't know if they're going to strip us off. I'm going to do to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm sorry. I think I'll just like know. This is my idea of China. I'm going to put it in my opinion. I'm sure that it's just a simple one. And we're going to solve it. And we're going to put it in my opinion. And we're going to solve it. And we're going to solve it. And we're going to solve it. And we're going to put it in my opinion. And we're going to solve it. And we're going to solve it. And we're going to solve it. Yeah. I'm going to get a mic. Yeah. I know. Yeah. Check on to check on to We're there, they're coming. We're coming. We're coming. We're coming. We're coming. We're coming. We're coming. music you Music you I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. you you you you you I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. you you Thank you. you I'm going to go to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. you you you you I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. you We are ready to get started. It is 2 o'clock on Tuesday, April 15th. I've really got to reach over. All right, we are going to start with a moment of silence. All right, thank you. All right, Thank you. If you are able, please rise for the pledge of allegiance. I want to begin to divide the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, ind with the religious and justice for all. All right, we are going to begin today with public comment time. We have, one person, one whole person signed up to speak and person and we have a couple people online. So Mitch Nason, if you can go to the back and I ask, if I just said your name, you're going to state it again to go to the board. I'm going to ask you to go to the board. I'm going to ask you to go to the board. I'm going to ask you to go to the board. I'm going to ask you to go to the board. I'm going to ask you to go to the board. I in Stafford, I'm a 20 year veteran of your fire department here in Prince William County. Thank you very much for the opportunity to come and address you all. As you've probably noticed, I haven't been here a week in and wake out this entire budget season and that's for good reason. The contract that we were successfully negotiated with you all. This past year really set the table for what's happening in foreign rescue, and I very much appreciate that. So I wanted to take the first 10, 15 seconds to say to the kind executive in your staff, thank you very much. The process has been delightful, and I look forward to continuing that in the future. However, I do come to you here at the end of your budget deliberations on a fairly somber note. I sent you all an email about two weeks ago, and since then I've unfortunately have some updated statistics. And this is dealing with cancer screenings and cancer in your fire department. We've actually had now three confirmed diagnosed cases of cancer in the past three months. We have a one member that has already had a test school removed. One member said to have a tumor the size of an orange removed from his kidney next week. I just talked to a female in our department that has cervical cancer, talked to her this morning. I just heard also later on this morning, we have two more cases that I haven't talked to personally of cancer. This doesn't count multiple cases of skin cancer that were diagnosed at the end of last year and two brain enderisms that I'm aware of. All this is coming out of a study that I know the hospital system is doing, which I'm happy, of course, to have done, but unfortunately that study's not available to all members of the department, both career and volunteer. The study is funded by the General Assembly to screen 800 firefighters in the Old Virginia, so it's not just ourselves, but loud and Fairfax, Arlington, Alex, M.W.A. And so you can imagine how quickly that's going to be overrun. It's also only for folks 35 years of age and older with 10 years of service. These early detection screenings that the study is actually looking into to figure out which one is the best type of way to find these sorts of cancers and other issues, has proven itself to be an incredibly powerful tool. And I think the point that I want to drive home with you all, is not just an emotional one, but also a financial one. A lot of these cancer cases are covered under what's called our presumptive law in the state of Virginia. And so they're going to be workers' comp cases. I'll use the testicular cancer cases as an example. While my brother already has had his testicle removed, he just was told last week that he actually had two tumors and he's going to need to go back probably about every other month for the next five years. Testicular cancer is covered under the state presumptive laws and for that reason this is going to be a workers' comp claim in Prince William County. And so finding these cancers early when they're stage one, not only is the best thing for the individual member, but it's also I believe a financially prudent thing to do for the county. So I'd ask you all to consider looking to find out whether or not we can allocate quite frankly 150 to $200,000 a year. That would allow us to screen all members of Fire and Rescue career and volunteer on a rotating two to three-year basis, one for the betterment of the actual folks serving, but two for the financial position of the county. So thank you for your time today. Best luck in your deliberations both today and next week. Thank you so very much. We are now going to go to remote public comment time. I believe we have two people. We do, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, everyone. Shall we begin, please? We have no speakers on this time. Well, Madam Chair, thank you so much for your support. Madam Chair, back to you. All right, thank you so very much. We are going to go to agenda item number four and that is county executive time, Mr. Shorter. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, members of the board. Just two directors that I want to quickly highlight that were issued last week. The first researching and reviewing best practices and existing legal authority regarding micro grids, onsite power, backup generation and other onsite power generation uses. And the directive asks that we come back to the board with staffs, analysis and recommendations. This directive was assigned to me, the county and the county attorney's office as well as our office of planning. The second directive was to identify funding for additional noise testing and technical assistance associated with refining the draft noise ordinance. And that directive was assigned to the Office of Management and Budget and will be resolved next week as part of the budget adoption. There were no other directors issued and no other directors closed. Also wanted to make note, in some of you attended the career expo this weekend, over 1100 attendees. Certainly a signal to the need in our community. Just wanted to really thank and appreciate our HR department for all the work that they did. Sarah Henry for the work that she did coordinating some of the federal resources that were there supporting those workers that have been impacted. And all the other agencies that came out to hire, to interview and to do on-site reviews. So just big, big thank you to Prince William County and the County Departments. And with that, Madam Chair, want to now introduce Amy. Oh, sorry, we have a couple questions for you, but thank you. I have supervisor Franklin, the Vega. Yeah, thank you for highlighting the career fair. I know several people now in need who are ripped from the federal government. Obviously, I think all of us sent out the information over newsletters and social media. And I did hear there were thousands of people there and that it was a pretty good turnout. Are we planning to do another for those that may have missed it or one feedback, even though it was a great event, was that it was a little overwhelming because of the sheer amount of people that showed up But I'm hoping that we can do something else maybe a little bit later in the year We absolutely plan on continuing to do these you may recall that this is not our first So we have started doing these career expos I don't have a date yet, but I do know for sure HR plans to host another career fair this calendar year. What I'll do maybe next week is come back during County Executive Time and give a specific buff. Where I know we are looking towards. Supervisor Vega. Thank you Madam Chair. Mr. Shorter, do we have any additional data from previous fares in terms of attendance? Just curious. We do. We also have the numbers of those who were interviewed and hired on site. I don't have it with me, so I will also come back with that next week. Thank you. Yeah. All right, thank you. You may proceed. All right. All right. Well, thank you again, Madam Chair. Just want to first thank our Commonwealth Attorney, Amy Ashworth for agreeing to come today with very short notice and want to turn the mic really over to her. All right, good afternoon, Madam Chair and supervisors of the Board of County Supervisors. As you know, I'm Amy Ashworth, the elected Commonwealth Attorney for Prince William County and the cities of Menaces and Menaces Park. I want to thank you for inviting me to come speak about all the good work and what's happening at the Commonwealth Attorney's Office. As you hopefully recall, I was here in April of 2024. I made quite a lengthy presentation as part of a budget work session. And today, what I'm going to do is update you on the information that I previously provided. Of course, if you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer those. All right. So when I appeared before you in April of 2024, we had just received the results of the time study done by the National Center for State Courts. That was a time study done by the Virginia General Assembly. And the result was staffing standards that the compensation board could use to inform the General Assembly of how many prosecutors they need statewide. The compensation board gets this data from the Virginia Supreme Court. They're looking at the number of cases brought by the police departments in each jurisdiction and the type of cases brought. And then they compiled that data and give that information to the General Assembly. So in December of 2023 we had the first results of that time study which indicated Prince William County should have 49 attorneys, 12 paralegals and 25 administrative staff. And I came to you last year, ultimately the board approved us for eight full-time positions. That was four attorneys and four administrative staff. And this year, it's my understanding that the county executive's budget is recommending another eight positions, FTEs, four attorneys and four administrative staff. After you approved that budget last year, the General Assembly then approved their budget which gave the entire state 29 positions for prosecutor's offices. The compensation board awarded those based on need and Prince William was awarded four of those 29 positions. So I came back to the board in October of 2024 and asked you to create those four additional positions. And you did so we were able to fund one additional attorney, three additional administrative staff with that compensation board money. So last year my office saw a total increase of 12 full-time employees that being five attorneys, two paralegals, five administrative staff. And so the question would be, what did we do with those additional positions? Well the first thing we did is added a senior assistant to our special victims unit. That is the unit that handles child and adult physical and sexual assaults. Now we don't often talk about the successes of that unit publicly because very often the The offender is known to the victim, and we always want to keep the privacy of our victim and their victimization private and confidential. But there are two noteworthy cases that I wanted to share with the board, just to highlight this unit that typically goes, there work typically goes unseen. One is the case of Philip Michael Brown. Now the police, Prince William County police, were called by several concerned citizens because there was what appeared to be a very intoxicated teenage girl at a convenience gas station. By the time the police arrived, she was gone and they didn't know she was. What their investigation revealed is that she had been picked up by Philip Michael Brown previously unknown to her. She'd been taken to a parking garage where she was sexually assaulted. He then took her to the bathroom, and while he was waiting for her at the bathroom, her friend, who had become alerted to her friend missing, located her using her cell phone and arrived at the bathroom. Philip Michael Brown pretended to be a helpful stranger, helping out this drunk and intoxicated teenager. Ultimately, this was a very difficult circumstantial case because the victim had very little memory of what had actually transpired. So the police had to pull together a lot of eyewitnesses and video cameras. This case went to jury trial. He was convicted and he was sentenced to serve 70 years. Another noteworthy case from this unit this year was Balmour Ortez Guadardo. Mr. Guadardo was providing illegal substances to teenage girls and when they would take those substances he was sexually assaulting them. He was taking photographs of what he was doing. This case, again, came piecemeal together. But the prosecutors working hand in hand with the police were able to build a strong enough case that he pled guilty to grab to that release. Three counts of rape. Three counts of object sexual penetration, seven counts of distribution of a schedule one or two substance to a minor, and one count of child pornography. There was no agreement as to the sentence, and Judge Irving sentenced him to six life sentences. We also had a deputy in charge of the Special Victims Unit. This deputy, deputy Klein, had been at Prince William County prosecutor since law school for just over 30 years. She recently left our office to go to a neighboring jurisdiction where she could make similar money and have less of a case load. We were very fortunate though that we were able to promenade Stephanie Buck as the new deputy of the special victims unit. And just last week while we were I was preparing this presentation, Stephanie Bich had been invited by the Commonwealth Attorney Services Council to give a presentation on a case that she handled that went to the Virginia Supreme Court and was upheld. And the difficulty of this case was the victim was autistic and the judge, the trial judge, found that she was incompetent to testify. So the victim of the case couldn't testify. Stephanie did not give up. She found her work around for that case, took it to trial, won a conviction, and was giving, this was a picture I took of her presenting it with the detective that she worked that case with. With another position that you gave us last year, we added a senior assistant to our special investigations unit. That unit handles gang, large-scale drug dealing and human trafficking. So it's now staffed with three senior attorneys and one deputy Commonwealth attorney. Again, I wanna sing the praises of that team in a noteworthy case, which involved Commonwealth versus Anthony Perkins. Anthony Perkins is an admitted gang member and he's incarcerated in our detention center on unrelated charges. From the detention center, he ordered two juveniles to commit a murder so that these juveniles could be members of the gang. These two juveniles not only committed one murder, but they committed two murders. Now, we prosecuted and convicted the juveniles of those murders. But our team wanted to go after Anthony Perkins for first degree murder, even though he was nowhere on scene, he was in the jail. Not only were they successful, but he was convicted of two counts of first degree murder, resulting in a 70-year life sentence. With the other attorney positions, we were able to add three attorneys to what we call the line. The line attorneys are less experienced attorneys who handle everything else. And mainly they're working with our patrol officers of the seven police departments that we serve. I think it's notable that two of the three attorneys we hired had been interns in our very robust internship program that this board very generously supports us having. We open that up to both undergrad and law school students. We run a program in the fall, the spring and the summer. And this year we've had over 100 applicants for the 20 positions we have available in the summer. This small increase in the line gave us enough attorneys that we could divide them into three teams that really coincide with our police department's patrol squads. So we have an East team, a central team, and a West team. This provides the police officers and the prosecutors with more consistency. And as they work directly with the same officers, each and every court date. We're just nine months into this arrangement, but it seems to be working well both for our office and for the police department. While I'm here, I want to also share with you some of our other awards and accomplishments. And mainly I want to highlight our violent crimes unit this year. Ladies and gentlemen of the board, we had one senior assistant who handled six murder trials this year. And I can't impress upon you how difficult it is to try six murders in one year. Most attorneys can do one or two, maybe three. These trials were long, they were complex, they were time intensive, the individuals were dangerous and gang related, the witnesses were not always wanting to come to court and testify, and yet this prosecutor convicted all of them. And her dedication to the job and seeking justice for these victims is unmatched, and we are truly grateful for her service. And then again, last week, she put on successfully a five-hour preliminary hearing with nine witnesses in a missing person presumed dead nobody homicide from 15 years ago. These prosecutors don't give up ever. I also want to highlight Deputy Don Goodman, who is now in charge of our juvenile crime unit. Last year at our Spring Institute, he was awarded the DuVal Award, which is a Virginia Association of Commonwealth Attorney Award. It is statewide recognizing his service in the juvenile and domestic relations district court. It was an honor and an accomplishment, and we're very proud of Deputy Don Goodman. But I also want to come here today and update you on some of our needs and challenges that we're facing. The first is the additional staffing needs in the juvenile and domestic relations court. As you recall last year, the General Assembly added an additional judge, which was much needed. The judges wanted to make best use of that, and so they increased the number of court rooms hearing criminal cases from three to five. And so now we have what we were doing before is one court would do motions, one court would do about 20 adult cases, and one court would do about five to 10 juvenile cases each day. We've now switched to two court rooms doing 20 cases every day in adult court, two court rooms doing juvenile cases every day, which is great because the faster we can move cases forward, the more justice prevails. Unfortunately, we only added one attorney to our juvenile unit or our special victims unit, which goes down to JDR. And so we've got this frustration by our judges because our prosecutors are very often in another courtroom. And so you've got some longer wait times for police officers, judges, victims, witnesses and defendants. We've heard from the court that it's frustrating. We've tried to put line attorneys down there, but it's an ongoing struggle. The other important need and challenge that we've addressed for quite some time is attorney burnout and resignations. We are losing really good experienced attorneys to other jurisdictions where their case loads are lower. And at the spring conference last week I met a nice young prosecutor. He introduced himself to me because he said I'm one of her constituents. And I said, then why don't you work for me? And he said, well, you know, I heard about Prince William. And we left it at that. I don't think it's a secret that we have higher needs than some other jurisdictions and I think that's what people are weighing. I do want to say thank you to the board for all that you do for employee wellness. These tools have been incredibly helpful especially over the last couple of weeks And I think it's great that we provide them. You know, our job, I've got my Chief of Staff here today, and one of my deputy Chiefs of Staff. A lot of our job is trying to spot when an attorney is starting to struggle or feeling stressed out. And then the county has great resources available that we can refer them to to help. In one of our last real needs and challenges that we have are what we call discovery. Discovery is the process of getting information about a criminal case to the defense, which sounds really easy, right? You just scan it and send it over. We're talking about things like all of the hours and hours of body-worn camera that the police officers produce, the photographs, witness statements, police reports, cell phone dumps. And the problem is that all of this information has to be reviewed by somebody. We have to redact out any confidential information like dates of birth, social security numbers. You might have people in a state of undress that you need to make sure is properly transmitted. We can't just send it all out. And so what we do is we have a team of four paralegals whose entire job is getting this discovery in from those seven police departments and out to the attorneys. The problem is that our general district court judges have set a deadline of 14 days before trial. It's just an arbitrary deadline that they set. And if we don't meet it, what the judges are doing is just continuing the case. So even if we get it to them 13 days or 12 days in advance, they are still granting automatic continuances, which is frustrating because we have to bring the witnesses in in case the defense doesn't ask for continuance. And if the defense doesn't get what they want, then they ask for the continuance and we have to tell the witnesses to come back. It's frustrating for everybody. And we have leaned on our paralegals. We've offered them. Over time, we have tried to fill in with other administrative staff to cross train and get them to help out. But you've got someone that goes out sick or somebody that's on maternity leave now. We're down a person. And it's just this 14-day deadline has been a challenge. So moving on to what's on the horizon for us. I think there's good news and there's bad news. I'm gonna start off with the bad news so I can end on some good news. As I stood before you last April, I told you that the numbers we were looking at, the figures we were using were going to change, and I was afraid they were going to go up. Well, I was right. In August of 2025, we got those new numbers. So this is where we currently stand. Those new time study numbers came out saying we should have 61 attorneys, 12 paralegals and 25 administrative staff for the work that we were doing in 2024. With if the county executive's recommendation is given to us, we will in July be at 53 attorneys, nine paralegals, 18 administrative staff. So that's that four additional attorneys, four additional administrative staff. That leaves us with a shortage of eight attorneys, three paralegals, seven administrative staff, total of 18 full-time employees. I'm not addressing in this presentation the staffing for victim witness. There are no staffing standards for them, but it would reason that the more cases we have, the more victim witness staff that we're going to have. Again, the new numbers are expected to come out in August, and I expect that Prince William is going to see an increase, because I borrowed this slide from last year's presentation and updated it, as you can see, the criminal case filings are continuing to go up. For fun, I thought about what could we do with those additional positions if all of our dreams came true. I would add those to our juvenile crime unit who has seen an increase in their numbers. I would add to the domestic violence unit, we are woefully understaffed in that unit. I would love to have an attorney in special investigations that I could cross designate with the federal system, the eastern district of the United States in Alexandria, a lot of the gang cases that we see are brought by the task force because they're not just in Prince William County. They're crossing state borders and and county borders and to have an attorney on our staff that's crossed designated with the feds would really allow us to leverage the laws that they have and bring justice to people on that level. I also think we are at the stage where Prince William County's Commonwealth Attorney's Office needs a civil attorney. And I know that sounds strange, but we are all prosecutors. But the code of Virginia puts a lot of duties on the Commonwealth attorney that are civil in nature. Expungements, civil commitments, we have a new ceiling law that's threatening to go into effect in July, I think of, 2020 and FOIA, which is a challenge. And so having an attorney that handles those cases exclusively would be incredibly helpful. What we do right now is we have to spread it among the attorneys. Literally we look at everyone's caseload and we're like, you look like you're not doing enough. Here's a civil case for you to figure out how to do. That's not how we should be operating. I would also add more attorneys to the line. You are increasing the police patrol numbers, as you should, as the data indicates we should. Every time you add more police officers, they bring more cases and we need attorneys to prosecute those. On the paralegal side, the current, whatever comes to us this time is going to go to our discovery team so we can try to meet that 14-day deadline. If we had additional units, I would love to see us be able to put paralegals in those specialized units. Right now, we have, if the staffing standard from the state says it's four to one, four attorneys to every one paralegal, we're currently at 10 to one, 6 to one, and 7 to one in those units. And the paralegal, there is no paralegal for the line attorneys. They do their own motions and stuff like that. And administrative staff is really where we struggle in our low. And adding seven admin staff would just be game changing. We don't have an IT person. We would love to have somebody that can really dig into. We have a case management system that has a lot of features like document preparation and subpoena preparation. I would love to have an IT person really get to know that program and be able to use it in ways that we just simply can't. Witness clerks who, when a case comes in and is set for trial, who review the police report and send out the witness subpoenas. Right now we rely on the police officers to issue those subpoenas. They're not thrilled about it. That's just the way it's always been done. And we haven't agreed to take that on for them. But having a witness clerk that could just generate those subpoenas for witnesses would be phenomenal. I think we're going to have to move to right now we do one grand jury every month. I've talked to the clerk of court. I think eventually we're going to have to expand that and run two grand juries every month. It would be, we don't, right now the person who runs our grand jury also leads our circuit court team. It just would be so much easier to have one person in charge of that. We could have courtroom clerks. There's so many administrative tasks that are done now by attorneys, again, which is part of the complaints we hear when people leave. Having admin to do that stuff would just save a lot of attorney time that could be better spent on those cases. Okay, and now for the good news. So as the governor's budget or the general assembly's budget stands right now, there are 70 positions for Commonwealth Attorney's offices across the state. I think Prince William County is going to see some of those positions come here just I think based on looking at the numbers and the need. The compensation board is the one who decides how to divide up those numbers and we will get that information. It probably sometime in May is what they were telling us last week at the conference. Those would be effective into July. And so if that happens, I will work with our budget people to do what we did last time and see if we can bring that to the board to fund those positions using that state compensation board money. The office renovation, many of you came and visited the office when it was before it was renovated. And you did approve, I think close to three years ago, this full-scale renovation. It is 99% done. It has been such a morale booster for our staff. They are thrilled. We will, of course, have a small open house and invite you all so you can see it. It's very beautiful and very functional and we thank you for that. And I just started talking with the circuit court about bringing a behavioral health docket to Prince William County. This is a Supreme Court of Virginia approved docket. It deals with criminal cases where there's an underlying mental health disorder that results in criminal behavior. These are a lot of what what people call catching release cases. Right? People are arrested for very low level nuisance-like cases. They're taken to jail. They're held for a short period, sometimes just overnight. They're released and guess what? They go right back out, steal something from somewhere else. Get drunk again get, here we go. This cycle is frustrating for the police officers, prosecutors, the jail, the magistrates, the court system, everybody. And so this docket will address that problem in a way that holds them accountable for their criminal behavior, but also provides accesses to services so that we prevent the crimes from happening in the first place. We have seen tremendous success with our drug recovery court, our veterans court. This would just be another really important tool for this county that I think is long overdue. So we're very excited about getting this up and running. Finally, I know I sent you an email last week about the loss of an employee he was here for 30 years as prosecutor. I worked with him when I was a young prosecutor and I happily kept him on when I won the election and took over the office. He headed up our domestic violence unit. Mike was a quiet hero of our office. He was humble kind. He showed up for work every day with his lunch box ready to do battle. He would come into my office. He rarely complained, but when he had something he would come in and say, you know, I love my job, right? He was a mentor, a colleague and friend to many of us and he will be missed. He died unexpectedly tragically March 30th of this year. Again I want to thank you for allowing me to come in and speak to come in and speak with you. My invitation stands to all of you to please come to the courthouse for a day. We will welcome you, we will match you up with one of these prosecutors that I sing the praises of and you can watch them do what they do. And of course my door is always open. Our legal ethics prevent us from publicly commenting on cases while they are pending, which is frustrating for me. But I can always answer questions as much as I can, provide to you. I'm happy to do that if you have or have something happen and many of you have reached out. So with that, Madam Chair, that concludes my remarks. Well, thank you so very much. Thank you for coming, especially on such short notice. And I am sorry for the loss of Mike and your team. That's very hard. And I can tell, you know, when you're speaking that he met a lot in your team. My first question is, how much turnover have you had in your office? Thank you for asking that. So I explained the deputy in special victims that we lost. We also had a deputy chief of staff. Again, he'd been a defense attorney for a number of years. Fantastic prosecutor. We lost him to the feds. I'm kind of secretly hoping that his job gets cut. We lost a line attorney to another jurisdiction. We lost our director of operations. And the frequent, the recitation you hear is, it's the workload, it's the stress. All of these departures, we have a little cake and say goodbye and everyone's in tears. But it is just, there's not much we can do. When we recognize that somebody is having, you know, they're stressed out, it's often myself, my chief of staff, my chief deputy that come in and we take some of their cases. But we're really just passing around this massive problem. Which is the case left. Are you saying about maybe five people the past year? Yes, I think it was four of five. Since January. Okay, then it was less summerright. Yeah. And then in terms of relieving workload and burnout, which positions are most critical between attorneys, administrative staff and paralegals? Because from the sheet he gave, it seems like administrative staff is a huge need. Administrative staff is our biggest need. That's where we're short the most. They work hand in hand, right? You've got, if you don't have enough administrative people, then you've got attorneys that are inputting data from what happened in court today, right? So they take their files, they go to court. Some cases are continued, some are found guilty, some are found, not guilty, some are continued for disposition. So now somebody has to input all of that into the case management system. And that typically will fall to attorneys. Now we get 20 interns in the summer and that's the first thing we train them to do is put input all of this information Yeah, and so last year there was a shift to allowing police officers to handle certain misdemeanors in court Yes, I just want to know how that process is working and you know with the staffing plan that you gave us if we give you additional staff You know right now what's in the budget the additional eight? Will you be able those cases back? Are you going to keep them with the police? So what we did after the last budget cycle, I met with the administrative staff in our office and the attorney said, what can we do? How can we do more with less? What is the next steps? Part of the strain is that each and every case that the police officers bring to us, we were opening a file and attorney was being appointed, which meant we had to do discovery, running records. I then met with the police chiefs for Menasas and Prince William County. We talked about how what we could change that would not be a horrible impact on them. We then met with the magistrates and the chief judge in general district court. So we've always had what was known as a traffic docket, right? Where is just the police officer in the judge? Essentially, we expanded that to include cases that were low level, that were typically not resulting in jail time. So your disorderly conducts, your first offense, shoplifting, trespass, things like that, things where you typically didn't need a lot of witnesses, they weren't complex. And we moved those to the traffic docket and expanded that docket. We gave the power to the judges to continue the cases for dismissal if that was the appropriate thing to do. We still send a prosecutor in on those dockets who meets with the police officers and says are there any cases on this docket that you think we should be involved in and if the police say yes, we move them to the 1030 docket and go through the process of opening the file and doing all of that. This is similar to what some other jurisdictions do. It allows opening the file and doing all of that. This is similar to what some other jurisdictions do. It freed up some administrative time because they didn't have to open files. And it was the best option that we had. As prosecutor, I don't think that should be our way of operating. I think for justice to take place, you need a prosecutor in the courtroom. But I recognize that there's financial constraints that we can't always do that, and I accept that. And so, this compromise allowed us to still focus on our resources on the cases that need that level of attention and allow the ones that don't to be handled by the judges and the police officers. All right thank you about my time. So Professor Vega and Franklin. Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you Miss Ashworth for coming in today. I spent plenty of time in the court house just not in your office, Madam Chair. Thank you, Ms. Ashworth, for coming in today. I spent plenty of time in the courthouse, just not in your office, but I will take you up on that offer. I didn't catch the name of your, did you say she was your deputy? She's one of my deputy chiefs of staff, Caragram. Okay, and my chief of staff. I saw Caragram action the other day in circuit. I was in that courtroom. So again, I'll take you up on that offer. You know, for me, not just because I'm a law enforcement officer, but just in general, society cannot function if there's no law in order. So I'm very critical of your office for various reasons. You know, when we conduct our countywide survey or when you just engage with your constituents, safe and secure communities is paramount. and the success of your office is critical and ensuring safe and secure communities. It's not just the police department, but it's the different branches that fall under a criminal justice system, if you will. And so I mean this whole heartedly that I want to support your asks. But the issue that I take often times when I presented with asks, and not just with your office, but in general, is managing efficiency, right? Are we being efficiency? Last year I asked you for data while I appreciate the presentation that you've provided, I still maintain my position that more data probably is needed so that we can make a better sound financial decisions when it comes to allocating funds. I will put this plug in every single time that I can, that I think that we would find ourselves in a much better position if we actually revisited our revenue share agreement that we have with our school division to ensure that we had funding that is needed to fulfill not just your asks but other asks that are equally as important. And so with that, I want to, you know, lead with my first question because we had chief Newshim here not too long ago. Is crime in Prince William County increasing or decreasing? That that's I think the last chief's meeting I went to, they said it was decreasing. Correct. That's just a yeah. And so the reason why I ask that is because I want to understand where the caseload is coming from right and so could you could you provide more insight as if crime is decreasing why are we increasing caseloads yeah so you know the you have a measurement of crime I think the last chief's meeting that we had, we were talking about the first quarter of 2024. And so, you know, compared what the time study bases it on, they're using, they're going to be using a three year average of this numbers, but they're looking at the filings in the general district court, the juvenile court and the circuit court, the types of cases that they are. So your larceny cases don't take as much time by prosecutor as, for instance, a murder case or sexual assault case. And so, you know, the, I thought, in your materials that I sent yesterday, I sent that time study, it is a brutal 130 some pages, I know. But it does. I couldn't read. It does walk you through the analysis and how they do that. I have a somewhere in my, I remember seeing a PowerPoint that they did where they explained it to us. And I'm happy to forward that to you. It's a little bit easier to go through, but that's what they're basing that data on. And as you saw in that slide that I put up, I'm just looking at January to December case filings. Okay, I mean, it'd be great. I would love if I showed up at the August meeting and they said, oh, you need less than what you needed last year. That would be great news. Would you say that your specialty docket are also taking up a lot of your time? They actually don't take up a lot of prosecutor time. What takes up time is screening the cases and making sure we're getting the right disposition, but the dockets themselves maybe take one afternoon every two weeks. And this is the docket that the attorneys love doing because it's actually good news, right? You're seeing people go through these significant life changes and that's uplifting compared to day after day of these horrible criminal acts that you see. And so it does good for the community, it does good for the attorneys working that I would not want to see that go away. I think I have room for one more question. In terms of workload and distribution, how do you measure that? How do you, you know, does every attorney have the same amount of cases? So great question. So we have that case management system that I talked about having to be updated. That will generate for us a list of how many cases each person is handling. And what we have another deputy chief of staff before every senior staff meeting will go through and update how many trials they have versus how many like sentencing cases because sentencing they are a little bit easier than your trial case load and so we try to keep track of how many attorneys how many cases each attorney has so we can see who is struggling, who should be struggling, and who has some bandwidth, if you will, that we can add some extra cases. Gotcha. I have a time Madam Chair. Thank you. All right. Supervisor Franklin, we are vaguely gordy. Well, okay. Well, thank you for coming and sharing this presentation. I guess I'll just kind of leave where, rather, we're going to left off with regards to the thought of an interesting question with our crime rate going down, which obviously we love, but yet the case load still being quite significant. And I imagine kind of as you just mentioned that it's a number of different things that we have to consider types of cases as you just mentioned certain types of cases just take more resources than other types and particularly we do have particularly violent crimes going down in the county which is wonderful but we do still have challenges with motor vehicle thefts and so I know know that that's still something that our law enforcement is paying very close attention to. But also what we haven't talked about is population growth. We have almost half a million people in Prince William County. So even if the crime rate decreases, we obviously have a larger number of cases than other jurisdiction by the sheer fact that we have a large population. So we also have to keep that in mind. Any thoughts on that? No, I think that's an excellent point. As long as your population is continued to grow, your need for police officers is going to continue to grow. Your need for prosecutors is going to need to continue to grow. Sure. And then just kind of diving from that, I do want to talk a little bit about the time study. I did go through as much as I could from the time study. Can you just talk about that a little bit more? You've explained what it was, but just to backtrack. What is the time study? What are they looking at? And what are you basing your numbers off? Is it based on just what Amy Ashworth wants or is it purely the time study and what you are seeing in your courtroom? So the time study was done in 2023. It was about nine weeks long. Every prosecutor in Virginia participated. And we literally wrote down what we did every day. We kept track of our minutes and that the end of every day you would put in to this computer, what you did. So they pulled all of that data, right? How much time has been on administrative tasks? How much about watching body-worn camera? How much in the courtroom? How much on phone calls? How much meeting with victims? And they pulled all of that together. And then they started, and they did it by case type. So if you were working on a murder case, you were putting that under murder. If you were working under sexual assault, that's where you were putting it. And so they were able to figure out how much time everyone was spending on different types of cases. And then they went through and they had committee meetings to decide, OK, this is what you are spending it on, but what should you be spending it on, right? What, you know, should you, did you have enough time to meet with all of the witnesses? Did you have time to do this? And they came up with like the recommended amount of time you should be spending on those cases. And from there, they just backtracked and said, okay, if you should be spending this much time on murders and this much time on sexual assault and this much time on larceny and juvenile cases and domestic violence, how much would you, how many attorneys would you need if there are 40 work weeks in a year and you figure people are going to take a two weekweek vacation, they're going to have training, they're going to be sick, like, how, what do you need? And that's where they came out with the numbers. And it was surprisingly on point. It really, from what we were feeling, because what our said is, you're a low on administrative people. And it was like an aha moment when I saw that because that was the number one complaint. Why are we as attorneys making our own copies and doing all of these administrative tasks that a secretary should do or administrative professionals should do? Our administrative professionals are like, if you ask me to mail one more letter, I'm going to lose it, right? Like, they're at full tilt and it was like, you read the time study and you're like, yes, this is, it fits exactly. And then I've seen other jurisdictions saying the same thing, like one jurisdiction only needed one additional attorney and they were like, yeah, that feels about right. Yeah, and I'll circle back with my second time slide, but basically you're going purely on the time study as well as kind of what you're seeing in your courtroom. Right, right. I'll circle back, thank you. All right, supervisor Weir. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Ashworth, I kind of was, I'm a lot with Supervisor Vega, but I'm the data guy. And I've looked at the chart, I've looked at the numbers, and what is inescapable is that over the last four year periods since the FY22 budget, your budget is increased by almost $6.3 million, which is 91% increase over four years. We can't sustain that. At the same time, you've got 35 new FTE over that same period, which is a 59% increase in staffing. And you have, at least with respect to the eight largest jurisdictions in the Commonwealth, you You have the second highest average expenditure per FTE. So I'm adding a hard time justifying even more FTE. You know, I get what the general assembly saying, what the study's saying, but what I'm looking at the study and I've talked to several of the jurisdictions. It looks like Prince William is an anomaly in terms of its ask Fairfax County to and a half times our population just cut three FTA. They have significantly lower numbers total than you do and my understanding is they seem to be fine. I know the Chesterfield CA asked for additional positions based on this study and the Chesterfield Board last week said no and the CA was fine with that. I'm kind of curious why we're the anomaly. I also sort of take issue with the correlation between more officers being hired and sort a data jump in terms of more cases being filed. We were so low in PDE officers that we didn't have people with enough backup. So if you've got two people in a cruiser, I doubt seriously that your case load is going to double, just because you've got two guys in a cruiser to provide more safety to the officer that's there. I mean, I'd love to see how that correlates. But to me, it's a matter of efficiencies. I'm seeing a lot in your presentation about specialty dockets and wine supervisors doing particular caseloads. And I'm not saying that's a bad thing given what the results are. But yeah, I've got a lot of managerial experience and I'm having a real tough time putting together the increase in the budget over four years, the increase in the FTE over four years, and then an even greater request that seemingly is based largely on a document that no other jurisdiction that I've looked into seems to be pressing or fulfilling. In fact, I'm kind of curious why Fairfax is so much lower. Maybe they've got a different strategy. Maybe they don't prosecute the same type of cases, but with two and a half times the population, oh, by the way, our population is plateauing and probably likely to diminish over the next couple of years, at least that's what's probably in the works given the lower birth rate, given the possible impacts of Doge, people retiring out, people moving out of the car, because they're now essentially work from home types of things. I mean there's a changing dynamic here and then last of all if the GA is going to give you give the Commonwealth's turnies as a whole a bunch of new positions in May. I know this is I know it doesn't jive with our budget schedule but I'd like to know how much they're going to fund before we fund more that they would otherwise be funding because at the end of the day they should be funding your office and not us. I mean you're you're you're your your Constitutional employee, our officer excuse me your office is constitutional everybody in there So why we're we're paying for what they haven't paid is is a gripe that we probably share But I would much prefer to read dress additions after you find out what the general assembly is gonna give you and when fun. That's all I've gotten out of cheer. There is a question somewhere in there. Okay. Do you want to respond? I mean, I'm the elected Commonwealth Attorney for Prince William County. I care about Prince William County and Prince William County's needs. I don't know what Fairfax is doing. If you're interested, we can invite Steve Discano down and he can explain what he does. But every single Commonwealth attorney that I've spoken to in the Virginia Association of Commonwealth Attorneys is abiding by this time study and making requests. We even put together a package called access, Virginia Access to Justice requiring the General Assembly to fully fund prosecutors and defense attorneys across the entire state. It passed the House Committee courts of justice. It passed the Senate courts. They both died in appropriations because it's about $258 million. But we're going to try again next year. All right right thank you. Supervisor Bailey. Thank you Madam Chair. And to continue the statement briefly we know that when we came on board you were dealing with a lot of archival information and systems and 50 years and so that doesn't go unnoticed on this board. But moving forward, I just wanted to ask you when you talked about going back to what my colleague had mentioned about the data, collecting data. Because I think we're all data wanks up here and making decisions when it comes to the funding and the tax payer's money. So my question to you is in terms of data and making sure that you are collecting the data more expeditiously, more succinctly, what does that look like in the future in terms of future budget? I know we're in the current budget, but is that something that we need to look at that you would read responsible for in terms of IT or is that something that you collaborate with the DOAT team? So there are multiple groups out there that work with prosecutors offices to collect this kind of data that you're speaking about. I know Deputy County Executive Dan Alexander brought to my attention that Fairfax has such a system where they're really digging into that data. I did reach out to my counterpart in Fairfax to say, hey, what is this and how did you pay for it? He said it cost about a million dollars and he had so many unfilled vacancies that he used to that money to pay for it. I don't have unfilled vacancies. Our vacancies, we try to be very proactive once we get applicants and keep them kind of waiting for a position to open so I don't have that kind of savings in the budget. We could potentially look at grants to pay for that. So I hope that answers your question. Yeah, it does. Just in terms the future and where we are right now in terms of having more data. I got three more minutes. The other question that I have in terms of interns that you mentioned earlier. Could you just kind of review for us how you use those interns and at what level do you bring them in to assist where you have holes where you need to fill? Yes. So our fall and spring programs, they are usually classroom-based interns, meaning they are getting college credit, so they're not getting payment, and they're coming in for a set number of hours. Most of them are undergraduate. In our summer program, we have a lot of law students. And the funding the board provides we're able to offer sometimes a small stipend to those law students. We match them up with a prosecutor in the office so they really get a hands-on experience working with that prosecutor they help assist with you know any way that they can in the cases, some of them even get their third year practice certificate from the Virginia State Bar, so they can actually do the case with the attorney sitting at the table next to them, which is very exciting for them. And the last question I have, one moment. When, with those interns, is the possibility when you talk about FTEs that as they come back, that's an opportunity for you to fulfill the number that you need for FTEs? That's exactly what we did last year. Like I said, two of the three line attorneys that we hired had been prior interns. We, as the board does its budgeting this cycle, if we are granted more attorney positions or the four that are in the budget, we have already reached out to previous interns who are interested in coming back to work for us. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mm-hmm. All right, Supervisor Corte. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Mrs. Hs. How are you? Good, how are you? Doing great. And going through the data between the two staffing standards schedules, in the 2025, they actually ranked each locality based upon the, I guess, the algorithms in terms of the need. And it just trying to answer it so in trying to compare that to what the state funded last year and the fact that they're looking at funding 70 positions this year. Do you know where Prince William ranked last year when we received the four positions? 9. We were 9. So we're 9th again this year. And how many positions were funded by the state last year? 4. No, I mean total. 29. 29. So we're three times somewhere in that range two and a half times what that was. So we would be potentially looking at somewhere around potentially three to four, five ads coming from the state this year if everything holds true based upon last year. Right. So yes, as I understand it, they all of the offices that were one man offices were given a second. And then they did it based on need. So I'm hoping that we are fortunate enough again to get a percentage of these positions. That would be nice. Thank you for that. In terms of, you know, this is theoretical, you know, and this is based on time, but you're also having to deal with the very practical, you know, this is what Prince William County needs in terms of prosecuting. and I thank you for hosting me at your office and we had great conversation about some of the challenges facing Prince William County and where the needs lie and and one of the areas that I'm particularly concerned about is domestic violence in terms of of both and in witness you know protecting the witnesses and making sure that they show up to trial also making sure that that that these you know When you think about the the most violent cases in our county What percentage does lie along that domestic violence? category You know, I I used to say it was about half domestic violence, I haven't looked, how to chance to look at those numbers recently. It feels like those are coming down a little bit. Domestic violence is certainly a lot of what we deal with. If I think this time study showed we needed seven people in that unit, we have four. We also have the early diversion program where we screen those and try to take out of the criminal justice system the very low level mandatory arrest domestic violence cases that we see, which are like brother and sister fighting over remote control. Those can be screened out so we can focus on the more serious ones. It does feel like a lot of our violence recently is coming from a, I want to say the 15 to 22 year age group and a lot of it feels more gang involved and drug involved than it used to. Yeah, and that's where I was going to go to next in terms of and with that in terms of prosecuting one of the challenges again gets back to the witness to showing up to trial to sure we can prosecute. So the positions that we added this past year, the state, I think you applied them towards helping, working with victims and witnesses. What have you seen progress in that and what do we need to do to ensure again that we are able to prosecute these criminals instead of going to trial and witnesses don't show up and therefore no trial takes place. Yeah, that's one of our main challenges is getting victims to come to court and be willing to testify and sometimes it just takes a lot of hand holding but that's time time that you have to take, having those conversations. Getting subpoenas out would be helpful. Getting that 14 day deadline met would be helpful because you wouldn't have to, it's hard enough to get them there the first time, then to get them to come back, maybe a second time or a third time. Relying more on the grand jury to issue charging documents instead of the magistrate is also helpful because it cuts out the whole step of having a preliminary hearing. All of those things making the whole system more efficient is always gonna be better for getting justice. Okay, thank you. I'll have additional questions in my second round. All right. I'll have Supervisor Vega. It's back to me again. I thought he was next, but I guess not. I will go on the record saying that I do not want Steve to come over to Prince William County for obvious reasons. And while I understand where a supervisor where was going with this, he was trying to make the point that you have other jurisdictions that have a higher caseload number and they seem to be managing just fine. I also understand your position as to, you know, I'm worried about Prince William County and Prince William County only, but just wanted to reiterate the point that my colleague was trying to make. And I believe they also blew through $240 million surplus, which is probably why they're cutting positions, but that's not us here in Prince William County. And I think our finance team for keeping us on track to making sure that we don't commit that mistake. But I do have a quick question. I want to know more a little bit about in the presentation you talk about wellness tools to help with burnout. What does that look like? What does that entail? Yeah. Well, I first want to say, from what I hear from other jurisdictions, they're not doing just fine. Well, and I was just spacing that off of the additional attachment that you included. We have Chesterfield County. The point is that everybody has a higher caseload and they're working with what they have. And I guess we're all working with what we have. I guess that might look different for other jurisdictions and whatnot, but I was just making an emphasis based on supervisor, we're being the data guy and he's just trying to match it up with the ask, which is similar to what I kind of asked last year, but. Yeah, I just don, I don't think we say, oh well, you know, Fairfax is operating with only 41 prosecutors. I don't think if you talk to the defense attorneys, the judges, the police officers, the prosecutors that they're saying, that's just fine. I think they would say the opposite, at least that's my opinion. I'm putting it in. Yes. The wellness tools, so when Mike Fipps passed unexpectedly, the county did provide a counselor to come and meet with a lot of the attorneys who were grieving. She's going to come back, I think it's next week. And that was just so, we were so in shock by this and having to, you know, we were greeting people as they were coming in Monday morning saying, hey, here's this terrible news. And by the way, here's your docket. I mean, it was terrible and we felt really powerless as to what we could do. Cara reached out to the county. I think I spoke with Mr. Schroeder and we had a counselor available to start the grieving process. That was very helpful. There's been other things that we have reached out. I know there were like, sound silly, but coloring books, right? Which are a real shown stress reliever to have people be able to do those things. The ice cream social, right? That's great. That, you know, everybody's spirit is high on ice cream day.. It sounds silly But you know that kind of thing we also provide Services to the police academy where we teach at the police academy that gives us a little bit of discretionary money So on a tough docket day we can order 10 pizzas, right those kind of little things really helpful. Okay, and then the last question that I have is in regards to the ask for the IT position. Obviously we know the county has their own IT department and we just increase that budget by a lot. And so this is a state program, yes. The database? No. It's in-house? It is in-house. OK. But that doesn't mean we can't ask the state to fund it. This position. No, it doesn't. So it's my understanding every agency kind of has an IT person. I know the sheriff does and we rely on the sheriff's IT person to help us out. And I know he asked for it, but I don't think we granted that last budget cycle. Yeah, just trying to figure out where else we can get additional Support in terms of funding if this board cannot fulfill your asks where else can we look into? Yeah, which is why I was asking That's all I have Thank you. Thank you All right Supervisor Franklin Yes, sure. just want to just go back to a couple of things. You know, we've talked a lot about other jurisdictions like Fairfax. Obviously, they're undergoing a pretty dire budget situation. So I think that's important to point out. And so it's likely that they're just making do with what they have. Whereas Prince William County is in a much different state because of some of the commercial revenue that we have coming in over the past several years. So I just want to point that out. And then in terms of what we can and can ask the state for, I always say that the state should come in and do better. Now with regards to IT services, I don't know if, because we go about what the comp board should be doing, and the comp board provides resources for staffing. So we need to kind of think about that as we're saying, well, you know, they can just come in and pay for the furniture. We need them to actually come in and do their job and pay for staffing. That's what's going to actually relieve the pressure from the locality. So I want to be clear about that. I also wanted to ask about the CAC. I wanted to ask this kind of in the beginning, but exactly how does that relationship work? I mean, does the investigation start, I guess with the police department, they kind of work with the CAC, and then your prosecutors kind of work with the information given from the CAC? Can you just talk a little bit about what does that look like? Yeah, the CAC has been just an amazing addition to the county services that we provide. I was a prosecutor in the Special Victims Unit for nine years begging for a CAC. Because what happens is you have detectives put in the Special Victims Unit and you have to be specially trained to forensically interview a child about sexual abuse. There's, you know, I'm sure the internet is full of horror stories of bad interviews create bad cases. And so the CIC kind of took that burden off of the police department by having forensically trained interviewers and they do a phenomenal job. So what happens is when a child reports sexual assault, usually very often a patrol officer is the first one on scene and we tell the patrol officers please don't interview the child. Bring in special victims right away. The special victims detective will reach out to the special victims prosecutor and they're working from the minute that complaint comes in. And so we can, there's case law and statutory law that allows us to use that interview sometimes in lieu of making the child come in and testify. Yes. Anything else to revise our Franklin? All right, we are gonna go to supervise our weir. Thank you Madam Chair going back to the efficiencies aspect I'm looking at the staffing needs slide 2024 and as I recall you know these staffing ratios one paralegal for every four is what you had then one admin admin staff for every two attorneys and we gave you more positions last year and the ratio is deteriorated. And under this scenario, you're not even getting back to 2024 ratios, you're actually being wrong. So for my one eighth, I understand the need for paralegals and I understand the need for administrative support. I do a lot of legal research and support briefs, etc. for a lot of attorneys. So for my one eighth, I'm going to give you the admin side, but I'm not going to create an even bigger staffing issue for the paralegals and the admin staff because adding the two more FTE for the attorney side, which I'm having an issue with anyway, given the drop in crime rate, given the plateau of population growth and given what's going on elsewhere in the Commonwealth, regardless of what the reason is. From I-1-8 to the rest of the board, I want to compromise a little. And I don't have an issue with the admin and the paralegal side to bring you a little more in line. How I might even be willing to give you more paralegals on top of the two, but not more paralegals, not more admin staff and more staff attorneys. All right, St. Fraser-Corty. Thank you, Supervisor Weir, for stating that. So, they kind of leads into my question. If you order prior to your request, what's most important to you. That's such a difficult question because there are you know I'm trying to vision when I go back to the office if I stand here and say attorneys I'm going to have a very angry at and if I go back and say admin to have very angry attorneys. I mean, everybody's running full tilt. I think you can see from what I've done with the positions last year, we needed to be up at 49 attorneys and I got us there, right? And kind of this shift in the docket that we made took a little bit of the pressure off of the admin stuff. And I think that's easier to do because I can't send admin staff into a courtroom to try a case. And so I think if I had to prioritize, I would say attorneys, and a lot of attorneys are capable at admin tasks. They don't like it, but they can do their own typing. And you know, we've gotten away from the years of having attorneys that didn't know how to turn on their machines. All of my attorneys know how to turn on their machines. They know how to operate them. And so I think that's where the bigger need is. That said, I know I'm going to pay for that answer. We can have security come to you. It's going to cost more ice cream. That's right, more ice cream. And I'll buy the next round. You just send me the bill and, you know, since I put you in that bad spot. The, and this is just more of a, just trying to get after, you know, part of what I've seen over the past couple of years is one of our big challenges is we have people who are arrested put and then they're arrested for a violent crime they are they go before I magistrate they are released and while out on release they commit a murder yeah that doesn't have been terribly often but it has occurred when it's been a murder it's usually it fits that so what a scenario right yeah so and those that are not the domestic violence it's you know on the other side of you know what you would more the gang side of things I guess but how do we are we getting better at identifying those who present the threat so that we are reducing that right to scenario of ensuring if somebody's presenting enough threat we keep them in jail until we get them to trial. We're getting better at it. Right. So the law changed in 2020 that there used to be a presumption that if you committed a certain act, criminal act, you would be held in jail pending your trial. The general assembly did away with that presumption against bond. And when that happened, our judges kind of flipped it into, there's a presumption against holding people. And so we are our prosecutors day in and day out our say. presumption against holding people. And so we are our prosecutors day in and day out are saying we think this person is a threat, we think they are going to flee, they should be held. And the judges are just simply not doing it. Now the vast majority of times nothing happens, which kind of leads them to say, well see, we told you. But those one or two occasions where it does happen, it's horrible. And it's frustrating to us, the police, the, and there's no real accountability for it. Now we go in, you know, we now have a attorney that does the arrangements every day, the same attorney. So she is seeing this on a regular basis and she is even filing motions to revoke bond where she sees somebody has committed another crime, even if it's not a violent crime. You're out on bond, you should not be committing another crime. And they are. And so we file motions to revoke their bond. That's not always happening. So it's very frustrating for us. We share your concerns, I think, until the General Assembly steps in and makes those changes. I don't think they're going to get the message to talk about. I mean, it's something I talk about that to them regularly. I know other jurisdictions to them regularly. I know other jurisdictions are seeing the same problem. Yeah. It's. And I know I'm out, but just, you know, the end in the inter-gearstictional challenges of something that may happen in other jurisdiction, but then they come to Prince William and come in another crying. So that's another issue for another time. Thank you. Yes. All right. Supervisor, I agree. Hi, Ms. Aswer. I didn't have a question initially, but something was triggered at me. But first, I sent an email because on the 29th of April to Tuesday, at some point, you'll get an email to, I want to come by and tell you your office. Yes. So hopefully you're there. So, okay, that's not the way. I want to talk about the ITU mentioned, and it's really a question for you and Mr. Short of you, because you asked for IT needs and I've had a similar discussion with our clerk with a course. What is, what IT support does the county give if any to your office and the... All of it. So the county IT provides our laptops, they are the help desk, they hook up our printers, they- So I'm gonna say this and you didn't say it, I'm gonna say it. So if you're asking for I-2 support, then am I missing something to support that you should be getting from our IT department? And is that something that we need to look into then that would help you garnish more support that you need? Okay, so I'm not putting any words near my budget. I think I can answer this. I think every agency has to designate someone to be their IT representative. ITR. Okay, and that falls on care who wears a lot of hats in our office. And so she's responsible for all of those things. Now she doesn't complain ever, but I know there are times where she feels overwhelmed by what is being asked. like you have to track all the laptops and do the refreshes. And there we often, when I say we rely on the Sheriff's IT guy, it's his ITR who does our badges and all of that. We just go downstairs and... So I think that's critical. And not to take anything from you I think because the IT guru is someone that definitely knows more about IT than you and I think that's so that's the missing element here to this position which We really should talk about because I've heard similar things coming out of You know Jackie's office as well. So I don if she has that position, but it sounds like if the sheriff has this position, or if the sheriff doesn't have this position, then maybe we should be talking about an IT person that works in these agencies that since, you know, because I don't want to throw our IT under the bus, but it sounds like something's missing there, thus the reason you ask for this position in the first place. And I only triggered me because I heard this comment before from, you know, click or the courts office. So I just want to make, I don't know what that looks like or. Sure, Supervisor, I agree. Thank you for the question. What else I would say? We have, it's a decentralized model for do it. They have a public safety support team. So, and I, a team of IT professionals that support all of our public safety agencies, some of our larger agencies do have an actual IT analyst to support information technology. We do not have a dedicated person at the Commonwealth Attorney's Office or the Sheriff's Office. Okay, so then I don't know if this is that. I just want to maybe that's something we should maybe we can get some more deep die between those three agencies of if that is something that's an issue because if they're asking for a position then something seems to be not working over there. Well, if there is a need for a dedicated support, then I think the Commonwealth Attorney's question to the board is, you know, will the board support an individual, like an FTE that solely works on IT, and has IT duties for the Commonwealth Attorney's Office. What I'm saying is that the way we are organized is that a team of IT professional supports all of our public safety agencies as it currently stands. So because I don't think the board here is going to just necessarily agree with that, but the team that we have that does this work is something that we should look into the CF that team is missing something between her office, the clerk of the courts and the sheriff's office because I've heard it from the two, maybe not the sheriff's office, but I'm just curious if she's asking for a position, if we give her a position then it's probably gonna open up Pandora's Box to the fact that the sheriff's office And now the clerk of the course, not saying you don't need yours, but I'm curious, what I'm really getting at is should we look inside of our how do we just set up and what service they're providing for them and this is something we can maybe enhance even on our side to give better support for whatever they need and I'm saying better support but I don't even know if they're clearly a she's asking for a position, something's missing. And I know you manage all that right now, but it seems like there is a disconnect between these agencies. So, I'm out of time, but I just curious if we should look into something like that before we get down that road. Can I just say that I think the DOIT is fantastic. They've been wonderful, responsive, every laptop that's needed to be replaced. They've immediately helped us and they do support the software. What we need on the administrative side is somebody who can become a subject matter expert in the case management system because I feel like there's a lot of tools and reports that could be done with that, that we just don't have the time or anybody that really has the expertise to do that. So I'm gonna enter Jack. I'm gonna ask a question for one of my colleagues who's out of time, because I'm gonna manage time for this strictly, because we do have to move on to mark up and that's going to take a great deal of time. Did you have an ask, like an IT ask or anything that wasn't included in the budget? Like was there anything that maybe you made a request on regarding IT that wasn't in the budget or we didn't have a chance to see as a board? Yeah, when I prepared our budget requests, we had a submitted a four, I thought it was a four year staffing plan. And I'm looking at it, I don't, yes, there was an IT tech that we did ask for in that plan. Just one just one. All right. I guess that was it for we are going to move on to you, um, Bowdie, and then that's gonna be our last question. Sure. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks for coming before. I guess that was it for we are going to move on to VODY, and then that's going to be our last question. Sure. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks for coming before us. Thank you for the presentation. Thanks for all that you do for communities and again, condolences on the loss of Mike. I know it's continuing to reverberate. Each day is different, but you know, leaves out a giant sort of app since in your office I know it's felt every day so I wanted to upload that for you. A couple questions, I know that some folks have sort of absence in your office that I know has felt every day. So I wanted to uplift that for you. A couple of questions. I know that some folks have sort of talked at the fringes about this about comparing the data we have in the crime report versus sort of what your asks are. But we know that anecdotally on the street, things are always what is shaped by what the data shows. So I wanted to allow you for a little bit to elaborate on that. Especially as it pertains to a drug and fentanyl offenses and the trafficking side, because I know that there are sort of two issues that are also been emerging over the last few years in our community and everyone's sort of trying to grapple with those. So could you talk about those in particular quickly? Yes. So your question, thank you, brings up the good point that a lot of these cases that I'm telling you about, these are successful prosecutions. These crimes occurred in 2020, 2021, 2022, 2022. And so while the crime rate that you're talking about is the number of arrests in the first quarter of this year, those prosecutions aren't going to happen till sometime down the road. So, you know, we're kind of lagging in that. And we're never going to have enough attorneys and staff to go to trial on all of those cases. What makes the system move more efficiently is when we have good investigations on the front end that and the police have provided us with all of the information that we've turned over to the defense and been able to say, look at this strong case. You are not going to win this case in trial, right? Let's figure out a resolution. And that is a much more efficient way for the system to move. Now there are some actors in the system that don't want it to move efficiently. And that's their job. But the stronger the investigation, the stronger, and more involved the prosecutor is in the beginning, the better the system, the stronger the system. I appreciate that. And also by the same token, I know that Suez or Vega sort of mentioned it earlier that there wasn't ASCO, can we see more data around? And I assume that you couldn't quite get there this year and this presentation sort of as a corollary to that. I guess my ask there is, as we continue to look at the compensation board, what's going on in the ground, is there a better way for us to begin like receiving more information from you on how this is playing out, especially knowing that we know that's a moving target, right? We know that emerging issues, like you said, different processes in the judicial center based on new judges, different processes, is there something we can do to support you getting more data to us so we can make more informed decisions around this? I think we need to start the conversation about what exactly you're looking for and we can figure out a way to collect that data. Right now our best data is that slide I showed you with the incoming case filings because each of those case filings is a case we're dealing with. Understood and I appreciate that and so my last question goes back to the conversation that Superversor Angry was sort of talking about in that IT that do it, it's great to hear that do it as a whole and team that we have for the public safety continuum is going well but I hear you everyone that's had any sort of size office knows that it's great to have a SME in that office that really knows the systems. And yeah, you have attorneys and even paralegals that know how to turn the system on and do sort of those core things at your job. But if there's a whole suite of software and reports that could help enhance their operations, your office is good to have someone in there. So I guess my question to that, and it gets a little bit in the weeds, has there ever been discussed a specialized person or team just for the judicial center offices? So yours, Jackie Smith, even the ADC and Sheriff Hill, so it's sort of that happy name. Knowing there's efficiencies that can be gained by one person who specializes for everyone in the judicial center, but isn't sort of a generalist that has to spend their time between police and fire and all the other public safety entities that are on our side of the house, but more someone that's specialized for your guys in your side of the house, and they might have the time to at least get to know everyone's individual systems within the judicial center. That could really be helpful, because I know in our system, there is a way for the police to put certain information in. And if we could coordinate that, that would be phenomenal because that's information we wouldn't have to upload or manually put it in same with the clerk's office. But I'll tell you, we're struggling just to get our dockets from the clerk's office. I wouldn't even know how to go about suggesting that we coordinate that, but that could be a position that could really be helpful and would improve efficiencies immensely. Thank you. Food for thought. I'm about to chime in. In efficiencies drive me crazy. So I'm off for it. Well, thank you so very much for coming out and again joining us on short notice we appreciate the presentation and that you were able to you know answer our questions today. Thank you for having me I appreciate it and have a wonderful budget markup. All right and Mr. Short you don have anything else, correct? I am going to move on to our county attorney. Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the board this afternoon in closed session. We will have a personnel discussion relating to the Office of Youth Services Director. And we will have consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members pertaining to the discussion or consideration of the disposition of publicly held real property to include parklands along with the consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members regarding the actual litigation of Frank Washington individually and as trustee of the Scott cemetery versus international investments LLC Prince William County and Prince William County Board of Supervisors, United States District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, case number one, colon 24-CV-01978, along with the accompanying consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members regarding specific legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by such counsel, pertaining to cemetery law and land use law, where such consultation discussion or briefing in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position in negotiating strategy or litigating posture of the public body. These items are appropriate for closed session pursuant to 2.2-3711-A1378 of the Code of Virginia. Move for approval, Madam Chair. Second. All right, let's go ahead and take the vote. Vote unanimous. All right, thank you. We are going to move on to agenda item number six before we do. I'm just going to kind of look around at everyone to see if anyone feels that we should take a break before we dig in because this is going to be a long long process. Madam Chair, may I make a suggestion? Got to sound like my mother-in-law. I'm going to presume that the county attorney needs staff here for her presentation for close session, and that rather than make them wait for 10 minutes, two hours, eight hours for us to finish mark-up, we take close session out of order and it out, get it out of the way, because I don't presume that's gonna take very long. I have considered that. I, and I hate to make them take such a long time. I may be willing to move it up based on markup, and depend on, because we may take, and I'll go over the ground rules, which will help people understand There may be times that we need to have staff duty calculations or we may take a break. So, breaded and moving it up immediately, I'm gonna see how this discussion flows for a market. Might as suggest combining lunch, dinner, whatever, with clothes. We can certainly entertain that. But I just wanted to see how everyone's feeling. If you guys need coffee, stretch break, does anyone, you want to, you have potty break? Okay. We're going to take 10 minutes. And I do mean 10 minutes. That means 350, all 350. arrived, we are going to go ahead. Sometimes supervisor, we have a good idea. All right. Today is one of them. Lightning can sometimes strike twice. We are going to go ahead and amend the agenda and we will do close session that will give everyone a chance to eat and then we will go into markup. And after close session we will take, we will vote to certify. All right, let's go. to certify. So, all right, let's go. Music I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. you you you you you I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. you you you you We are back from the we're back from the closed meeting. The first thing is I need to we need to certify so 7a can I get a motion? So moved second. All right it is been properly moved in second. Let's go ahead and take our vote. Vote unanimous. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. for, members of the board. Just want to first appreciate you for the support and thank Elijah Johnson for leading the recruitment. And welcome Mr. Levi Bass, our new director of the Office of Youth Services down to the podium. And thank him for his service to the county he has served here in Prince William County since 2012 and has served extremely well. And I am just very thankful that he has gone through very competitive recruitment process and we are now able to welcome him here as the new director of our reestablished office of youth services, Mr. Bass. Thank you, Mr. Shorter. Madam Chair, moves to the board. I'm Leviticus Bass. Directive for the Office of Youth Services. I want to express my sincere gratitude to the board and executive management for this incredible opportunity to serve. I am honored by the trust you have placed in me, I am committed to working diligently and collaboratively to contribute to the betterment of our community. I want to thank my colleagues outside who are for their continuous support on this journey. And lastly, I would like to thank the dedicated men and women who work alongside of me in youth services. And I really think them for their commitment to create and positive youth development opportunities for every youth that we meet. I look forward to collaborating with each of you to advance the opportunities that empower the youth and Prince William County. Thank you for allowing me to be a part of this important work. Applause Congratulations and we appreciate all that you do for the county. I do actually have before, we go into Supervisor's time, I do have one quick thing to mention because it was just brought to my attention. Our very own Chris shorter was elected to the board of the directors for the National Forum for Black Public Administrators. So we want to give him a congratulations as well. All right, with all these good feelings, we are now moving. We're going back to item six at the supervisor's time. We are going to get in into the fiscal year 2026 budget markup before we do. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, before the board begins budget markup, I need to declare a personal interest in this matter. My wife is a school's employee. As a school's employee, my wife and I are members of a group which is affected by this matter. I'll be participating in it because I am able to do fairly objectively and in the public interest. Thank you. Madam Chair, before the board begins budget markup, I need to declare a personal interest in this matter. My wife is a special education instructional aide with the schools. As a schools employee, my wife and I are members of a group which is affected by this matter. I will be participating in this matter because I am able to do so fairly objectively and then the public interest. Thank you, Madam Chair. All right, thank you guys for your statement. So I just want to go through a couple of ground rules before we get started. First of all, I am going to give a similarly to what we did last year. I'm going to go around and I'm going to give everyone five minutes. Please don't take the five minutes. I think three minutes is more appropriate. But, you know, to discuss their priorities for this budget and for this markup. And staff, we will have staff doing live calculations. I know Bob, if you want to wave your e also has this calculator, but we're also going will have staff doing live calculations. I know Bob, if you want to wave your e also has this calculator, but we're also going to have staff doing this. So it's going to be double checked. And there might be times where we need to take five minute, five to minute breaks to still take calculations. Because I really want to try to stay on things and work it out as we go along. Again, I ask everyone to be respectful of the process. So with that, I'm trying to think, we already had our dinner, we had an early break, we did a close session during that, but I may call for another break depending on how late things go. And just based on how people are feeling. Hopefully we won't go to O-Dark 30, but you never know So with that I'm going to start with Supervisor Bailey if you want to, you know, we're going to go around for our priorities. And let's focus everyone on budget priorities. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm honored to start first. Let me just start with my budget priorities based upon the recap that we received from our county exec. I believe that county exec, shorter has given us a healthy budget to make these decisions from. My focus and my priorities for this budget cycle was number one, parks and wrecks, the forced grains, golf course upgrades that was mentioned in the budget, and it's the capital facilities upgrade, and with that it is in the amount of $500,000. I'd like to utilize just for my colleagues to know, the profit for funds that was giving to us earlier by Mr. Sinclair of $325 to make that amount at $175 for the general fund. Then secondly, I'd like to focus on for discussion and increase in funding by $50,000 for the Arts Council grants which we have been discussing all year. That $50,000 is to give a sense of equity and distribution as well as making sure that upgrades and revisions to the Arts Council application process is equal across the board. And the $50,,000 for the increase and the level of organizations across the county and the service that they provide for us. Next, I'd like to offer, we had a discussion about the development, I mean redevelopment program that was discussed a year ago, our finance director brought us a program to that address our ability to do assemblages and redevelopment across the county, but where as much needed is on the eastern quarter of the county. And it was an amount of $1 million. I would like for there to be a discussion or support for the small area plan assemblage market study. That will also support across the county, but $250,000 to that, which was proposed in the budget. I also would like to offer as one of my priorities, we are in great need of FTEs for our planning department. And to that need and request, as we move forward with long term, but also current planning here in the county. Just want to refer back to our discussions about not just one FTE, but two FTEs for current planners in the planning department. And again, I just want to support the redevelopment and assemblage study that was mentioned for $250,000. The last, no, not the last, but in addition to that, there was also presented for us in the Parks and Recreation Historic Preservation for the Williams-Ordinary, a budget item of $130,000. And this is to support the 250th anniversary that's coming up in our area, but mostly, but specifically on the eastern corridor. And it covers the gap of fundraising and shortfall for the historical preservation Williams ordinary organization where they've done private fundraising themselves and they're in a shortfall of $130,000. The other thing is just want to support the annual, I don't know, excuse me. I'm sorry. Oh, lastly, the clerk or the court, the lands records management system that was presented to us two weeks ago for $329,583. I do support that and I think that's an area of opportunity for us to receive funding back from the state to support our county. And so I am in support of that. And that is all that I have in terms of priorities at this juncture. Thank you, Madam Chair. All right, Supervisor Gourdy. Thank you, Madam Chair. The first of all, I have to recognize, given the sunshine laws in our state, it makes it very difficult for us as board members to engage directly in conversations related to our budget, but our staff have engaged with each other to address the issues related to this budget and working collaboratively. So I just want to commend them. I want to thank them for all the work that they've done. I can't thank, I mean, they've gone above and beyond. So I really do appreciate all the hard work that they've done. I can't think, I mean, they've gone above and beyond, and so I really do appreciate all the hard work that they've done. For me, I think any budget should be a good balance between effective governance and at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayer. And for me, it's about given the inflationary pressures that our citizens are facing in many different aspects of their lives, it's about trying to find a way to ensure that we're able to provide them some tax relief while at the same time ensuring that we're meeting our county's priorities and meeting the needs that we have as a community. And so, you know, one of the things I've been outspoken on is the food tax. I'd love to eliminate the food tax. I know we probably will not be able to eliminate it, but I certainly want to see us take reductions there. Certainly reducing the real estate tax to keep that flat for our citizens and then providing car tax relief. And I think over the next year, the value, you know, everything that we're hearing is the potential that car prices, even use car prices are going to go back up again. So we need to be prepared and go ahead and start providing a balanced approach to that, given what's likely to happen over the course of the next year. And I do support the increase in taxes on the CMP tax to bring us in line with our neighbors on the computer and peripherals tax. I also believe that we have to be serious about our revenue sharing agreement with schools. Right now, the projections over the next five years, according to the original budget documents, is a 20% increase through FY 30. While at the same time, there's gonna be a 5% reduction in student enrollment projected by the school system. So I think we have to start having a very serious conversation about what the actual need and requirements are for our school system. And we need to revisit and start to adjust that revenue sharing agreement based on what the requirements are, not just on an autopilot of tax increases. And so I'll leave it at Thayer Madam Chair and look forward to a robust discussion today. And again, I appreciate all the hard work that our staff has done to get us to this point. Thank you Supervisor we're Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll keep it very very brief, you know, I think budget priority number one For me is to fulfill the promise that this board and the passport have made to Reduce the burden on a residential and to some extent the commercial taxpayers both in the form of real estate taxes and vehicle taxes by taking advantage of the alleged revenue, windfall from the data center industry. The budget as proposed doesn't do that. It actually creates quite a number of issues, particularly with respect to the school budget, due to the difference in what the school division asked us and what they're required to ask of us. They've given us a needs-based budget, add a wish list, but the needs-based budget and the proposed allocation from the county exec created a $40 million delta, wherein they have asked for roughly $40 million less than we have allocated. That actually creates a $70 million funding requirement due to the revenue sharing agreement with $30 million roughly going back into the county budget. That's seven cents on the mill rate. Did we take? I may have that wrong. I think what everybody else, and I'll just leave it at that. Everybody knows where I stand on this, but I will note this. Any additions to the budget beyond what's already in it? Will require cuts or significant tax rate changes? However, we are limited in the tax rate changes that we can make having already advertised the maxes. So if somebody wants to add something, they better have a cut to fund it with if it's outside of the budget presented. Supervisor Franklin. Yes, thank you. Just want to first start by thanking our county exec and his team for the hard work that they've done this budget cycle Answering all of our questions doing kind of the math on the spot the analysis. So thank you To our county exec and his team The board saw proposed budget in February for the first time and after months I think we are to a point where we can make some real decisions here in markup. I support changes in the proposal by the CXO recap to reduce the real estate tax rate to 0.90 in particular 0.906 pour $100 of assessed value from the current rate of 92. This change reduces the average tax bill by about 5K. The total general revenue is reduced from real estate taxes by roughly about 8. And however much of that increase is offset by an increase in revenue elsewhere, resulting still in some revenue loss, but I think we can kind of go back and forth about kind of what that looks like. Also I'll recap the county executive presented additional sources of revenue and expenditures. The additional expenditures include funding for the Social Services Children Services Act, the Circuit Court Clerk, Cland Management System, the Noise Ordinance Enforcement, and no wrong door project manager. Each proposed expenditure is essential for the proper functioning of government. And also, on a highlight, the circuit court, land records management system that needs immediate attention and generate significant revenue for the county. These additional expenditures are supported by the resources in the budget recap. I also support funding for the Adult Detention Center and the projects listed in the recap for Board consideration for markup, including others as well. So the key issues where to find revenue to support the programs, I think can include several options for increasing the CMP tax, particularly from where we are now. And also just want to point out some additional things that I support, including trails construction, forest green, golf course as mentioned by Supervisor Bailey, Recreation Center's Location Study, Williams Ordinary Historic Preservation also mentioned by my colleague, the therapeutic recreation program, or I know Supervisor Gordian and I have expressed interest in that, and Arts Council grants. And I also support the swim lane rentals for the use of Veterans Park for swimming teams, which is a net cost of zero, because this will be covered by rental fees. Also the employee home ownership program, Redevelopment Fund Reserve, and I know the county exec has laid out several options to consider those mentioned. So just, again, as an overview, support reducing the real estate tax. I'm happy to have a discussion about what increasing CMP, then obviously separating out property taxes for that and seeing how we can also see a decrease there and making sure that our revenue is still strong in terms of growing. So with that, happy to have a discussion with my colleagues. Sir, I'd like to bow to you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to sound like a broken record, but I think that certain things to only do be said, especially in terms of gratitude. When I think, of course, the county exec, the finance team and the entire county staff, that works for months and months to put these budgets together to address questions from us and the community to really be flexible and responsive to this board. And the multitude of staff that we have that also asks them questions. So I wanted to say that first. Also, like Sue, as I already said, I know that behind the scenes, folks, you should don't see how much are our staff, are Chiefs of Staff, collaborate with each other. And again, knowing that we can't in a group discuss these things out so the committee, I'll get to that in second, that our staff do a lot of heavy lift, especially this time of year. So I wanted to thank them publicly as well. Also, I wanted to thank again, my colleagues for all the discussions we've had in the finance and budget committee. I think that it's helped cultivate more constructive opportunities for us to talk. And I look forward to next year when we're able to have that a lot more front loaded and have ongoing discussions to help this part seem a little less onerous. That said in terms of priorities, I'm going to echo what some of my colleagues said. At the end of the day, I think that, especially in this moment where we have a lot of uncertainty, regionally, we have to balance what's coming down the pipeline to our constituents, our taxpayers, but also stepping forward and realizing that we are the blast backstop to the residents. We are the local government. government We are the ones that provide those services that they touch each and every day. And as other levels of government retreats or shifting in ways that people right now don't fully know how that's going to pan out, we need to be that rock, that steady goal that people know that when they come to us for services, we're not going to back away, and we support the folks that deliver those services. I started last week where I said that I appreciate how the county exact focused on people and centered people in this budget, in the county organization, and how that needs to continue to evolve and grow to a point that's responsive as it can be to our residents. And knowing that in a few months from now, if not already, we're going to see likely influx of people looking for services, looking to be connected to community service, looking for ways in which we can help them during uncertain times. And to me, this is a time in which we need to invest in those folks to ensure that they are as wall-equipped, trained, and feel the value that they're delivering to our residents every single day. Now that said, I do see a real need to balance that with knowing that our taxpayers do deserve some relief. Again, I fully support raising the computer and perforal tax up to 415, the computer and perforal tax we now know especially with some of the presentations we were given earlier this budget season, predominantly overwhelmingly impact the data from industry, some of the richest companies in the history of the world, they need to pay their fair share for our community needs. So I wholeheartedly support that which gives us some room to bring down some of the other tax rates. I do believe that we should be looking at to the point that was made earlier at the vehicles tax. You know that's one of the biggest taxes I hear from my constituents all the time. Yes, there's some others that they mentioned, but the most universal tax that I know that really hits my constituents is that vehicle tax. So I'm looking forward to lowering that. Probably to around 360, maybe even lower, depending on how our conversations go. But we also need to look ahead again with how some of the other economic moves that are being made will affect those prices and affect those price points in the months ahead. Looking forward to discussions around the meals tax. I know that's one that I've been resistant to really get rid of or reduce because of the ability for at least part of that tax to be paid for by visitors. However, I will acknowledge that there is impact on our businesses, especially our mom at pop restaurants. That means it's needs to discuss as well. But I'm looking forward to other ways in which we can help have a diversity of taxes that help support our community. Looking at the real estate tax, I'm not sure how much farther down we can lower that beyond the 906 of the county exec put in there I'm open to having that discussion again knowing that the two biggest things that people have to pay taxes for each and every year Is their home whether it's mortgage or rent or their vehicles and then of course everything they buy in order to to feed their family So open to that discussion in terms of after that with my last 36 seconds or so Looking forward to having discussions around the therapeutic Program looking forward to having discussions around Some of the the other issues that folks have brought up, but also I want to bring up transit Transit not been talked about too much of these chambers But I know that that's a true equalizer our community looking forward to talking about transit my colleagues as well Thank you you Madam Chair. Sir Viser Vega. Thank you Madam Chair. I know that it's going to sound a little bit redundant, but it is important and I feel that I also should thank county staff and the county executive for the time that they dedicated into putting the original proposal forward. As we all know, once they presented to us it becomes our budget and as stated by some of my colleagues already. I certainly want to thank my staff because our staffs have certainly collaborated with one another. But I also want to take this moment to thank Supervisor Weir because Supervisor Weir has spent countless hours. I know he doesn't like the spotlight but he deserves to be thanked. He put together a great spread. She taken into consideration a lot of the feedback that our Chief of Staffs had discussed and came up with numbers. And so, supervisor, we're thank you for your time and your effort and what you've proposed. I agree with a lot of what you have put together in the spreadsheet, but do want to share and be on the record that once the budget was presented to us, I was a very first one to put forth a plan and that email actually went out to my constituents. Well, not really my constituents because we have people that sign up for a newsletter from all over the county and I'm grateful for that. But we put that email out on February 19th and that email talked about a bold plan to reduce the real estate tax to 88 cents to eliminate the meals tax also known as the food and beverage tax and to lower personal property tax. I'm not going to go into the weeds of it because again, this email already went out and folks have seen it, but it talked about the cuts that we were going to make. It talked about the revenue share agreement with the school that I'm still going to be pushing forward for us to modify, because I still believe firmly that a 50-50 revenue sharing agreement is what is fair. And I obviously hope to engage in those conversations later this evening. Also, you know, just want to highlight folks that we have a lot of people coming into chambers to talk about the cost of living, to talk about how expensive it's becoming to live in Prince William County. It's not affordable. And there's a lot of speculation going around, right? We've heard it here in Chambers. Some of my colleagues have talked about it. We see it on the news. We know what's happening in Washington, DC, and how this is going to impact. It's speculative. But what I do want to say, and what I do want to remind my colleagues and those hearing chambers and watching at home is that what your local government decides is going to have a greater impact on your life and on your pocketbook. Not what's happening in Washington. It's what we, the eight of us on this board, decide for the taxpayers of principal and county. That's going to have the greater impact. And so as we have these conversations, my goal, my mission since being elected to this seat has always been to provide real tax relief. People are struggling. People are living paycheck to paycheck. Not everybody has a six-figure income coming in. We have single moms. We have single dads. We have people that really are struggling to make ends meet. So when we talk about helping people, when we talk about affordability, we got to remember that we have the power to ensure that we help those folks. And so as we have these conversations, I want to remind my colleagues, it's going to be us that decide whether or not people can afford afford to live work and play here in Prince William County. Thank you Madam Chair. Supervisor Ingram. Thank you Madam Chair. I was just reflecting so this is my six budget season. So I started this in 2019 from the course to a board, hit the ground on him. 2020 COVID hit. Didn't do anything but try to survive figuring out what was going on. That went on for about three years. I think this is honestly the first year where the money's kind of flowed, even though we're dealing with federal issues and layouts and jobs. But, you know, without a pandemic of a virus, it's such. It's the first year where we're talking about like a full budget and all the grand things. So let me just be clear about my priorities. Taxes. I started this by the discussion of decoupling taxes because I wanted to look at how can we help out our citizens with that car tax? I'm going to specifically call it that, the car tax because this is a single one tax that drives most Virginians absolutely crazy. So in decoupling that, that was my focus. I was not interested in raising data to the taxes and I was simply say this, I believe these should always be a discussion with industry about anything you're going to do in industry and being elected officials if we're not talking to them, then I feel like we've shorted something there. However, it sounds like we've got consensus that that's gonna be what it's gonna be. But I just wanna be specific in that. What I am interested in is lowering our firelovy tax. And if we're talking about saving tax for ourselves, we have many taxes in this county that we can do better with as we look at these. I can support lowering the mail tax. I want to look forward to that discussion. Also, I know that Mr. Schroder introduced the real estate and getting it down to 90 cents. We've over the last six years, we've done nothing but lower that tax. So regardless of how you say your taxes are gone up, I can tell you since I believe we said, way in a way, I know it's come down from 112 to 90 cents right now. So, or 92 right now. So, I've seen that over the last six years since I've been on this board. And I'm happy to discuss getting that lower to where it makes sense for our citizens. I have great concerns as we look at that dollar and we cut out how the percentages of all our divisions have great concerns when you take out 57.23% of that and give it to the schools. The next highest bracket is 20% going out in our safe and secure communities. But inside of that safe and secure, 44% of that is inside fire and rescue. I do believe there are some areas there that we can do better. So I want to have discussions about that, not sure where we go. And then to my colleague, Supervisor Bode here, as you look at the transportation routes, we know that our transportation, Omnu App, P-R-T-C, needs some enhancements to the services. So I'm interested in really working to find a solution to get us through this year. And I'll end by saying this, I too think, you know, supervised aware, our staff, county staff, you Mr. Shorter, follow the work that it takes to get us this far. Again, I've done this six times now. I don't know how this is going to go today. I'm really hoping it's the best one yet, but I just know that the process to get here is always a journey. And so I thank everyone involved in getting us this far. Thank you, Madam Chair. All right, thank you, everyone. I do also want to be... I do want to start off by thanking our county staff because I don't think we can be redundant enough. This is a huge process. It's a process that is year round. It's a Lord to lift. You know, thank you Mr. Shorter for guiding us through this. Also thank you, Steph. You know, Mr. Sinclair. Lord, I know I was emailing you this weekend last minute. I'm that type of student sometimes. You know, Michelle, a trade. All of you, everyone who was involved all of our directors. Thank you so much for the hard work that you have put in for this. Essentially, a budget is a statement of our values. You know, you're going to hear me talk about the things that I think that we should do, but I just want to start that a budget is a statement of our values. And we have conflicting ideas of how to fund our county government. But I hope that we can remain respectful of everyone's ideas. I hope that we can have a fruitful and productive discussion. You know, for my part, you know, I am mindful that we have a real threat of recession. And that's something that we're going to have to think about. I do agree that local government is the one that touches you most intimately. We are the ones who decide how much money is going to your schools. Are the potholes getting fixed? You know, what do your communities look like? Are they near an industrial area? Are we going to put a pig farm next to a townhouse community? I mean, those are the things that we are looking at and we're deciding. But again, I do want to be mindful about what is going on in Washington because there is a real threat of recession. You know, that's been talked about and that's a very real possibility and we have to keep down the back of our minds or actually the forefront of our minds. For my part, I really do want to invest in us. I want to invest in our our community and I think that this is a good time to do that. I want to talk about where we can make incremental tax decreases. One of the things I've always said is we do need to reduce the burden on our residents. But I also am looking at a moderate balanced approach to that. We do have more data centers and that is an opportunity for us to expand our commercial tax base. But we're not, some of our neighboring jurisdictions are. We're not there yet. So I do favor incremental tax decreases. And over time, hopefully that will add up. Hopefully over time that will make a difference for our residents. So with that, I am going to kind of outline where we go next, Mr. Sinclair. If we can pull up this sheet, if do you still have this presentation available, it's already loaded? Because we are gonna start with the CNP tax. And if you can go to, just so we know what we're working at, if you can go to slide two. I know that we have some people who want to return to what the board was doing previously with incremental tax increases for the CNP, but I also know that the will, the majority of the board, is to go to $4.15 which we advertise. So I'd like to get a motion to go to $4.15. So move to second. Everyone wants to do this. I'll give it to Vega and Gordy. Thank you so very much. Any discussion? I don't think we have that presentation. We do. Okay. So I can send this. I actually have additional copies. It's not the recap. We're going to look at the recap, but for this one, if anyone needs a Well, I don't have very many. I'll pass one out over here. Bob and I can look to them. Bob and I can look at one of those. Oh, you have one? Oh, yeah. Oh, sorry. I just don't need it. Just so I'm clear. So this is from our finance department. Yes, this is what you have requested. Okay, but is this the same information as the recap? Sorry, I was going by the recap. So we have two different documents. We're going to lean heavily on the recap. I just have this pulled up so that we could see some of the numbers. Most of this discussion is going to center around the recap. You can have you can use my copy. You can use you can have mine. It's email. Yes. If you don't want to give it back or. I just have hard copies of some things if anyone else on the board does anyone else want a hard copy of this. All right. So what we're looking at is four dollars and 15 cents. And you can see where that would land us in terms of additional revenue in terms of what'll be sharing it with the schools and what we'll be sharing or what we'll receive as a board. My first speaker is supervisor we're then Franklin. I know what the answer is. I know what the answer is. I know what the answer is. I just want to confirm for everybody this is an additional 17.995 million. Yes, I'm going to get the mood so it's 18. But the number we're going to go with for your purposes is 17.995-505. Yes, sir. Sir, Mr. Franklin. Mr. Reiser Franklin. Yeah, this is more of a comment for, I'm just gonna call it the data center tax for purposes of this discussion. But I do think particularly in our legislative agenda, we really do need to push to figure out how we can separate out businesses that are not data centers from being impacted by these increases that we're doing. And I think that probably needs to end up being a priority for this board. You know, I'm fine with going up for our data centers, but it really, really pains me to have to do it for the 500 or so businesses that are not data centers. So at some point, we'll to have that conversation with the board. You know, it's the same with the food and beverage tax I'll always say, you know, for our larger restaurants, you know, fine to do it, but our mom and pop restaurants, you know, we really do need to have that discussion about the general assembly giving us more flexibility locally. Supervisor Weir. Madam Chair, for the least a third time today, I'm going to agree with Supervisor Franklin. It's really setting of, however, no. But I wrote down what you said about the legislative side of it, and there was actually a bill to do that this year it died. I think that's the kind of thing that we need to be considering in the legislative committee, and whenever we meet and start pressing particularly our delegation and the loud and delegation to do that, because we are the two jurisdictions that are most impacted by it. And I will be more than happy to lead that charge, although I'm probably the wrong person to do it. Civilizer Bailey. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I appreciate this additional document because it does help us go through the recap a little bit easier as well. But I sincerely agree with the 4.15 as a Relay to the Computer Equipment computer equipment and peripheral tax. I think when we talk to the business community and we look at the needs that we have here in the county that as we build partnerships with the business community I think it's necessary that they are bought in and I think that we're at a juncture in our community and in our budget process where that partnership is getting stronger. And so I do support the 4.15. I didn't say it initially in my priorities. I was focused on what my personal priorities were. But as we go through this, I see that how this document could be very helpful. So 4.15, I will be supporting. All right, I don't have anyone on cue. And this again, or not inviting. This is a strong poll. So I think I'm sorry. Did you have another question? I just wanted to make sure that Andrea knows that we're having problems with our computers. When we speak, it doesn't go out for you, so that's kind of confusing. Oh, no, it went out, I saw you. Mine is still here. It needs to be cleared. Yeah, it's not being cleared. I just wanted to, and maybe it's just me. Thank you. I do see you and we are and I do take paper notes just to keep. And now it's cleared, yay. All right, so Ms. Badam, would you like to do roll call? Supervisor Vega? Yes. Supervisor Gordy? Yes. Supervisor Angry? No. Supervisor Bailey? Yes. Supervisor Bowdie? Yes. Supervisor Franklin? Supervisor Weir? All right. Chair Jefferson? Yes. Motion passes 7-1. All right, we're going to move now to the personal property tax rate for vehicles. Now that that has been decoupled from the CNP tax, we have different options and hold on. Let's go to page number three. Okay, you're already there. Thank you so very much We have a lot of different options. We can keep it at 370 which I don't believe there is any appetite for that We can look at 360 we can look at 350 345. I mean there are a number of options that we can look at I do want people when they speak to give an idea of where they want to land with that. And being mindful again that we're gonna have to think about what it is we want overall and if there's gonna be any cuts to anything. Supervisor Franklin and Vega. Sure, I am gonna need a hard copy just because I can't find the email. You have. thank you. And so also, so it looks like we have a chart here because what I was going to ask is, again, this kind of specific chart. I'm only willing to go down if we can guarantee that we're still producing revenue overall. So I just want to know that one answer, are we still producing a net growth in revenue? It depends on which rate and also depends on what other cuts we want to make. So I understand that. I'm aware of that. But I guess what I'm asking is a recommendation from staff on. No proposal 370. Right. This staff, or did you guys need time? I'm sorry. Supervisor. We typically don't provide recommendations on rates. This is, so if there's a combination of rates, we could certainly work the numbers, but want to. Sure. And I guess respectfully I will say when the budget is presented to us, that is a recommendation on rates. So, okay. So, um, Madam Chair, wait, hold on. So, I guess I'm going to, because this is an uncomfortable spot, and I don't want staff to be put in an uncomfortable spot. Um, they go generally with what has been the prevailing rate. And we advertise that the highest rate possible, because I think that gives us flexibility if we want to go down. And we're going to have the real discussion is going to be on how far we go down. We just voted to raise the CMP tax. We know how much extra money that we're going to be working with. We are also going to be talking about, after this, the real property tax rate, We're going to talk about the fire lovelies. We're going to talk about the meal stacks and other things we may want to reduce or possibly leave alone. So I would say you know if you want really look at that sheet you know I can come back to you for you know your next moment of time but I don't know I mean Michelle are you able to kind of answer the question? If you could go to slide four please on this. So the kind of executive's proposed budget and recap were both based on the 370. We did know that the board was interested in raising that computer equipment and peripheral so we created these two charts to help you really make that decision. This chart I think shows you, you could go as low as 345, and that's sort of the break even. There's a little bit left on the bottom line. This sort of, it really depends on how much you want left to put towards other priorities. I don't know if this slide maybe helps. Supervisor Vega. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to go ahead and propose a 350. because you asked where we wanted to go. I certainly don't want the 370 and I think that 350 is a good starting point for discussion. If anybody wants to go lower, I always welcome that. But the math has already been done into supervisor Franklin's point. They're still revenue being generated. So, revise our inquiry. 350. We are. Thank you, Madam Chair. I mean, I wanted to go down to 343. Couldn't make it work. I tried to make it work at 345. Initially, I couldn't have to talk to Mr. Sinclair. I could, but I want to be realistic about it. And I think probably 350 is the landing spot. Boating. So, I have concerns because if we lower it to 350, we're not leaving a lot of room to look at meals, tax or real estate unless we start cutting things quite a bit. Which I know is what some folks want to say, but I want to just throw that out there that if you look at the math between what we're raising here with the CMP tax and then cutting the vehicle tax too far down, looking at what is what would reduce by the meals tax of itself. You're kind of looking at a break even with those two things and then we don't really have a lot of room to do anything else, especially with real estate. So I want to say 360. And I'm sorry, I don't know what happened. Gordy, did you take yourself out of cue? Well, I was in cue, but I was, I didn't know if you were just going down the line and asking folks for the people who aren't a cue. I'm going to go back and ask. Yeah, now I wanted to be back in cue. I'm sorry. A question I have. Can you remind us how much revenue was generated in this fiscal year for the vehicle tax? Car tax. I'm going to put it in the middle. So I had the total of the total of Q4 for fiscal 24 war. Is that what you're asking? Well, it's trying to based on our 370 from last year. I was trying to because you know the way I look at things is what is the net effect going to be on the resident not just comparing to what a proposed budget was but compared to what people paid in one year compared to the next. I mean, even at a lower rate, they may still be paying more in taxes. So I just want to try to figure out what the, what the, what the, I want to see the whole picture from one year to the next. Yeah. So we have. Correct. But again, we're talking about I'm trying to understand what the real effect is going to be on our citizens. Go to that next. Yeah, so we have correct, but again, we're talking about I'm trying to understand what the real effect is going to be on our citizens Because this is only in relation to the proposed budget Set the one? Yes. Okay. And 228 million is the vehicle portion of personal property. 228 million. Okay. Okay. All right. All right. I can do some calculations. Okay. We'll come back to you. Supervisor Franklin. Yeah. Actually, before we take a vote on this, I think it may be important to actually have a discussion on the real estate tax first since that's our largest portion of revenue. Because once we decide like if we're staying at the proposed for 90 or going down to 90 point, point 90, whatever we said, then that kind of helps us out a lot, but I just want to make sure we're all on the same page about that because at least that way we know what the revenue would be and that can help dictate what makes more sense for the personal property tax. I am open to that. I don't know how other people feel. But I do at least want to get a sense. Are you comfortable giving me a sense where you are right now? So yeah, so I can't do that but I will say if we're all or if most people are open to the .90 for real estate then that helps me at least look at the personal property. I see it. Just quickly how do people feel about going to because that is a bigger number. No, no, how do you feel now? You're on going to it. Body. Okay. We're open for discussion. All right. I before though, I will go to that, but I do have a couple people. I guess Bailey, did you want to wait because you told her say, angry. Did you want to speak now or do you want to go over to this I'll just simply say you know we we took an industry we shot them to the top we're trying to do right by the citizen so if you know 350 for car tax is good and 88 cents for real estate is good then I mean that's I'm all in for the people because if we got the money now to do it, so I'm all in it. So what we're gonna do then, I'm gonna go ahead and go to real estate since that is a big number. The reason why I also I'll just say this, it's the reason why I start with personal property tax rate is because last year, I'm sorry last year we all agreed that we need to focus on that and prioritize that this year. And that's why I wanted to do that rate first. But I am open to going to the real property tax rate because it is a bigger dollar number. So with that then we're going to switch over to the real property tax rate. We, the discussion, our county executive came back to us doing bandied about. And so, I wanted to talk about the rates that were bandied about. You know, there is a 0.0895 rate that was talked about. And there is also a 0.0885 rate that was talked about. And so, I think that was fair. I've heard other rates bandied about. And so, I wanted to talk about the rates that were bandied about.895 rate that was talked about. And there is also a 0.0885 rate that was talked about. So I do want to have a robust discussion on where people feel we should land. And again, knowing that when we, that the budget, that the recount was based on that, you know, I just want to be mindful that with all the rates that we're really going to be looking at today. You know the lower we go the more cuts we need to make or the more things we need to say no to. So for real property tax rate, supervise a we're. Thank you Madam Chair. Let's be clear. .906 is not a reduction. .906 is an adjustment to the higher than predicted assessed value. So 906 delivers essentially 92. It's, you know, and I've said this before, I'll say it again. The rate is a relevance to tax paid. There isn't virtually no difference between the tax, the tax paid under the February at point nine two and the recap at point nine oh nine oh six because of the change in I'm in amended and change in assess values more over because we didn't change the fire levy it's not actually a three dollar decrease it's actually a three dollar increase because the fire levy was not adjusted for the increase in assessed value. So, in essence, the combination of the two, which constitutes the vast majority of your total real estate tax bill, leaving out mosquito levy and that kind of stuff, it's actually a net increase over the February taxable bill. And I think that's what we have to keep in mind is we're talking about the tax tax bill the rate is irrelevant because the rate and the assessment together are what define what your tax bill is. I've played around with this for a long time my my brothers would have been point eight eight. I could not make that work. But I think we can make 0.885 work. And I think at the end point eight eight five work. And I think at the end of the day that's still going to be a slight to modest increase in everybody's bills because I think point eight eight is the relative break even point. But there is a significant dollar difference between the two and to be compromising I guess or, I would be willing to go to 885. So, Mr. Franklin. Okay, so I'm looking at this document and it's all a comparison for personal property as it relates to CMP. So, I guess my question is if we do, if we stay with the reduction to 0.906, increase CMP to 4.15, I guess where does that give us for revenue to play with the personal property number? So that would, so what you're asking for I think by raising the CNP and please correct me from wrong to four dollars fifteen cents that would be what he had up on page two. Right. Yes, understood. But if we keep the real estate to point nine zero six does that give us, is that if we drop the personal property tax to one of those scenarios, yeah, essentially what, will that still generate revenue for us? So at .906 it generates a revenue to support the kind of executives budget at recap with the additions that were added. The 415 was not factored into the recap at all. So that's really where the additional revenue comes from. So that means that we do have wiggle room to go down from 370. Correct. Up to $18 million. Yes, without making any other adjustments. Up to $18 million without any other adjustments. Right. That was. Wait, I'm sorry. I wouldn't that be 7 million because the school portion? Yes. Well, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. What about that? That's a three. OK, but you're, yes, that top number, the 17, this is what we need to look at to look at the reduction. Right, each reduction at the 18 million, so if you went to 365, so you did, Let's do 360 or let's do 360 attention reduction it would decrease our revenue by 6.5 million. And so you have a 11 million dollar balance of the 18. Just split with the schools. Did you have anything else to propose a Franklin? No, I just think it's okay. Okay. Supervisor Vega. Thank you Madam Chair. So at the original point nine two we know that the average tax bill for taxpayers would increase $276. If we kept it at what was proposed for recap at point nine zero six day, how much does the average tax bill for taxpayers go up? At the budget recap rate of .906, the average tax bill increases $273 or 5.6%. $273, thank you. And just to be clear, because there seems to be a bit of confusion in terms of the public wanting to know how This sharing with the school division goes To the to the county attorney. We are obligated. Yes to share To split with the school division this and the personal property tax. Yes Madam chair members of the board by law you are required to budget and appropriate to the standards equality. And then you have the discretion to provide additional funds to the board. And that's a policy decision for the board to make as to how much more. But at a minimum you are required required to budget and appropriate the standards of quality. Which is super important as we talk about how much money we have to play with. Thank you, Ms. Robel. Supervisor Franklin, are you back? Yeah, just, you asked me kind of what I would be comfortable with. I think $365 for personal property tax while keeping real estate at 0.906. I think Supervisor Bowdie said 360, right? I think I'm willing to do 365 with keeping the real estate at 0.96 and increasing CMP to 4.15. Supervisor Vega? Yeah, and just a refresher. I said 350, and I know that I had verbal support from Supervisor Angry and Supervisor And myself so Don't want to He said 88 he said 88.5 since we went up on 415 for the data center CMP tax and he was okay with the I'm going to get back to him but so where you in property you're the 88 five yes Yes. All right, Gordon. Yeah, and I'm also at 88 five as we think about again. This is in base upon the information that our great staff has given us. Well, nearly 130,000 bills will go up under this scenario, tax increase with only 4,188 decreasing. So getting something south of 0.906 provides a better balance between the number bills going up and the number bills going down to, and again, I wish could break out commercial real estate from residential real estate. We don't have that luxury here, but as we drop this down, we're providing more of a benefit to our residents. While the largest land owners, the most expensive land owners in the county will continue to pay, we'll have an increase in their tax bills. So I'm going to see a few words and I'm going to pick on those who haven't spoken. I do want to decrease both car and property tax rate, but I'm also nervous about making big jumps because we have a lot of things we still want to fund and we have gone to Meals Tax. And honestly, I am committed to making a decrease in Meals Tax and we'll talk about that because that's going to be an ordinance change but I'll get to that when we get to that section. From myself, you know, I am willing to consider the 0 0 8 9 5. That's as low as I'm willing to go. I am hesitant to move away from what we had already discussed, what was in the recap budget. The lowest unwilling to negotiate is to go down to 0.0895. The reason for that is we need to do incremental decreases. We need to do incremental. What I'm prioritizing is the CAR tax and the Males tax. Those are my priorities. When I look at the average, not the median, I think the median is a better indicator, but the average. You know, a 273, we're talking about $22.75. Last year, my bill actually decreased $25.10. And I would say that I live in an average house in Montclair. I live in an average house. It's a nice looking house, you know, these lot work. But I would say it's the average house, you know, what we're losing side of is yes, some people, because it's an average, some people are going to see a decrease. Some people are going to see an increase. But I don't think it's onerous. I don't think the people who are in fixings come so that we're necessarily driving them out. And thank you, Ms. Derson, Claire, for sending the historical data of what our increases have been because our increases over the past few years have in my mind been very modest. They've been very modest. We haven't had huge spikes. Now, you can argue maybe collectively over the years, but looking at surrounding jurisdictions because I do think it's important to note what our neighbors are doing and how we stand in comparison. Noting inflation, I think that we have had a pretty measured increase. So, and for me, for car tax, I am looking at 360. Again, because I want to be able to offer tax relief in other places and I also just want to say you know as we go through recap and see what we yay in eight of things we may you know I'm willing to actually go back and see if we if we can do a little bit better on some of these tax rates but that I have supervisor we are than angry. Madam sure put in some context. Let's assume let's take a house value at $500,000 last year. Assessed at $500,000 will a .92 rate. Would have paid a bill of $4,600. If you assume a 5% assessment increase, which is probably I believe is less than the average that drives average. That drives it up to $525,000 and a .906, even though it's supposed to be flat, they actually pick up $156 and additional charges over last year. Even at .885, the average bill is going to be higher than last year. So if we're talking real tax relief and not just lesser increases, I mean we have to get down to you know point eight eight. I understand we can't do that but I think I think we have to be a little more honest with the residents and their taxes. And, you know, that's why .906 is just a nonstarter with me. I would strongly suggest 4.6, 4.885. I think the other two other things you need to keep in mind. There's a lot of reference to other jurisdictions. And I would reference, allowed in their data center revenue streams, and they have actually managed to reduce both the rate and the actual tax bill over the last couple of years, something we have not been able to do. And I would also note that we actually have more money to play with to Ms. Robles Point. There is still a $40 million delta between the needs-based budget submission we got from Superintendent McGaid and it was adopted by the school board. So we have plenty of wiggle room to play with yet because under the state code, that's what we're mandated to supply them with. And if we use that as the starting point that opens up a lot of doors both for addressing things we want to get rid of or things we want to add both in our budget and their and their budget. But we need to take advantage of that at the front end to give both the commercial and residential taxpayers some amount of relief this year. Well, I'm actually going to jump in real quick. I also want to make the distinction when we talk about loud and county and data center revenue. They have more data centers than we do right now and they have been taxing at a higher rate longer. That is one of the reasons why I supported, last year, going to the highest level that we were able to do without raising the vehicle tax. And that's why I'm glad that we are talking about separating the two out. It's hard to make a comparison. I know people want to see more immediate tax relief. I want to see deeper reductions. But I personally, we're not there yet. We're not yet where loud and county is. So I want to say that. And reducing at a lower rate, I hear you on that one. The bills aren't going as high as they could. I would argue that we're taking our foot off the gas. It may not be the reduction. We may not actually be cutting into some people's bills as deeply as someone like. But again, I go back to, you know, the relief that we are able to offer. From my part, my house, I looked at my assessed values for fiscal year 2026. You know, my toll system is $618,000 and $300.00. And for last year, again, I saw a decrease. And we're talking about over 517,000. So, I mean, the reason I'm using this is, again, at my house assess value, I did see a decrease. You know, we are talking about modest, modest increase. And again, working out $273, then on average, our people is going to be $22.75. I'm not trying to minimize hardships for people, but I just want to be realistic about what we're talking about. And I don't want to scare the public. I don't want people to think that, oh my God, we're going to have this huge spike. When you do the math, it is actually a modest increase at the rate that we had at recap. Again, you know, I do support possibly a lower tax rate but I just want to be realistic with everyone here given that, you know, yes we raise the NP tax. That's going to allow us to offer some reduction but how deep do we want to go? Supervisor Angry. So I'll simply say to Mr. Shorty's budget he introduced that is all been taken care of because as we've heard that was the budget that we had prior to this 415. So the 18 million roughly that we just picked up from 415, I will say if we make a modest increase in revenue by targeting the industry for $18 million, then I'm going to make a modest investment in our citizens for that very same $82 million because his budget is met with the things we have. have now Maybe we don't spend all eight to me of it, but I will say You can't say a five-cent reduction is gonna help a car tax, but you can say a 20-cent reduction will you can't say 90-cent Reduction and residential tax is gonna help I get what you say in the modest piece But I think as we talk about it is and I'm just simply saying we got eight to $2 million and if I'm gonna spend it I would rather spend it on the people this one time because everything else has been met to the knees of what I've heard you all say about Mr. Short as budget and the personnel that we want to invest in so so we're not messing with that but anything additional maybe we have some leftover maybe we don't Maybe we need to find out and keep a total, running total of how much that 18 million has come down with these two major investments for the citizens. So. So where are you on property? 88 five. All right, supervisor Bailey. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just I just am listening to my colleagues, but most of all what you said about, we have to be very careful, I think, about how we make reductions and how we support our community. And I think we can't compare ourselves to other jurisdictions because we are at a pace and how we're raising funds and where we're going. And it's not going to happen overnight. And just because we have a great lump sum of money, that we got to consider, we don't know where we're going to be in terms of the national climate that we're in financially. So for me, I can definitely support the CMP, like I said, the 4.15. But I think that we would be comfortable in making sure that we're projecting if we go at 0.0895. Because I think that we need that cushion, that leverage for the lack of projection that we have nationally right now. And then the other was the $3.60. I'm flexible in that, but I'm very comfortable at $3.60 and supporting the personal property. Because we still have to understand we're not quite where we want to be given the national climate and given how we're trying to raise revenue as we have not in the past. The last two years we're raising revenue. So we've got to be very strategic in how we do that. So I'm right at Madame Chair, 0.895 and I'm at 3.60, given the discussion is going forward. on Flex'm flexible at 355, but definitely 4.15. Did that answer your question, Madam? I'm just with car tax. You're saying what are you at 360 or car tax? Where are you on that one? Currently at 360. I just wanted to verify. And then you're at 895. All right,. Supervisor Vega, Franklin, first I want to go to Bodhi because I'm sorry we haven't heard from Bodhi but I we haven't heard from him so I'm going to let him we've heard from everyone else multiple times. Sure thank you Madam Chair so I won't be too long with it here I just again want to reaffirm that if we go to even 895 and 360 on the vehicle tax, that really doesn't give us very much room to decrease the meal tax unless we're going to start talking about cut sound streaming. I'm just going to throw that out. Because again, we're only raising 18 million and going 895 on real estate and 360. And I believe my math is right, is already around close to $17,800 or around that, I think. And so that comes very close to what we raised in the CNP tax. So I just want to be cognizant of that. That all said, I'm a fan of 360 when it comes to vehicle tax. And I would be open to 895 for real estate. But again, that doesn't leave us very much to do anything with the meals tax. Thank you Madam Chair. And that is actually a very fair point because I am greatly concerned about the meals tax, which is why I'm not you know keen on really going too low but I'll go to Supervisor Vega then Franklin. You know we can't have it both ways. Sometimes we want to compare ourselves to other jurisdictions, when it's convenient for us, other times we don't, so which one is it? We preach affordability up here. Well, this is your chance, right? To provide that affordability that your constituents have been asking you for. They come in here, they email us, so this is the time to do it. Now, I will say it again. we would not be pinching for pennies or scraping the bottle of the barrel if we just slightly move the rubbing of the barrel if we just slightly move the revenue share agreement by one percent. How much additional revenue would we get if we modified the 57% to 56, let's say? And while you guys try to get that answer, I will, you know, just keep going down the road that supervisor angry was going. I think you have the answer to this question, but before I ask that question, because I already asked one and you're working on the answer for that, we get emails from folks, phone calls, people come here and say, I thought that the data center industry was going to be the answer to all of our problems, that they were going to generate all of this revenue. Well, the data center industry through the CNP tax has been generating a lot of revenue. It's not a lack of revenue. We don't have a problem of revenue in the county. It's just us adjusting our spending. And so when you hear folks making those comments, it's because they don't see those dollars that have come into our coffers, put to work for them. So to Supervisor Angri's point, I think he has spot on when he says that we're if we're gonna raise it to $4.15, real tax relief means putting it back to the taxpayers of this county. Not scraping the bottom of the barrel for pennies again. We have money here that we can play with. It's just going to require some bold action from us. And for us to really look at these numbers. I'm not asking for a significant change, Madam Chair, to the revenue share agreement. I'm just suggesting a small change and we wouldn't have to be debating this back and forth because we would generate the revenue that we need in order to fulfill a lot of the asks. And so, do you have an answer for me, Dave? Okay, now this is based on budget recap amounts, okay, at 90.6. If the revenue sharing agreement was changed from 57.23% to the schools, down to 56% to the schools, that revenue change is 21.3 million, based on my calculations. 21.3 million. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. And then the last question that I have for now is how much revenue did we receive from the CNP tax last year? Do you have that? Michelle saying yes behind you. From the rate increase or overall? Overall. I wanna say 56 million, but let us verify that please. If If we could come back to that, we'll work to verify that number. Okay. Again, if we went down to 56%, we're talking about $21.3 million that we have to move around. Okay. You gave me 56 million. That is a lot of money folks. So when people email us, when people call our offices and they don't see this being put to work on their behalf, that should worry us. Again, we don't have a revenue problem. We just have to prioritize our spending and I understand that a budget is a reflection of our, what did you call the Madam Chair? Our values. But I'll also talk about the fact that we have to analyze the budget and what are the needs, what is the function, responsibility, and role of your government? And then really ask ourselves about these wants. And are they necessary this fiscal year or can some of this stuff be pushed over to the next fiscal year? And even at 56%, if I'm not mistaken, they would still be getting 13% more than what they did last year. Am I right on that? Or it? I have the answer to your previous question. I'm just bombarding you with questions. I'm sorry. To answer the previous question, when the board increased the computer and peripheral tax rate to 370 as part of the FY25 budget, the county picked up 54.8 million in additional revenue. Sorry, what was that?, what was that? It's $23. You asked for a call right now. Yeah, yeah. But again, those are huge, huge amounts. And you know, it's important for us to be reminded about those numbers. Because it's a significant amount. And now we're going up to $4.15, which means even more money. Sarah, please, Frank, I'll just do. Yeah, just for those of us who do support the revenue sharing agreement and who actually do want to go down on the food and beverage, be careful with with these numbers. I mean, even at the point eight nine five, that's putting us in a very, very type position, particularly if we go down to 360. So, you know, again, I'm only gonna support the point nine zero six to go down to 365 with the increase in the CMP being at 415. I think that still puts us in a pretty good position to give the schools what they need and then still at a later date to go down on food In beverage and still get a decent amount of revenue So rise or angry Thank you, Madam Chair So let me just say I'm not interested in Lord in the Revenue Shared Agreement. I will say to my point again earlier, I am interested in these revenues. Now, that may also mean that I'm not interested in lowering the mills tax. And I said, because we can't have it also, it's going to be a given take. That may not be interested in even lowering the fire levy. But if this all means that the people are going to get the maximum out of this money that we just raised on the industry, this is what I'm interested in. So, you know, mills tax may have to wait to a next year. You know, fire levy may have to wait to a next year. I don't know, I'm just simply saying, but right now, we got 18 extra million in addition to a budget that was presented that meets everything with still some revenue. We're not thinking. I don't know, I'm just simply saying, but right now, we got 18 extra million in addition to a budget that was presented that meets everything with still some revenue. We don't have to get rid of all of this. But I think right now I'm interested in car tax and I'm interested in residential taxes being as low as they possibly can because of the revenue we have in now and now would be the time that we can do both. Take care of the people, our employees, our staff, and also take care of the people, our citizens. Thanks. All right, guys. I want to make this a little messy because people have already mentioned meals, Jackson. If you, when you speak, if you want to tell me where you are on that as well, I'm open to it. Supervisor Gourdy? Yeah. just so that we have some numbers here and you can guys can correct my calculations. At the rate of 0.895, the reduction would be 12.167 million. I have 12.167291.2. I have approximately 12.4, but it may be more than that. Okay, so you're strictly based on the value of Epinny. Okay, so 12.4. Actually, I've just been told, 0.895 is a total revenue reduction of 13.3 million. Okay, so what that saying is based on our assessments keep going, apparently we're getting more from our assessments based on some of the, because these numbers keep shifting north. So the reality is, as these numbers, the assessments keep shifting shifting north this is more of a tax increase on our citizens so so yet so even at 0.895 you said 13.4 would be the tax reduction and so based on your calculations what what would point 885B? The revenue reduction at the revenue reduction at 0.885 is $25.3 million. We've got 0.3. So that's a little more than now. I want to explain something if I made the board. What you're seeing is a deviation from the value of a penny that we previously gave you because we actually, when we actually run it through the county's revenue model, there's other reductions that occur for things like interest on taxes, things like that. OK. I just want to say that. The number we arrived at last night. Yes, sir. 23779. We hope. All right. Did you have anything else? Yeah, I just wanted to kind of make sure that I'm the numbers that I'm working with are in alignment with staff. So. All right. Vega. Just a quick question so that I not waste time. Supervisor, angry just said he's not interested in amending the revenue share agreement. Can we get just like a deal of fear? I think again, I just found ourselves an additional $21.3 million. I think we can't. I would venture to guess, most people are not a four ending revenue sharing, but let's just go around. Supervisor Bailey, where are you on revenue sharing? 1%, just 1%. No, I'm not in favor of moving the revenue share agreement. Supervisor, we're. Yes or no? Madam Chair, they've got a $40 million carry over from last year. They're giving them $40 million more on top of their ask for a total of 80. It needs to be adjusted because it's hamstringing us in our budget. Billie. No. Angry. You're no. All right, Vega, you're yes.. Franklin? Nope. Gordon? Microphone was on. Yeah. And I just also want to say the revenue sharing agreement has hamstrung the board, the school board. And that was their message to us. They planned based upon the revenue sharing agreement, which didn't fully fund their, but they're, they're,, in their mind was the requirements. So, so again, this thing is broken and needs to get, we need to have a serious conversation about meeting the requirements of our school system, not just having an arbitrary funding source that doesn't fully fund or meet the needs of our school system. And so, you know, and again, they're even if we take the 950 that was in their request. And it based on both supervisor wear and supervisors' boaties increases and other things that they did not fund, we can still get to 965 and meet those requirements. But instead, we're giving them 992, more than exceeds even their request and the additions. So that's in that that is 27 million dollars still left in there even if we give them a dip you know even if we gave them what they asked for plus provided additional funding for those, for special needs, councilor services, poor people funding increases, career tech programs, additional support to English learning students and computers, science and digital curriculum. So I mean, there's room to play here, even based on their own budget requests. And so I think we need to be serious about that I agree was supervisor weird. This is hamstringing us and the budget and the and the revenue sharing agreement is rev is hamstringing them Now thank you. So I'm a hard heck no on this one and the reason and life stated throughout our process Why support revenue sharing and I don't think it's hamstringing them? I think it's giving them budget certainty and they're going to budget up to what they are expecting. You know, and from what I took away from my conversation is that they want to be respectful. Yes, they have additional needs, obviously, that we can fund, but from my perspective, and I, it bears repeating again, our schools are our number one asset. It's what makes people want to live in this county. It makes people want to do business in this county. And I think our schools have a tremendous amount of needs. We've seen an increase in populations that have more needs. They need to make sure that we need to help make sure that they are adequately addressing those needs. We have a need to rehabilitate older schools and we do have a need for newer schools, particularly for new schools, particularly in the Brentsville and Potomac districts. So that's going to be a conversation that has to be had. So I support revenue sharing. We can go through this, but I think there is a consensus that revenue sharing will stay in place. I have Bodie and we are. That's the question but I wasn't done because I took the time answering. All right. Supervisor Vega. Thank you. So now that we know that I still want to be on the record for those in chambers those watching at home currently right now the school division sits on 101 million dollars of unencumbered funds. And there's a different supervisor Franklin because, because I know what you're gonna say. There's a difference between encumbered and a surplus. Am I correct, Dave? Yes, okay. So I'll say that again, $101 million. Even if we reduced it by 1%, they are still getting more money than they did last year. That is a fact. We're not talking about not fully funding our schools. We've been doing that. We've been more than generous. With our surpluses, we have to give to them. Ask yourself if they return the favor. No, they don't. So this is about prioritizing. This is about looking at this budget holistically. And I also want to share Madam Chair, that on average, based on my time on this board, more than $260 million annually go unencumbered. And that has been for the past five years. We all got the letter from their financial officer. I think that's who came when the school board came to speak to us. And they couldn't give me a number I asked how much they had But in the letter they stated that they had that number amount since June of last year if my memory serves me correct We certainly have to look at this revenue share agreement. We're going above and beyond And you know this is one of those hills that I am gonna die on because they have exactly what they need and then some I'm gonna say say this and you know again we have people who want to speak to this issue but I think the voice of the majority is clear and I also want to just note that it's called an agreement for a reason. It's an agreement between us and the schools. It is our decision with how much we're providing to the schools. It's a policy. It's also part of our principles of sound financial management. So I just want to note it is an agreement. It's a one-sided agreement because we're the ones who control the purse rings. But again, I think we've heard from the majority of the board that we want to keep it. You know, I have a few people on cue. I have Bodie, we're in Franklin. We'll go in that order. But we're going to have to land this plane. And it looks like, and we can going to have to land this plane and it looks like and we can continue to have discussions about the revenue sharing agreement. I think the appropriate vehicle at this point is our finance and budget committee, but I have those three people on cue so I'll let you speak. And then we're going to have to really talk about car property and mail stacks. All right, supervisor Bowdie. Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to actually pick up right from what you said. that I'm open to having discussions about the revenue share agreement, but not at markup literally a week before we adopt the budget. But we have not discussed with the school board directly this entire budget season. They predicated their budget on that. And I agree with you that even with we given the more with the revenue share, with the increases in the assessments, there is room between there asking what they gave us. However, I believe in the principle of the fact that we have a ready-sharing agreement policy in place. We have had it for decades at this point, right? At least about a decade or so, yeah, decades at this point. 27 years. 27 years. I don't think the appropriate time to buck that again is a meeting before our budget adoption. I think that we should, to Madam Chair's point, have a finance and budget committee meetings about I think that we should have those with the school board. And I want to hear more of what Sue Razzagordi said in his comments at that kind of meeting where he if we have school have school board members that believe that it's hamstringing them as well I'd love to hear that from them. I would love to have a long discussion of that because if they feel like they're constrained by it then we should talk about what that looks like. What a post revenue sharing agreement world policy works like with them. But again, I don't think that to honor what they, their certainty are relished with them, but also what the tax payers and what the constituents of this county know to be true, which is right now we have a 57.23 commitment to the school division, which means that. They want us to keep that at least for right now until we have more discussions about that with the duly elected school board that then takes that money and does it out. So that's what I want to say on that point. To go back to Meals Tax, like I said, I'm willing to entertain and talk about going down a percent on that. the maximum that I would be able to stomach this, you're going down, understand that we have other discussions to have, but I know Madam Chair, you asked at the outset, long before we got to the Revenue Sharing Agreement policy discussion going to the meals tax. So I just wanted to add that too. Thank you, Madam Chair. All right,'re not I'm sure I'm going to keep this dead horse a little more. It was clear from the presentation by the superintendent that she developed a needs-based budget. That's why I asked her if it was a needs-based budget. And the statute is clear. They are to deliver us a needs-based budget that funds the SQL. Regardless of what the school board chair and his, what I would characterize as a stump speech from the podium said, their ask without the wish list is $40 million more than in the proposed budget, because the proposed budget is based on assessments that weren't in place when they got the original projections, that the projections were far short of what was actually assessed and what the rate delivered means that they were budgeted or they were proposing a budget that was not actually geared towards the number that we would be giving them under the director under the CXO's proposal. In essence, what you're doing by continuing down this road is giving the school division $40 million of additional unencumbered monies that we are exercising zero oversight over have no way to direct to education, construction or anything else on top of a hundred million dollars of unencumbered plus the CIP money they've already sitting on for school construction including a significant percentage of which will probably not get used on the 14th high school, given its lack of need, it's time to get fiscally responsible and give the residents some oversight of the taxes that they're paying us and that we're then allocating. And in this case, blindly allocating 40 million to the schools, which means we spend 30 million more. If we reduce the rates, the delta between their request and what was, what's in the proposed budget necessarily shrinks. So with each dollar, you are each percentage, you knock off of, take your pick, real, vehicle tax or food and beverage that narrows that gap. But in order to narrow that gap, we need to look at some other cuts and I've made some proposals here where you fund things with proper dollars and not general fund dollars for capital improvements where we save on both ends and the ultimate beneficiary of that is both the commercial and the residential taxpayer picked the rates you want to you want to use to do it. But blindly going down this road is just in continuing to go down this road after 27 years. And I didn't I never agreed to this resolution. I don't think some of us were even alive when it happened, but it's grossly irresponsible. All of us. All of us. Supervisor Franklin and Bailey. Sure, I just want to clarify, and I really think we got to bring the schools back in. Dr. McDade and their finance people, the 100 million that's been thrown around, that's actually for reserves. They can't spend that money. And it's actually under their 263 million budget that they roughly have. They should have one to two to three months of reserve, really three months of reserves. And they don't. They have 100 million, which is under the 263 million that they should. So if something goes wrong, they can barely keep the lights on. So the 100 million is not money that they can play around with. It's money in reserves. Thank you. Bailey? What about the extra 40 million? I'm not Bailey. You think we can go all day? No. It's Bailey's turn. Bailey's turn. OK. So, again, I'm not Bailey. You think we can go all day? No, we don't have a money. It's Bailey, sir. It's Bailey, sir. Okay, so, again, I'm just not good. I don't think we should talk about now the revenue share agreement. That's not where we are. We said we were going to meet with them and talk about how we wanted to talk about funding and budgeting prior to the budgeting season. We did not do that. I think out of respect for what we are asking, we need to have that meeting and not during markup period for me. And so I'm going to support that. But I think that as we go through this, we cannot, there needs to be cuts and I am for cutting the mills tax. I just want to say that up front. But I think we have to be reasonable when we talk about cutting the real estate tax. We have to be reasonable about that because we don't know how the climate is going to be nationally. And we've said that also during the budget season. And so we can't make this make a decision vacuum by just throwing some numbers out there. We've got to be reasonable and have a big picture thought and decision making about this. So I'm still that between 0.90 and 895. I'm still there. But we've got to have, I mean, it just doesn't make sense for us to just throw numbers out there. And I believe into what Victor said about protecting the citizens. Absolutely, we have to protect the citizens. But because we don't have a prediction or solid footing on what's going to happen nationally, we also have to look at that. And when we don't, we're making not good decisions. So I'm going to go back. I'm going to say something to do. I'm going to go to Vega because I do want to get to make sure, you know, and I appreciate the robust discussion. But I do want to get to where people are and the ones we're looking at right now are car property and meals. You know, for me, car tax, I'm at 360. I'm going to reiterate that for property, I, you know, because I want to do meals tax for meals tax. I'm at three cents. I'm doing an incremental decrease every year. As we see more data center revenue, as we see things going online, I'd like to slowly phase out the meals tax. Now on property, I am going to go back. I am going to go with 0906. So that's where I'm at, Vega. You're next and cute. Yes Madam Chair, I just want to remind my colleagues that I am not making numbers and pulling them out of thin air. I sent an email with my budget proposal, the rates, eliminating the meals tax, supporting the CNP increase, and where the cuts would go and how we would generate the make up for the income that we were losing. So this is not the day of markup. I made comments about tackling the revenue share agreement. And I had some interest from my colleagues to my left. But let's be real. We have to be serious about wanting to really tackle and have the conversation. So I just want to go on the record saying that I've done my due diligence. I haven't brought anything today that I haven't already brought to my colleagues months ago. I'll go back February 19th. That's when I made my budget proposal known to everybody on this day as in my intentions of tackling the revenue share agreement along with the meals tax. With that being said, Madam Chair, you had kind of asked where we were and it seemed like we were kind of stuck between the proposal that you sent also via email which was what 0.889 or 5? It was 895. 895 and then the other proposal of 0.885 and I had proposed 350 for the correct and so Super supervisor Franklin was the only one that was supportive of the .906 rate. So, do you want to do the straw poll for that? What I'm going to do is I want to go back around in case people have different, where they're at, you know, after the discussion, people have different ideas. So, for you, you are at 350 for car tax. You are at the 885. And then for meals, where are you? I eliminate all of it. Zero. No, let me, let me. So we will come back to you on meals. Supervisor Boating. Thank you, Madam Chair. I don't mean to throw another number in this, but Dave, question for you, you don't have to get back on me because I know you need to make calculations. If we lowered the real estate rate from 906 to a solid just 90, well, would that look like in terms of reductions in not only the revenues, but also the tax bill? I'll answer the tax bill first if I may. At $0.90 even. Exactly. The average tax bill increase would be $239 or 4.9%. At $0.90 even, the general revenue decrease by itself on real estate is $7.2 million. Thank you, and I'll be able to answer more questions after I take a second. I'm sorry, can you give me those numbers again? Yes ma'am. At 90 cents even, the average tax bill increases $239 or 4.9% increase. And the general revenue impact at 90 cents only is a $7.2 million decrease in revenue. All right. Before we move on, Supervisor Baker, what did you just whisper to me because I it on the record. I'm okay with the three-cent reduction. All right, three. Hopefully next year we get rid of it all together. All right, next is the supervisor Franklin. I'm at .906 for real estate, 365 for personal property, and I have not thought about the food and beverage because we're not doing it tonight. All right. Before I start calling on folks, is anyone else want to jump in? Madam Chair, can I ask a minute? Supervisor Gordy. Can also people, can you press? So go on. Can you give me the numbers that you just gave but at $0.89? At $0.89 even the average tax bill increases $182 or 3.7% increase. And at the $0.89 tax rate General revenue decreases $19.3 million. Okay. Thank you. All right. You were saying at $0.89, I'm sorry. What was the average bill? Average increase. $182 increase or $3. I'm sorry, at $0.89. $182 increase or 3. I'm sorry at 89 cents. $182 increase or 3.7%. All right. I just want to kind of before we go through and talk about some of these things or taking these troubles. I just want to see if anyone has any additional questions or if you guys need a little bit of time to think because otherwise, and if you need time when I call and you just let me know that you need additional time. So Gordy, where are you right now? I would prefer to maximize our tax savings to the citizens and the best way to do that is to the personal property tax. So I'm at $350 on that. I prefer $885 but it would be willing to go to $89 on the real estate and $3 cents on food and beverage. Hold on. Is that for the sense? All right, Franklin. Yeah yeah. Yeah. Vega you went angry. Where are you? Yeah. So point 885 real estate 350 vehicle personal property. I'll do the same for the mills tax three three three cents three percent. Yeah, I guess it will be the rest. Boatty. A flat nine zero sorry flat 90 cents for real estate 360 for vehicles and and 3% for the meals tax. We're. Get complicated. Prefer eight eight five can read the room would be willing to go to point eight nine. But that means staying at three three point five at personal property and three at meals tax unless you want to go to 885 and go to 3.6 on personal property. There's a menu of things. I'll bend a little bit but not much. Bailey. Three cents from MealsTax, 350 for personal property and 9-0. So we're a little over the map. I want to start with Meals Tax. That is an ordinance change and based on the temperature of the room, it looks like we want to move forward and the staff is going to have to come back to us, hold on. Staff will need to come back with resolutions related to this item because it's an ordinance. Yes, it's an ordinance. And also, just so everyone knows that any changes to the meals tax would actually be effective to anyway first. So I just want to let everyone know that. So it does look like for meals tax, we're in a good place to, you know, for staff to come back with some resolutions related to the item. So that one is done. So I'm going to go back to property tax. I'm flexible. I just will be honest with you. I'm nervous about the 885. while I do want to see real relief I just don't think we're at that number just yet. I don't think we're there. Yeah, you want to rip off that bandaid. I'm not ready to rip off the bandaid. I'm just going through So we have Gordon who's at 885 or 899 Franklin 906 Vega 885. I'm flexible. I can get 906. I can do 899 although that kind of hurts me. Ingris 885. Bodys at 90. Where's that? You can You can be flexible at $89. We're. The FF absolutely necessary. But that's going to depend on what the car chassis is. All right. And Bailey, you're at 906 or you're are at 90 you're 90 so The car is you know Gordy's 350 Margaret 365 Vegas 350 Angry 350 Bodys 360, Wears 350, Bailey 350. So 350 is for car tax, so 350. Now I can be the marks of the list. All right, so here we go. So I just want to let everyone know, again, to reiterate mail stacks, we're going to look at going to three cents and that will be an ordinance change and the staff will come back next week for the car tax. We are going down to $3 and 50 cents. Are you? I just have it. Can you clarify is the mails tax going to 3%? Yes. Okay. And keep hearing three cents. I just want to make sure I've got it. Yeah. Yes. And again, In that effective January 1 of 26 because of the notification requirements. Because it is a resolution notification requirements, this is how it's going to work. I don't know if you had anything to add, Mr. Shorter on mail tax, but. We will, you are right, Madam Chair. This will require an ordinance change. We will come back as part of the budget adoption resolutions with language specific to essentially directing staff to come back and come back with the effective rate that you establish on next week. So if that rate is at a 3%, then we will notate that in the language. Madam Chair, if I'm right. Yes, I'm from the other way. In speaking with Mr. Sinclair and Mr. Tweed about this yesterday, I think and I think three of us would agree and I believe Mr. Shorter would agree. One of the principal reasons you have to push it back to January 1 is so that the Establish the opportunity to and I agree with this modify their systems get their software changed, get their reporting changed and it's going to take a significant amount of time and here we are already at the end of April. So making it effective July 1 would be problematic. Am I overstating this? I'm just saying July. She can explain it a whole lot better not July one was not the was not I don't Madam chair. I believe you said January one. Yeah, I'm explaining why it's January one or not July one like everything else All right, thank you so much. I see right there frankly. Did you have something? Yeah, I just want to reiterate what the chair said about. You know, it's going to be a lot of heartburn. If we're going down to personal property tax, which I am fine with going down because that impacts more people. But if we're going to go to 350, we really have to look closely at that real estate tax rate. You know, I'm going to stick to the point 906, particularly if we want to open up the ordinance for the mills tax to go down by one percentage. We got to think about the revenue and the fact that we're sharing that with our school system. So I just want to reiterate what the chair said is going to be tough with some of the other cuts that we're making. All right, so what I'm going to ask staff to do for a minute, if you guys can do some calculations for us, we have us keep a running total. If we are looking at, I know it's going to be hard because Meals Tax is January 1st, but if we are looking at the reduction, you know, we raise the MP on the 415, we're going to go for CAR tax for 350. We are going to look at a 1% reduction in Meals Tax. you give us an idea or do you need time? No, we have that for you right now, if you put like. Okay, let's go. Wait, hold on. I'm sorry. I can listen to one person that wants. Dave, Dave, you're the man right now. Shooter and equipment at 415 vehicle personal property at 350 and a 3% food and beverage tax rate. Total general revenue, we are down approximately $1 million. No decisions yet on real estate. Okay. So right now we are down $1 million. $950,000 to be precise. Okay, I appreciate that supervisor Franklin. Oh, I wish you stayed here. Oh, you're still here. All right, I think this has been a really good discussion. We are at 503. I would actually, if people feel good about discussing property, real property, I say we keep going and then we take a break or do people want to take a break now. Keep going. All right, we're going to keep it. We got two people who are already taking a break. I do want to keep this going because we already have two people out I'm just gonna say let's take five minutes, okay? Five minutes you She is going to be back shortly. She said. So I am really glad with the addition that we have. We will settle on car tax. We will settle on mail stacks. Now we're really going to dig in our Russell Lucky Routes foot, whatever you need for the property tax rate because I just want to remind folks where we are right now. Thank you, Dave, some clear. With going down to $350 for car tax and going to 3% for meals tax right now we're about a 1 million loss and that's a rough estimate. And so, oops, yeah, yes. Okay, because of the full year impact of the meals tax being realized in fiscal 27. We are down 950,000 in FY 26, but 7.2 million in FY 27. Can you say that again, please? Yes, with the decisions already made thus far tonight, general revenue is down a net of $950,000 in FY26. But we are down $7.2 million in FY27. And the major reason for that is the full year impact of the food and beverage tax being reduced to 3%. Remember it, please remember it's a half year impact in FY26 because it would begin January 1, but the full year impact, that's the major reason for that. Yeah. Yeah. If I might, Madam Chair. Please, everyone who wants to speak jumping Thank you. I heard supervisor. It's great. Oh, OK. I mean, I don't see you though. Hit your, hit your, hit your, hit your re-cycle button on the left. Bottom left. Click that. Hit the refresh button. Everyone refresh. It's not the older. hit your hit your Hit your recycle button on the left bottom left click that we hit the refresh everyone refresh Learned something for my All right Gordy wins go Gordy so do we have any anticipated? What the anticipated crease increase in the CMP would be in 27? The staff has made no assumptions about what that rate would be in fiscal 27. We have outlined it at more than $7 million. So thank you. No wait, let me please let me clarify. We made no assumptions on the CMP tax rate. The forecast has built in, already had increases built in. Just in the valuation in general. Supervisor Vega. Now the7.2 million that you mentioned for FY27, that's we can make adjustments later down the road to mitigate that, right? Yeah. It's not like that's. It might require some hard decisions, but yes. Thank you. Supervisor Weir. Super Rosa Gordy's point, that's a 2027 or FY27 problem, but it will be mitigated significantly in my view by the increased number of servers that will be online in FY27 that are not online in FY26. And I think that will be a significant number is probably an understatement given the state and the state of the construction right now and the near operational status of a couple of new data centers. Let me say Madam Chair if I can and I stated this at budget recapping and proposed part Part of the objective here and part of our requirement is that we present and eventually adopt a budget with a five year balance budget. And that is every single year of the five years that the budget is balanced. So the 7.2 or whatever the gap might be between 27, 28 or 29, we have to resolve as part of the adoption of this budget. All right. Thank you for the clarification. I don't know what anyone else wants to jump into the queue. I really do want to go lower, but I'm also mindful again of what the shortfall is going to be for this year or for the year we're looking at fiscal 2026. Each year we're going to do the budget. We can make a decision at that time where we want to go with each of our tax rates. But just looking at the year ahead, we do have a number of asks or a number of things that we're gonna be looking at from budget recap and we've gotta be mindful about what cuts we're willing to make or not going to make. And so I'm really focused on 26 because I wanna focus on the year ahead. Again, I would have liked to go just slightly lower with a property tax rate because I do understand that people are hurting. I am, again, looking at the threat of a pending recession. But as I said previously, you know, with the data center tax rate, it's going to bring an additional revenue. And I think we're going to have more room to play around in future years. As more data centers go online, as we collect more taxes, I think that we're going to have more room to be flexible. And I want us to get to a point where we have a flat tax rate or we have a decrease. Personally, I don't feel that we're there yet. But I want to say that I understand where people are at. I am a single mom. I know it's like a little paycheck to paycheck. I know it's like a balance of budget and I have to make sacrifices. But I also want to be realistic that a lot of people are not going to see, this is not a huge spike that we're proposing and a lot of people are not going to see a huge spike. The average family, the average home is going to see a modest increase. That is going to amount to roughly $22.75. Again, that's not every household. There are people who are going to see a decrease. I saw a decrease last year. But again, since we've kind of landed on reducing you know, different, since we landed on reducing the car tax and reducing the meals tax, I want to go around again. I have all these messy sheets to see where folks are with the property tax rate. I don't know if anyone has any comments before I kind of go around and see where we land. Anyone else? All right, now we're. Madam Chair, I've already on record is saying I prefer point eight eight of already accommodated point eight eight five. I have to look at this particularly with respect to the to the Gainesville district and the the hits that the Gainesville District residents will take are significantly higher than they are in some other some other magisterial districts but I think you also have to look at this long term. The average increase in the Gainesville District is probably on average over the last 10 years to $250 a, $250 a year, sometimes more, in many cases significantly more. So although, and I've heard this reference before, it's one piece of a month, well after 10 years, it's two dinners at Mortons a month. I think my tax bill since I bought the house is quadrupled. It's a cumulative effect and you reset the baseline every year and an incremental increase this year is significantly more impactful than a similar percentage increase in years past just because of the assess values of a risen. So I think if we're looking at really delivering on what has been promised by this board in many land use applications over the last six or seven years, I think we finally need to address the real estate tax side of the equation and saying that there are also, there is a lot of room left in the expenditure side of the budget to make up the difference and the delta between what the school school has proposed and what will be budgeted to them will decrease as a result of both the decreases in the revenue and and changes to the expenditure side of the ledger so at at the end of the day, I think will be much closer to 77.2 than anybody actually thinks. I think in the budget that I sent everybody yesterday, it was not 57.2, it was 56.9, something like that. Food for thought. And so where are you right now? 8808-4400-888-888-888-888-888- you said up by 27, 7.2. What was FY 26? What was that over 950,000 950,000? Okay, so total. Yeah, so help me just clarify. So when we started this, we had a proposed budget that the rate was set at 37070. Then we, under CMP rate was 370. We rate that to 415. That generated another $18 million monthly. If you like, I can go through the breakdown for you. Okay. Computer and peripheral at 415. That generated revenue up 18 million. Vehicle personal property going down to $3.50 rate. That's a $3.2 million reduction in revenue against the 18 gain. And then the food and beverage going to from 4% to 3% for a half year in FY26 is $5,750,000 down. Okay, and so then we're roughly at combined. All of that combined, the revenue is down $950,000 in FY 26. Okay, that was the, now I'm playing with that 18 mil, or you're talking, so the 18 mil that we just generated of new money it's gone it's gone and that's gone because of what you just went through there because of the decisions on vehicle rate and food and beverages so that map was because my map itself that was the 18 mil okay but then that will put us back at the kind of the starting block to the budget that we're working with. Close to it. Yes. Okay, so then now we got a real decision to make about real estate tax. Okay. Okay. All right. Well, that's it. I was going to say do you have a preference at where you're at for real, further? Well, because this is going to build more or sound-ify. And we stick it. Lower rate. It's going to be a lot lower. I can come back to you. Yeah, come back. Supervisor Vigo. Thank you, Madam Chair. I respectfully disagree with you in terms of your perception of what's modest and what's not. Again, I think about people on a fixed income. I think about people living paycheck to paycheck. This board preaches affordable housing. This is our shot to give people real and meaningful tax relief. We obviously have the funds. If we really want it get them, we know how to do it, but there is no real interest from the board in doing that, and I'm just gonna keep reiterating that. An increase of $100 a year is a huge jump. You know, when you talk about five, 10 years, so I will go ahead and maintain my position at 0.885. Because again, you again, we talk about making this county affordable. We talk about the cost of living. Well, this is our shot. This is our opportunity to really put some meaning behind that and give people real and meaningful tax relief. I was looking through my inbox and I couldn't find it. But I think the email came from Dave. I'm not sure who asked the question in regards to one was the last time that I believe was personal property tax was lower. Do you remember that question? Dave? Yes, I believe the question was how long generally how long has the personal property tax on vehicles been $3.70. Correct. And I believe I indicated through research, research of budget adoption resolutions, I think it's been that rate since. 1990, if my memory serves me correct, 91. Fiscal year 91. Right. In fiscal year 90, the rate was $3.75 for the record. And obviously the times changing, you have to take other things into consideration and whatnot. But again, folks, this is our opportunity to provide real meaningful tax relief. You know, what is a slight increase for some is a significant one for others. And it's our job to make tough decisions just like we do with our personal finances. I want to go to the store and shop, but I have priorities. I have two children, they have priorities that I need to fund, and I have to hold back. And I think that as responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars, we have to look at this county budget as we do with our personal one because it's easy to spend other people's money. That's easy. But when you sit back and you think about your own finances and how you manage your finances, I can bet my right pinky supervisor Franklin that we're not reckless with our personal finances. But I'll leave that at that. Thank you Madam Chair. All right does anyone else want to jump in before I start kind of going down the line to see where people are at? I'm at 885. I, yeah, I put you down there. 885. Anyone else want to jump in? Comments? Franklin? Yeah, so thank you and I'm glad Mr. St. Claire kind of clarified that the increase that we have for the 415 is essentially gone. So the 0.96 I think is going to be important, particularly if we're going down a percentage on food and beverage. So just for my colleagues, just really something to think about. Thank you. And you're still 906 again clarifying 906. Gourdy. I'm still at 0.885. All right, I'm going to go backwards. We are I know where you're at. Bailey. I'm at .90. And I don't think just for point of reference, because I understand what Supervisor Vegas said. I don't think we're being reckless. I think we still have to plan according to the future. And so that's all I have, Madam Chair. Boate. .906. Angry. Well, I'm going to tell you this. I'm going to ask for something because this is all about negotiations. And I started this thing by talking about the fire living. I wanted to take that down to .0684. I know we're not there yet, but I'll go to that .0684. I get support on that. I'll meet you guys at that 0906. But I, because I want to cut, I want to tax cut in that fire living, and that'll help out the people as well. So if I can't get that, I'm sticking with my 885. Hold on one second because I need to pull up. I have a whole list of rates. But I just want to make sure I have exactly where we've advertised the fire levy. And I guess they would, if you can tell me what that would generate if we we went down from 0, 7, 4 to 0, 6, 8, 4 on the fire living. 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, yeah. Okay. Generally, yes, that would be a $4 million decrease in revenue in the levy. And that fire levy is not in the journal fund that's its own Yes, so yes, that would be just for clarification for the rest of the board that would be a 5% decrease in the rate From 7.2 cents to 6.84 cents If I'm hearing correctly So you said 62.84 that's where you want to go. I'm sorry 60. 68. 6.84 sense. Looks like Victor is kind of our kill shot right now. I'm mad at you and I ain't mad at you, but I am mad at you. All right. Where are people? I'm gonna give this one thing. This is not a boring meeting. Supervisor Franklin, them voting. Yeah, so the, I guess one question supervisor angry than another Dave, because we've gotten several letters from several of the fire companies. I think one or two, I think Dell City in support, but the others very much so in opposition. And so I guess just to get a little bit more rationale in terms of what your cuts would be for. And then today if we cut 4 million, how will that impact the fire and rescue system? So you asked me first, I'll let you jump in a second. We, and I'm going to go first, because we spent an hour without commonwealth attorney about cutting her budget and she makes up 2.7% of the entire, you know, safe and secure community budget. Fire and Rescue makes up 44% of that entire budget. That budget is extremely too big and I will guarantee it is a $4 million cut in the labor that only goes to firing rescue volunteers included is not going to be anywhere of a dent to that service render and I would challenge this board that we need to be looking into those service responses and what does that data look like as this firing the rest of it has grown so big in itself. This is just one area that I'm even looking at. So there's many more that we will be discussing in the future after this whole budget process, but I would want to be clear on that. That this, that four million dollars is not going to hurt anything inside of our fire and levied and won't hurt services that we give provide to our citizens. I'll let you take it from there. I'm sorry. are Franklin, we kind of cut you off. Did you have more? Well, yeah, so that answered from Supervisor Angry kind of his, why he wants to cut. And it sounds like it's because you're saying the budget is really big. Mr. Sinclair, do we know, and I don't know if we have anyone from Fire and Rescue here to kind of talk about the impact. Excuse me, that would be like, are we, will we have to rearrange any services for FY 26? I know we're trying to do some renovations at some of my fire companies. So I just want to know kind of what the impact will be. There we go. So if I may set the stage for Chief Label, the board has a couple options within the Fire Levy. The revenue generated for FY26 is really going towards three or four major initiatives, okay, that the board would have to decide, okay. One major initiative is the centralized apparatus replacement program. The total ask there is 12 million, about 5 or 6 million of which was being funded by FireLevy Revenue in FY26, the rest from fund balance. Another major initiative, I believe, was 5 million dollars for structural firefighting gear. I'm not hearing anyone on the board say that they want to cut that. Okay, but that is what that some of that FY26 revenue was funding. All right, at $5 million in the proposed budget. And then the other major initiative is Station 30 apparatus. All right, now you may be asking yourselves, we haven't even started design on Station 30, and that's a fair point. But if you remember from Chief Label's presentation in March, we have to order apparatus three or four years in advance of delivery. So those are the three major things that the Fire Levy is funding in FY26 in terms of new investments. Okay, now something that the board can consider and I don't know this isn't necessarily my recommendation but you can choose to use more Fire Levy fund balance for apparatus replacements to compensate for the four million million. That would reduce projected fire-lovy fund balance to less than $10 million. It's still roughly about 10% of annualized revenue, but that is an option available to the board. And with that, if you like, I'll turn it over to Chief Lebel sure that will be helpful I already said too much yeah in where station 30 it would be within the Brentsville district good evening Tom Lebel the fire chief madam chair members, the fire chief. Madam Chair, members of the Board, Mr. Shorter. I'm sorry, you may proceed. Are you guys ready? You mind repeating the question? Oh, yeah. The question was, what the impact of a $4 million cut would be now? Mr. Sinclair has mentioned centralized apparatus that's planned for FY 26, as well as structural firefighter gear, which sounds important, as well as station 30 to start planning for that, which is going on to Wellington Road. It sounds like one option may be to take from the fund balance, and so super, super, super, super angry, that's one thing to think about. They would still get $4 million. And so if your angle is to cut the budget altogether, I think that's a different type of discussion we may need to have. If I could just to be clear, so the fire will be just one piece of that budget. So what is the budget that's coming out of the general fund going in the fire rescue? It is the major budget. So, so, so let's, let's not confuse that the fire livy funds the fire department by itself. There's a whole, it's part of money. And then I'll simply say this, is there a balance right now in the fire livy? Like there is a, like what is, what is the balance right now in the fire living like there is a like what is what is the balance right now in the fire living? The fund balance. Yes. Based on the proposed budget, the projected fund balance with all the uses in the proposed budget would be around I think 10 million. 10 million. With the No, without the floor. Yeah. Okay, so with the $4 million revenue reduction theoretically, that would be the projected fund balance would be drawn down to 6 million. Right. And so, yeah. And so again, this may be a discussion for the board, but if your goal is to reduce the size a fire and rescue key suggesting going to the fund balance they would they would still get the four million. So I well I'm sorry because if the board supported it and the whole point here is the fun the fire levy is its own fun so it's not taxed by any that that's a non-tax fund that goes strictly to the fire rescue. Now, the four main is not coming out of the journal fund because it's in R&N and the fire livid as a fund balance. So that money sits in the fire livid. It's not coming out of the journal fund. So we don't have to pay into that. That money's already in a balance. And the fire livid, additionally, that, Even that at that original 0.72 the revenue generated was what 30 million what's the what's the total revenue generated for the fire levy it was approximately 81 million so your mind is some 4 million from the 81 million is what we're talking about so you're still sitting at a very heftyy fire living tax. That's coming in there. Sure, yeah, and I'll give back to Chief Lebel. I think the point that I was trying to make is we can agree to the reduction of the 4 million. But what I'm saying is if your goal is to overall reduce the size of their budget, I'm not sure that that's still going to happen because we can still have a discussion about dipping into the fun balance. Which we will, which I don't see why we would do that, but you definitely could. And I was saying this is just that one for me. I just, as I said before, I think that that department is entirely too big. And so I think there's a whole list of discussion that we need to have anyway. So it starts somewhere. So this is where I'm starting. I do you have anything else to provide for Franklin? Well, I would like to hear from Chief Lebel. But then I would love to hear from my colleagues because I mean, those three items sound kind of important. Actually, why you're on this? Because I want to jump in here too and ask this cook. Because I think it really ties into what you're saying. You know, we're talking. I mean, those three items sound kind of important. Actually, why you're on this? Because I want to jump in here too and ask this good. Because I think it really ties into what you're saying. You know, when we're talking about the fire fun balance, how much do we really need to maintain? Is this something that impacts our credit ratings? So I, you know, our fiscal outlook. So wait, Lebel, you can just kind of stand inside. I want you to go anywhere. No, baby, no, you stand right here. So yes, our rating, and she's looking at our total reserves. We are low for a triple A. We are not triple triple A. When it comes to our reserve balances, they want the reserve balances to be close to 30% of our general revenues. Right now, we are at the end of 24. we had dipped under 20%. So as we continue to draw reserves down, that delta shrinks. And it could become problematic for us. I would caution, any funds should have a reserve that fund balance of some sort. Our unassigned fund balance in our general fund is based on general fund revenues. It's not based on our fire-lovy revenues. So it would be prudent for the fire-lovy to have a fund balance as well. All right, thank you, Lebel. If you can step home back. To be frank, this is the first time I'm hearing about an amount of COT. I really would need to go back and meet with my team to talk about how we would absorb a $4 million COT. I have Boatey, then we are. Yeah, thank you Madam Chair. I appreciate the discussion. I know that Sir Ersa angry has not been shy about this. I know that he gave us a presentation earlier on in the budget cycle. And even to the finance committee about this with much more robust cuts, frankly. But I have Hartburn about this at least for this year. And I'll tell you why. We've talked about it at Nazim during the last few weeks Around where we see things going in terms of increases in costs for vehicle parts vehicles themselves Equipment structures what have you the core part and was re reiterated just now of a lot of what the fire Lovis and to to be paying for, at least for this fiscal year, are precisely those things, right? Vehicles, building components for new buildings, renovations for buildings, equipments for firefighters, when I'm not sure how much that's gonna pivot on things, but we know that most everything in the world now has not just come from one single place, right? Parts of different equipment and vehicles come from all over the world where we are. So we don't know how much that's going to impact folks. And I have concern about cutting into what's really a pretty small reserve in the fire lobby knowing they're likely to be escalating costs throughout the year if not longer. So again, I appreciate the conversation. I know this is a conversation that needs to be had at some point, but I'm not comfortable with lowering the fire levy this year. Supervisor Weir than Bailey. Chief, you walked away from the mic too fast. Let me start off with, I'm generally in agreement with supervisor angry, albeit for some different reasons. I've said for quite some times, it goes back years prior to me even sitting up here that the fire levy is not what the fire levy was once. And it doesn't serve the intended purpose that it was adopted for in the first place given the significant reduction in the volunteers and I would suggest that if we lost all of our volunteers we lost we lose the ability to collect the fire levy I could be wrong mad at maternity but I believe that's correct we had a discussion a couple of weeks ago it's my understanding you do not have an accounting for all of the fire proffers available to your department or have you gotten that. I've received that. You have received that. You know what the balance is? Not off top, my add. I would suggest that it's significant. It's in the millions of dollars. Okay. Most of or many of the projects that we're talking about are capital expenditures. And I think we agreed that those proper funds should be used for those and a significant portion of what would be drawn off of the fire levy with a reduction could be easily made up for with proper for the capital projects that you got on the books for this year. Similarly, do you have an accounting for the fire funds that are going to be transferred to the department from the from the towns of Occoquan Haymarket and Dumfries? Yes, sir we do. Do you know what the total one that is? I don't off top my head but we can find out. It isn't not in the millions but it is another significant number. It's a significant number. I know the town dealt with that. Yeah, I wouldn't have been able to. And transferring or paying for equipment. If I may, they specify the equipment and we work with them as it's there. You're welcome. I made them do that 20 years ago. So I wasn't just going to give Chief McGee a blank check. So think there is the ability with very little manipulation required to use particularly older fire fire profers that are significant and sitting around for in many cases a decade to offset the impacts of super as our angry suggestion. So at this point, Tom, I'm going to support super as our angry on his proposed rate. Survivor Bailey. Thank you, ma'am chair. I want to make sure that we are really matching apples with apples and oranges with oranges, if that makes sense. And so I would like to understand in detail what the needs are because I know one of the things we experience, what the needs are in the cost if we're talking about reducing fire level. Levy, because in the past we were trying to amp up everything because things had been not supported for so long. So now we are in a rhythm and spending and how we're projecting our cost because equipment was backlogged because COVID. And now we're at a place where we can move forward with the fire stations and with the apparatus and equipment that we need. And so I would be very careful in just reducing the fire level or anything because it was just too big. Because when you talk about public safety, what does that mean? As well as when we hire, you know, too big would be a lot of people on your roster. But we needed because the population is increasing and the services are increasing. So what I would like to see as we move forward outside of the budget cycle is maybe we sit down and chief, you can explain to us when you tell, you know, where we can cut or where, you know, what's imperative because I'm not a fireman. I just like y'all, but I'd like to see that. And I'm a little uncomfortable right now and just cutting you because you're too big. But I want to understand it. And I want to understand it from my colleague as well. Supervisor Baker? Just to be clear, supervisor, you do recall that supervisor angry said that if we modified the fire levy, he would be supportive of the .906. And you just said that you would support supervisor angry's ask. So does that mean that now you're changing your position and you're supporting the .906? No, I don't have a situation with ethics. Okay, well, just wanted to make sure that I reiterate that. I might consider your request if you meet us halfway with the rate. What's the number you wrote down, girl? I'm asking Supervisor Ingrid if he wants to play. We're going to play. I don't think that that matters because you have heard from my colleagues that they're not only one said that is that would no no no no That's true I Guess you don't think you have the support I said either I'm going to we're doing that. I'm staying 885 so I'll stay 885 will be done with this Understood I hate to say this but I'm going to be doing that. I'm staying 885. So I'll stay 885. We'll be done with this. Understood. I hate to say this, but I'm going to say this. First of all, I really do want to protect our creating ratings and I do want to protect reserves. And I know by saying this, we're going to have to kill other projects. But so be it. I'm not comfortable cutting the fire loving. I'm not comfortable with that at all. You know, and I appreciate, you know, supervisor, and greener your team. but so be it. I'm not comfortable cutting the fire loving. I'm not comfortable with that at all. You know and I appreciate you know supervisor angry in your team with my team we had a discussion. I think that's going to be an ongoing discussion. You know and also involving fire but I am not going to play with public safety and if I lose your support for the current tax rate then I lose it because I'm not going to play around with public safety. But I'm also going to take issue with some of the things said here about affordability because I care about affordability. And again, to reiterate, not only am I a single parent, I am the only single parent on this board. And there are very few people who are single parents who are elected officials. I truly understand what it is like to live paycheck to paycheck. I understand what it means to live in one person's means. But I'm not going to allow our public safety to be hijacked for a tax rate. I'm not going to do that. If you want to make cuts, if everyone is up here, it's fine making cuts, so be it. But I am not going to play around with public safety. I'm not going to play around with our fun balance. So that's where I'm at. I want everyone to comment on this. But I do feel... I just... I feel very strongly... that the people who put their lives on the line know what they need better than this board. Lebel came to us with what he needs and I'm going to meet it. I'm going to meet it. This is, you know, again, statement of our value statement of our principles. I've said very clearly, education is huge for me. Education is the number one thing, very, very, very, very, very close second. Maybe one point B is public safety. And I'm not going to play politics with those two things. So if we're going to have to make cuts, we're going to have to make cuts. I'm not happy with where we're at, but I'm not going to mess with our personal safety. Civil adviser we are than Vega, than angry. Thank you Madam Chair. And I do take on the enceeration that we're jeopardizing public safety chief Lebel. You keep walking away. You're not getting off that easy. I don't think That's what I'm suggesting and I don't think that's what Supervisor Angry is suggesting I'm going to speak in his defense and on his behalf. I think it's simply a matter of allocating different resources to lessen the impact of the fire levy and make better use of the fire levy funds. Nobody is saying that we have to raid the reserve. In fact what I'm saying is the exact opposite. We just need to utilize a different resource that is to date historically been underutilized. I mean I'm looking at your budget and you've got a structural firefighting line item at $5 million coming out of the fire levy revenue. I would suggest that that structural firefighting gear is capital expenditure of some sort and could come out of profit. And if I look at your capital outlay line item, there's $8.2 million. So if we offset a significant portion of that $8.2 million and I would strongly suspect that you have far more than $4 million in profit funds that we can accommodate this with absolutely no loss and service level service impacts. And that sort of thing, we just have to rethink the way we fund the department. And I would even suggest it in the future to avoid this type of argument over the fire levy. We simply roll the fire levy into the real property tax rate and then subtract out the fire department's budget from the share if we're going to retain the revenue sharing agreement from the share of the general fund that school division gets. Consider right we can't we can't jeopardize the kids education nor can we jeopardize public but that doesn't mean we have to continue doing it in this fashion. I think we need to start making better utilization of the resources that we've got. And the fact that many departments don't even know how many dollars they have in profits, and they've laid unspent or unallocated in some cases for decades. I'm looking at one from 1987. I think I think we need to do better and I think continuing to do the way we're doing it now just because that's the way we've always done it is not the answer. Supervisor Vega. Yeah Madam Chair you know you're talking about public safety and whatnot so that leads me to my next question. Where does this leave the CA's office based on the presentation that we just got a few hours ago? Are we going to get into the weeds of that right now? Right back to that. No, we're going to go back to that one because we need to finish where we are with firelovy and with the property tax rate. We need to finish that discussion. Madam Chair. Madam Chair. All right. All right. Elliot turning Madam chair members of the board I know there's a lot of discussion with regards to Proffers And I understand that that discussion and I know that this is why the county exec I think recommended for the audit plan to look at that Calling something capital for budget purposes does not mean that it can be used by Proffers Proffers Can only be used for capital that expands the use. They cannot be used for operation and maintenance. And making the decision on this day is tonight to determine whether or not a new vehicle or apparatus or uniforms legalized, legally qualified for the use of Proffers. I have concern about at this time. I appreciate that clarification. Supervisor Viga, did you have anything else before Moe? No. All right, supervisor, angry. Thank you, Madam Chair. I joined the L.C.D. Volunteer Fire Department in 2011. I served this county for the last 10 years as a volunteer. I saved lives and I saved property. If we're, so I don't ever want to be confused with I'm making the decision on public safety to interfere with someone's life. I will tell you this. I may not be saving lives now, but I'm to save some property and their money because that's what we're responsible for. So I'm going to stick with my 885 and we can move on from here if we need to. Hold on. No, no, no, supervisor Franklin. Yeah, thank you for this. So I think what we need to do because it looks like 4 4 to keep the fire levy where it is, which means that we need to go back to the discussion on real estate, excuse me, the point 0-9-0-6. And so that obviously means if we have to go down to 8-9-5, we've got to make cuts. And so my question to this board is we all have priorities who wants to make cuts and supervisor, supervisor angry maybe we should start with you in terms of you know if there's anything we think we can all give up. Wait hold on one second so what we're looking at and I'm just going to be real. We are going to look at 885 that's's where we're at. That's where we're at. That's what house the most votes. So we are going to have to make cuts based on that. I just want to make sure that everyone's comfortable. Comfortable? Well, comfortable, no. But that looks like where we are. And Madam Chair, to your point, that's why I wanted to start the discussion of what are we going to cut and That is the next discussion We can park this for now But it looks like right now we're at 8885 So let's go through because the next way hold on there a few other things we've got to discuss Way home. Yes, we've got to discuss the rest of the tax rates So let me go back to my and we have to discuss landfill hours We have one of our things that we're going to discuss. Wait, hold on, yes. We've got to discuss the rest of the tax rates. So let me go back to Vi. We have to discuss landfill hours. We have a number of things so we're going to discuss. Fire levy, we're at, we're stuck on that one. So we're going to have to come back to that one. Because that's 4.4. That means it actually doesn't move. Am I correct? no change? So there is no change for the firelovy. Yes, it was for for. So, So, I have a little bit of talent, mails, tags. Hold on. We are going to discuss, first of all, we have other advertised rates, mosquitoes, stormwater, all the other stuff that we have. You know, personally, I would like to leave those at the rate that we've advertised. I don't know if there's anyone else who has ideas, supervisor, we are. Madam chair, I'm going to say the same thing. I say every year, I'm not going to oppose them this year, but like every other jurisdiction just roll that amount into the bloody real estate tax. So we're giving everybody an accurate picture of what they're paying, rather than four different figures that they have to add together to get their total hit on a yearly basis. I grow weary of this. Civilized according. Yeah, the only concern I have about that is when we have some of these levies, those are, they do not go into the general fund. They go into very specified accounts to deal with very specified things. There is no revenue sharing agreement associated with those things, unlike the real estate tax. So there are some challenges there that I think we need to be careful because even if let's say that we take the fire love we put in the general fund, well we just lost 57 cents on the dollar on that. I think I addressed that. So that would, so I would have concerns about that. So for you guys, where does it mean where you're at? Do you want to go with the rates as advertised? I know you want to roll them all together, Bob. But the question is, do we, and I'm going to just go down the line, are we going to leave them at the advertised rates? Supervisor Gordy, where are you? What say you? I'm sorry, say your statement again, I was reading something. So the other advertised rates, you know, we're talking about mosquito storm water and others. Do you have, do you want to keep them at what they were advertised or did you have any specific concerns or anything? I think I'd rather focus the effort on the real estate tax and keep everything else where they are and try to maximize the ability on the real estate. So we're going to have a Franklin. I have a Thomas. was Franklin. Vega. I did an eye roll for the camera. So angry. In grade. He's been a problem as advertised. Body. As advertised. Isn't worth the fight as advertised. Bailey as the advertile. All right, I should have let the clerk do the roll call, but I'm as advertised. So, so that one is good. Let me go through what is next. We have got to talk about landfill hours. We got a lot to talk about. So I hope everything is a little one's comfortable, well fed. If we can put that slide up and I think that is in ourordy, you're still in the queue. Let me keep refreshing. Don't worry, I'm going to refresh too. All right. So now we're going to talk about, I think this is an important discussion, is the landfill. You know, option one what is proposed, and that's six, three hours a week with a Sunday opening. But we have other changes. And if I believe, I just want to verify where we're at because I believe option two is what was discussed with the trash haulers. If we can get some clarification from the director, I would greatly appreciate just giving a little more clarity around option two. Good afternoon, I'd like to chair members of the board to top some more the director of public works. We discussed several actually with them. The 63 was one we've originally discussed with. The 65 hours is basically stretching Thursday to add two more hours to 6 p.m. But we had just a general discussion on all of the options that we have available to us when we discussed with them the last time we met. Did they have a preferred option? Because I'm just trying to remember. I felt that you might have been the preferred or am I making this up? Well, yeah, we didn't really go into preferred. We just got into pros and cons of some of those options. They would really like to say no change. If that's possible because change is also, you know change also you know add different routes and different costs and different things for them and they don't know what that impact is until they actually see it and they actually map it because the idea is once they change it out because of the squeeze schedule that may attract that may attract that may have drivers, may have stuff like that. They exactly know what it is right now, so that's why it's probably easier. They've actually asked us why you won Sunday and we said the public asked for Sunday, and that's why we're looking at it. I really appreciate that. Let's see, don't go anywhere. I have boat in the middle. Thank you Madam Chair. just want to remind folks on the price tags here. So if we go with option three, we're adding $900,000 for FTEs, which is an ongoing cost. And then we'll be adding, I would imagine, a one-time price of $852,000. So now that we're based on the current tax rates already in the whole, this will be adding to that. Now if we do one, sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Madam Chair, for once I'm going to be the agent of change, but at no cost option two. All right, you had me in some suspense there for a minute. Okay, supervisor Bailey. Option two. Vega. Option two. All right, let me call on everyone and pick on everyone else. G score to where you at. Ditto. Okay, he's a ditto. Franklin. I think that's fine so long as we think we can get the personnel to actually do it. And I've set that before so. Angry. Angry so to just turn your mic so I want to want to make sure it's on her. Two. All right, I did I call on everyone? I called on everyone, so everyone's a two. Option two. Thank you so very much. Thank you. So yay, we will one day have Sunday hours. All right, so let's keep moving this along. Did we have anything on PRTC? Did anyone want to talk about PRTC? Yes, no. No, I guess we're good. Okay, Supervisor Vega, then Bodie. Are you in for PRTC? No, I was kind of coming on the landfill. Oh, I will let you make a quick comment on the landfill. Okay, all right, let's go. All right. So, Bowdie angry. Yeah. So, understanding again where we are now in terms of the whole we're in terms of revenue for the budget currently, all I will say again is that if we're going to step away from having additional funds to work with now because of slow-roaring all these tax rates, we really need to get serious about having a dedicated funding stream for transit and transportation. So I will again say we need to really look hard at the C&I tax and I've had a couple conversations with folks on the day us about it. So I'm hoping, and I see that Rick just walked into the room. I'm hoping that this board, especially knowing that there are some folks who want to look at revenue streams that don't touch residences. If you're looking for a revenue stream that doesn't touch residences, look no further than the C&I tax commercial industrial doesn't touch residences. So I believe that we should have a serious discussion about that and I would want to see where my colleagues stand about implementing C&I January 1st of next year. Supervisor, angry then, Mayor. Thank you, Madam Chair. I know we had a, I'm new at P.R. T.C. the second the road came in to our budget committee and talked about some that I just had. If he had three priority routes that we could look into, it was those three, the total came to 1.2 mil. I'm just gonna send this to you guys and leave it up to you if you wanna work on any of these and add it to the budget and not. So just wanna bring that to your attention. Supervisor Rear. Thank you, Madam Chair I'm sorry. I think you could park that 1.2 until a little later on and we can come back to it. I actually in agreement with those supervices, Bodie and Angri, except for a little bit of a different reason I had a long talk with Bob Schneider when he came into my office. And I, a couple of things. A lot of this isn't really ready for prime time until FY27 And he kind of admitted that in many cases Especially some of the micro transit because the areas that it's going to the areas that will Impact aren't quite ready for service yet But I wish This this discussion we're occurring a little bit later in the year. I don't know how long we're going to experience current circumstances. You know, our further dose cuts going to reduce the demand is go back to work, going to change things. You know, is this just a function of the first couple of weeks, first couple of months of the changes in the normal? Is this going to be the new normal in two months? I don't know. I think everything is in far too much flux right now. It's been making long term funding suggestions. Then again, if we've got enough money at the end of the day for the three priority routes and it's only 1.2 million I could probably be willing to wrap my arms around that but I want to see what else happens before we start adding in 1.2. Supervisor Bailey. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you Bob for saying that it's 8 o'clock and we agreed on something. Wow yeah, wow. So since he sits next to me at PRTC, I agree with you. I mean, this is something that we do need to look at, but because we're cutting so much, we won't be able to serve at that level right now. But I think this is something that we need to bring to our finance committee and really have an in-depth discussion about it to make sure that we're not in doing budget studies and talking about this over and over again. I think it's a more precise way that we can do it and elevate the level of service from PRTC and come to the public with a really good tight budget to let them know that we're looking at them, but not just at budget season. All right, does anyone else have anything they want to see on PRTC? Hold on, I'm just pulling it up. I am going to... So I actually am going to take a moment to express some disappointment because I didn't have a meeting with PRTC. There was none made. I thought that Bob Schneider was going to come around and speak with each of our offices that didn't happen with mine, and I'm disappointed. He didn't, you know, and I'm disappointed. I'm very, very, very disappointed with that. You know, at this time, I don't support anything with PRTC because I would like to have a fuller discussion with them. So I don't know if anyone else has anything they want to add on that. What's that? Yes, I did say that. And I'm someone I'll be honest. I rely. I prefer public transportation when I'm going into Washington DC and when I'm in this district and I'm moving around. I do personally prefer public transportation I am a huge fan of that. I see Mr. Sinclair you have your light on did you have a comment? I'm very sorry. I do I do not My mistake Did anyone have anything else that they want to say? Supervisor angry if I could I don't know how We miss you. I know we did the budget committee presentation with Dr. Snyder. But so I know he made rounds. I didn't make those rounds. I didn't know. I don't know if you guys call him. I'm not going to defend that, but I don't know how we missed you. So I don't think that was purposeful. So I got to figure out what that was. I will say when he came to the Finance and Budget committee meeting, he spoke for 15 minutes to give us a handout. And there was, you know, you had said there would be follow-up. I don't know what happened but certainly my office was not a part of that follow-up. I don't know if anyone has anything else they want to see on PRTC. Bob has brought his entire desk. We are actually going to I want to go a little deeper now into recap. We are going to go, so before I go, because I wanted to go to budget markup considerations, but before I do that, all of the other stuff in recap, I'm asking this for Mr. Sinclair, are we going to have to make changes to some of the things that were outlined? Yes, so, you know, such as, you know, children's services, no wrong door, noise ordinance, enforcement, land records management system, are we going to have to make changes to any of those things? Those are all in the budget recap that the county executive presented to the board last week so all those things are currently in the budget. We can even with the changes that we've made to the budget we can fully fund those things. I'm not talking about the second part. I'm not talking about budget consideration. But everything in the first part of the packet, we can fund. Okay, well, I can provide what we've done is we have programmed the impact of 88.5 cent real estate tax rate if the board would like that update. So again, for the first part, all that's, the board considerations is, I guess, assume we're going to make cuts, but the first part is that fine the board considerations is I guess a similar we're going to make cuts But the first part is that fine and what I'm asking is madam chair from on pages From pages six pages six seven eight nine and ten ahead. Do we have to make cuts to any of those items or should our if we accept it those things as are with all of the cuts we made? Madam Chair, I think what, maybe what might be helpful, because I do understand your question. Dave is trying to provide essentially a financial update on where we stand now in terms of the cuts that will be needed to the budget recap numbers. So Dave if you want to Okay, so what we what we have is computer and peripherals at 415 personal property vehicles at 350 3% food and beverage tax. And I know this is a point of discussion still for the board, but we have put in a real estate tax rate of 88 and a half cents. The total general revenue that we are down is $26.3 million. All that amount based on the revenue sharing agreement, the school transfer is down 15.1 million compared to the amount in the county executive at budget recap and the county portion is 11.2 million down. So theoretically at 88.5 cents the board would need to come up with 11.2 million dollars of reductions to the budget on the county side. I hope that's helpful. That is very helpful. In terms of magnitude. In terms of that is very helpful. I am going to give us, because we're going to have to, I'm supervisor Franklin, then I am going to give us time so that we can kind of look over things that are yet, you're not in the queue? Yeah, that was a question. Okay. All right, sorry. Maybe I can read minds. I don't know. So what we're going to do is we're going to take, I know people want to get out. I'm leaning towards 15. But I'll just say 10-minute break. The kind of look through the packet, do what you got to do. But we'll take a 10- break, so that is 918. Thank you. you you I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. you you All right, everyone, we are back. So when I was leaving out for the break, it was brought to my attention that we didn't take a vote on the residential tax rate because right now we're 4-4. So I want everyone to officially go on the record. Andre, if you want to do the roll call for the tax rate. for .885. Yes. Okay. Very good. Supervisor angry. Yes. Supervisor Bailey. No. Supervisor Bodie. No. Supervisor Franklin. Supervisor Gordy. Yes. You're noise. I'm sorry. Sorry. Supervisor Vega? Yes. Supervisor Weir, Chair Jefferson? No. We're at a 4-4. So, if it's 4-4. So it fails. So then the other, so do we need to go through 9-0s? I mean, because 9-0s6 is the average height, right? So that's what it's going to stay at. I just want clearly. 9-0s6. I don't know. What's all? You need to go to the bathroom. You need to go to the bathroom. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You average. right so that's what it's going to stay at as one clearly point nine over. We advertise that nine two and I presented a recap at nine zero so so we are at nine zero six now and without a affirmative vote at 5, we will remain at 906. Now that is to say that the board will still need to vote on 906 as part of the resolutions next week. What do you take for the last six? Let's go, let's do a stroke poll at 906. Ms. Manon, if you can do the roll call. Certainly. Supervisor Angry? Yes. Supervisor Bailey. Aye. Supervisor Bodie. Aye. Supervisor Franklin. Aye. Supervisor Gordy. Supervisor Vega. No. Supervisor Weir. No. Chair Jefferson. Yes. That passes five to three. I'm not changing just the spreadsheet. Sorry, it's a change of things like, oh, that changes the spreadsheet. You know, you love your spreadsheets. Madam chair. All right, hold on. I want to get updated numbers. If we get updated numbers and also supervisor Bowdie had something I'm so sorry. Let me refresh my screen so I can view the speakers While they're getting supervisor Bowdie what were you talking? So no, I so I wanted to ask Madam County attorney or anyone or anyone I know we advertised rates if we wanted to go up on a rate, what timeframe would we need to advertise for it? You care. Madam Chair, members of the board, it would depend upon what it is and whether the Virginia code requires once a week for two weeks or advertise once, but you would need another public hearing on that. And then it would be tied to X number of days before the decision is made so it would really throw off the whole. Okay. Just wanted to know. Thank you. All right. Is there any other speakers? Are you ready for your calculation? All right, go, sir. Okay. Based on a real estate tax rate of 90.6 cents, total general revenue, we are down $950,000 of that amount, based on the county school's revenue sharing agreement. The reduction to the schools is $544,000. The reduction to the county is $406,000. So the county government budget is short $406,000. I appreciate the clarification. I feel like I've written on almost every clean sheet of paper I have. So what we're going to do is we are going to, we're almost, I'm not going to say we're almost in final stretch because I was going to add time. Alright, so I would like to go to the recap before I do and before we really get into the recap and the markup considerations, I do want to talk a little bit about Prophers. It's already mentioned but I think that it might be worth really stating up front because I do want to spend down where we'rephs and I appreciate supervise a weird what you were looking at and how we can fund things out of Prophs But to reiterate what was said earlier you were doing an audit right now of our Prophs And I was advised By mr. Shory that anything we want funded, you know for parks and rec, we're really going to need to rely on the budget process. We're going to, we're going to need to prioritize because using proffers at this time, you know, may be difficult because the county staff is going to need more time to analyze each proffer. Mr. Schroder, I don't know if you wanted to say something or. Madam Chair, you said it well. Just to remind the board as as Michelle Roll will mention, we added proper account management to the annual budget calendar. So it will be audited this year and we will come back to the board with the results of that audit. I would also suggest that maybe as part of the Board's Finance and Budget Committee that we provide updates as we work with the County Attorney's Office and our proper administrator to really work through the accounts. We do not have to wait on the audit to provide updates, but we would certainly need to be very specific project by project on what project what proper what offers are eligible if you will for that project. So this will be an ongoing process but it is not something that we will know tonight. We will not be able to tonight say for sure that we'll be able to use park proffers for specific projects. And that for me is going to plan to a lot of what we discuss tonight. And I do want to say this. I do want to think more as we move forward about what proffers we have and how to use them. I think that's going to be I hope that that's going's going to be a very important discussion moving forward, because if we have money sitting there in a pot, I want to make sure that we use them before any of them expire. Supervisor Weir? I apologize if I sound irritated, because I am. I don want to hear excuses. We've got two types of proffers. You've got proffers dedicated to particular uses in particular district and you've got general fund general proffers that can be spent in all districts. Proffers do not belong to the district supervise, they belong to the board and we can allocate them. In fact, we have a listing of the allocatable proffers that was delivered to us. I would argue that this spreadsheet is a little too big because it contains things that have been zeroed out, which should have been just removed. But I'll give you an example, Hunter at Haymarket General Use Proffers available 50,000. That's just one example out of this long use and that particular one is from 2000 and 12. The county attorney are going to disagree on in many respects on how they can be used. There's room for disagreement on it. I've been doing this a very, very, very long time. with a number of different legal councils and opinions very across the board. But the fact of the matter is, at the end of the day, we have fund balances that have been sitting there in many cases for a decade unused. And you can have the general fund profits out of my district. I don't care whose park they go to in this particular instance. Same thing with the fire department. We've got needs that need to be funded and we shouldn't be funding them with general revenue sources when we've got millions available in this spread, in this spreadsheet alone just for parks. Continuing again, continuing to do things the same way we've done them and just accrue these profit funds year over year and not expend them for the purpose that they were given to us. And I would say the same thing for the fire department. A new station is not because of a new neighborhood. A new station is because of expanded demand across the county. We can do this. It's not that hard. It takes a little bit of effort. But the funds are there. We don't have to allocate them tonight. All we have to do is accommodate them. And the budget is to be dealt with by proper money at some time in the near day. So, I think that's the point of clarification. The funds are there. We don't have to allocate them tonight. All we have to do is accommodate them and the budget is to be dealt with by proper money at some time in the near future. It's just a book taxpayers of this county, what is the meals rate and the car tax rate? So those remain the same. The meals tax we're going to lower is going to be in ordinance. We're going to have a resolution next week. That's going to be, we're going to lower it to three cents. And the car tax is going to go down to 350. So instead of spiking, we're offsetting. Thanks. Sir, Viser Bayley. Thank you, ma'am, Chair. Just to get back to where you were trying to focus us in terms of the proffers and what page are you starting on? Are you on 13 in terms of going forward? Because to what my colleague just mentioned about the proffers, I just wanted to offer as we move forward with this how we could utilize the profits to share if I could so that we could move. I just need to know how you want us to move forward. I know that there I would like to actually start with budget markup considerations and then we'll go At the end the last thing we'll talk about other further revisions that weren't discussed on that My include a few other things that people have additional entrance of so I'm looking at Starting guess at page 13, okay, and again, I I do feel your frustration I feel like a frustration Bob because it's like, come on. We do need to spend, we already have this money, we need to spend it. And so my recommendation as we move forward next budget year, I wanna see what we can use proffers for. That doesn't help the taxpayers this year, with all due respect. And then I'm gonna look at, you know, I, you're right. I don't know, is there anything that can be done or real, should we, you know, I'm asking? Because I want to know what's realistic and what's feasible. Madam Chair, I have indelved into the fire department that heavily, but I would notice that we've got proper integration on page 402 of the budget and with fire we're using 1.75 million if I read this correctly Dave for fire and rescue station 30 but we've got other C&P expenditures and FY 26 that I would argue we could use additional fire, proper funds for specifically fire and rescue station 27, which we've got an allocation of 8.89 million or 30, which is fire station 30 and the emergency operation center, which I would suggest is a operation center that serves the entirety of the county to some degree. And then the replacement renovation program at 4.5 million. I don't know where those funds are coming from right now, but since they're not listed on proper integration, I'm assuming those are either fire levy funds or general fund dollars. In the case of the fire and rescue stations, those are scheduled to be debt financed and the debt service impact does not impact the county's budget in fiscal year 26. We can evaluate the use of Fire and Rescue Proffers for the station construction on station 30 and station. The other stations included in the proposed CIP. I don't know if that answers your question or not, supervisor, we're. It doesn't, it doesn't because the capital improvement just includes the stations. You know, if you build a new station, it necessarily requires a new unit. And if the new unit is to go to a fire station whose purpose is to expand service because of county, county demand, county wide, that's the creation of the new station, then the vehicle that's in that new station to accommodate the expanded need and the need for the new station should also be a capital expenditure and has always been the case in every jurisdiction I've done this. Yes. First station 30, the apparatus for station 30, which is a new station. And so the apparatus in that station would be new apparatus. That is something that is in the FY26 proposed budget. It's budget for the state's budget for the state's budget for the state's budget for the state's budget for the state's budget for the state's budget for the state's budget for the state's budget for the state's budget for the state's budget for the state's. Now we'll argue that is the case. I don't know. Madam County attorney, do you have any guidance? Madam Chair, members of the board, as I stated prior, proffers and when they were provided to the county, probably a lot of them were provided back when the county had a proper policy. And there would have been an analysis done on the expanded need caused by a rezoning application and I do not think that that analysis included vehicles for either the police or the fire. It was discussing stations, etc. Proffers cannot be used for operation or maintenance. Sometimes profers are provided to the board for a specific purpose. There would need to be legal analysis done on where the Proffers came from and where they would be applied for. I do not know of any specific statutory authority and I've discussed this with Mr. Weir of the use of Proffers for vehicle apparatus. We have a supervisor weir than Bailey. I'll also add Madam Chair if I can. Yes, Mr. Sharden. What I one of the things that I said to you earlier this afternoon regarding Proffers we certainly heard the board earlier this year and your interest in us that are understanding our current accounts in inventorying those accounts is why it was added to the audit plan. What I'm also suggesting is that throughout the budget year as we are more clear on proper accounts and what we have what is eligible and what we had access to that we come back to the board through the Finance and Budget committee have, what is eligible and what we have access to, that we come back to the board through the Finance and Budget Committee, and where there are resources that can be used in lieu of general fund, that we will certainly bring that to the board as we become clear about the use of the proffers. and I'm recommending that because we don't want to get in a situation where we are committing profit dollars this evening or next week. And then we find out that we cannot use those profit dollars. And then we are in a position in the middle of a budget year where we have a shortfall where we did not expect to. Oh, you just dropped out of cue. So we are in Bailey. Did you guys want to speak to you? Okay. As we are than Bailey. Madam Chair, I agree with County Attorney and partner disagreeing part. I think what everybody has to realize is that many of the professors and I can only use the parks ones because I've got those cities in front of me. I don't have the other ones. But there is a line of demarcation roughly 2016. And whereas many of the profits post 2016 have to have an access to the development from which the profits came that was not the case prior to 2016. We had a general fee schedule essentially. And this is why the 2016 legislation took place. Because we specifically and Loudon County were accused of extorting money out of the developers to a high degree and that's why the development industry went and got the proffer law changed kind of, kind of bit him in the ass for a couple of years after that. But there are general fund dollars that are not restricted by Nexus nor restricted by general, magisterial district. And that we're arguing about this at this point in time is our fault. This should have been addressed a long time ago and I know I've been bitching about this for a long time. But we have the opportunity to correct this. We have weeks, months to do the analysis because we have to allocate the proper money that takes a board action to my understanding or at least it does everywhere else I've ever been. So we can make this work. It is not that that hard It is not being made. It is not as difficult as it's being portrayed. Supervisor Bailey. Thank you, Madam Chair. First things, first, when Supervisor, we are not talked about the budget last week. It was an enlightenment that he gave to me and usingffers from the reports that Mr. Sinclair had sent to us. So in doing so, the Proffers that I'm going to use in the budget cycle tonight was approved and discussed legally with our county attorney, the agencies talked about it for what I'm gonna use tonight, and is applicable because I don't wanna get into, and I should using it, using the profits. I don't want us to get into a discussion that's not applicable to us moving forward and making sure that markup is healthy. Tonight, I think it's a tool. I agree that it's maybe we can talk about in the finance committee. That's where I'd like to flesh it out and get a better understanding. Because as a board, I know that it hasn't been thoroughly fleshed out as to where and how we can and when we can. And so I don't want us to misuse funds like the county executive saying, and I know that he and the county attorney work when we do use profits, they work together to make sure we're doing it right. So I just want to say that, and then to that, on page 13 of what you, where you refer to, Madam Chair, for example, with the Forest Greens golf course, I just want use that as an example that I've shared with some of my colleagues on the board. What was projected was 500K. And I did use some of my profit funds that Mr. Sinclair had sent to me three months ago, I think two or three months ago, towards that to defrave a cost of what we're looking at here. want to put that out to the colleagues so that we could satisfy what you're trying to require. three months ago towards that to defraver costs of what we're looking at here. So I just want to put that out to the colleagues so that we could satisfy what you're trying to require in pace 13. Senator Viser Beka? Thank you Madam Chair. I obviously don't support some items here that are listed under budget options of board and committee interest. So just want to sure that I'm understanding how you wanna go through this. Supervisor Bailey just mentioned one that I'm opposed to $500,000 for a golf course. We can get into the weeds of that as to why I don't support it and why she's asking for us to subsidize. This is a private business. And it is what? Is it? Okay, well I stand corrected, but I still wanna know why when the time comes. So do you want us to go down this list? Because this is for our consideration. It's not like we have to fund these. We are going to go down the list. I want to hear what people are on-prem first because this is a really vital discussion. And to be quite frank, you know what? Yeah, Bob, I agree with you. And I agree that these dealt with long-dessence and the lesser restricted to it, individual district. So I think this is an important discussion we're having. Did you have more? I do. And my question is for Dave, I just want to be clear in terms of how much money we're working with or what we have to come up with. Can you give me the amounts for all of the new rates? Because we're talking about decreasing the car car tax to 350 the meals tax to three cents I just want the box numbers not the school portion and I stand correct that I did I know that that was our golf course I've never been I'm not a golfer I'm sorry I just want to be clear that I answer your question, Supervisor Vega. You want the county where the county is at? Yes. Okay. All right, so we are short $406,000 in FY26. However, we are short $3.1 million in fiscal 27. And that's because of that, the food and beverage tax. Half year impact in FY 26, full year impact in fiscal 27. Okay, so with all the rate adjustments, it's just 406. In fiscal 26, yes. Okay, gotcha, thank you. But that it does increase to 3.1 million in fiscal 27. Supervisor Franklin. I kind of forgot but I think I was going to point out that we needed to find $400,000 in cuts, which I guess we're doing it now. We're still talking about profits. Well, I think we're we've landed or so would profits again just so we're clear because I do want to keep moving forward. Mr. Shorter, the staff is going to look at what we have and you're going to come back to us, correct? That is correct, Madam Chair. On an ongoing basis throughout this year, we are not going to wait on the audit, or the completion of the audit as we become clear, we will come back to the board through the Finance and Budget Committee. And so basically tonight is we will prioritize the things we want and your team can go through and say, hey, we can use some of the profit money to offset that, again, am I clear? Can we do that or no? Well for our purposes this evening I think to get to agreement around the actual budget I'm not sure that I fully follow. So basically tonight you know I'm just going to use the four screens golf course, the principal and four screens golf course, $500,000. If we say, hey, we're going to go forward with this, and we approve it as part of the budget, but if you come back and say, hey, we can use proper funds. Can you come back and say, we can use proper funds for some of this? Can the rest fall to the bottom? That is absolutely what would happen. If we find in 60 days and 30 days that there is a certain amount of proffers and I don't want to speak for our county attorney but that we have gotten legal sufficient, legal review that we will come back to the board. All those funds will fall to the bottom line at the end of the year to the Capitol Reserve. And Madam Attorney, I see you shaking your head in the affirmative. Madam Chair, members of the Board, when we were working with Supervisor Bailey's Office with regards to the directive that she's already provided, we did change some of the wording because some of the intended purpose could possibly argue that his operations are maintenance. And so that's why we changed the wording to the directive to read what it read. And I think the board has already passed that directive for that. And I think that this, the additional funds that are to be utilized, I don't know if the Proffer Administrator has analyzed what the use is for this 500,000. If there's been the analysis on that or not, I do know that we did work with your office before giving that other directive to make sure that the wording was that we could legally support the use of those profits that have already been directed. All right, thank you. I have, well, I'll let you go, Bailey, since I've used your example, then angry. I just wanted to respond to that, and I'm sure to give you and my colleagues a sense of comfort in terms of the directive. And yes, the agency has confirmed that what can happen. That's why I was trying to explain earlier that's in terms of using profits, that's how it happened. And thank you, Madam County, it's turning for clarifying for my colleagues exactly what that looks like. Thank you, Madam Chair. Supervisor I agree. Thanks, Madam Chair. The NIAF's district is sitting on a little under $1 million in fire-proper's. We have been discussing for many years renovation of some of these stations. If that money can be used and there's four stations in Del City, I will be investigating putting that money towards renovation of those stations. Thank you. I don't see anything else so we're going to close the proper discussion. You know, again I wish we were in a better position to make use of that and I'm going to as we go through page 13, slide 13, you know, I will be honest with you and there's something on this slide that I'm not fully comfortable with right now, given that we do need to make cuts, given that we have a number of things left to discuss. Trails, I'm going to start with trails, I'll be honest, I think $5 million is ambitious. I think it's very ambitious. I think maybe in future years we can make up for it. I personally would like to at least cut that in half, particularly since we have been talking a lot about being sensitive to taxpayers. And I would like to see if that is something, maybe at a later date that we can use some parks for us for. If I may Chair Jefferson and members of the board, these items, I just want to emphasize that these items of board and community interest are not in the proposed budget. Okay. I didn't want to leave you with the impression that removing any of these improved the situation. So basically, and that's a good point. So basically, we don't have the money to put any of this in, right? Right. So, yeah, we don't. Not at the moment without cuts elsewhere. So we are gonna look at cuts, we have to look at cuts elsewhere. And we've got to see if we can include any of these things in the budget. So I appreciate the clarification. Survivor Boate. Yeah, Madam Chair, a question on that piece. Because I feel like since we're going through these slides and I get why from an organizational standpoint you would like to, but if every slide we're going to go, hey, we can't really invest in anything since we have to make cuts, then I just want to, I thought we that the I think that's what I think is that the I think that's what I think is that the I think that's what I think is that the I think that's what I think is that the I think that's what I think is that the I think that's what I think is that the I think that's what I think is that the I think that's what I think is that the I want everyone to look at it. And so I'm also clear, pages 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Those are areas that are right for cuts, I believe. Because that's not baked into the budget. Or is that baked into budget? It is. These items are baked into the budget through recap. Yes, they were added at recap. So these are things that are good targets essentially for a cut. They are in the budget so we can cut them. They are available for cuts if that's the will of the board. Thank you. All right. I don't know. Supervisor Booty. Well, just for clarity, slide nine, I would imagine is not because I think slide nine the ADC and Fire-Lubby stuff are not general revenue funds. That's correct these are funds outside of the general fund. Okay so then we're looking at and let's go through actually some of these two on page, I'm just trying to think we're just start, because I mean, some things, I'm just actually gonna take a quick page, looking at page seven. I know that we're on agreement, we cannot, we have to fund the land records management system. I believe that everyone's in agreement so that is going to be saved. We have other things you know that we can talk about where we want to make cuts. I'm just going through and seeing if there's supervisor boat you're still like you did you have something else are you going to hear the discussion for everyone else because I I'm not in favor of cutting any of the things on that expenditure addition. So we can't cut this child's services act as an example. I don't support cutting the land records management. I don't support cutting the noise ordinance as well. So I don't support cutting the no wrong door projects. So. So on this page, I don't see it. Does anyone have anything on page where we're actually going I have to go back. I have a conversation as well about page six. But is there anything anyone wants to cut on page seven? Supervisor Vega? Are you page seven? I don't think anyone has anything. Looking at page six. This is page six revenue from the Commonwealth. I don't think that's something we really can cut now. Expand your savings. I don't think that's something we can cut. Let's see. I might have to get a little creative here. Supervisor Franklin. Mike isn't or I don't know what's happening. Yes, supervisor Franklin. So I wonder and this is a question for staff. And the answer may be no. I mean, we have to find 400K. Are there staff positions and that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that we are hoping that 400K. Are there staff positions that we are hoping to put forth to staff up that perhaps we can look at cutting this year maybe revisiting for FY27? I hate to say that, but I'm just, you know, listening to options. We can certainly pull up the we can go back to the initiatives that were proposed on February 18th to remind the board what new programs initiatives and projects we were we were anticipating bringing forward so that the list list for the board's consideration is certainly larger than what was presented at budget recap. And to be clear, these are actually already baked into the budget because obviously my goal for asking is to see where we can make some adjustments. Correct. projects program, staff, FTEs that were proposed on the 18th and that were added on the night of budget recap are all eligible because they are all baked into the budget. Supervisor Bowdie, then we are. I just wanted to respond to browser Franklin. There are some proposals from a number of people. I have a list of them. It's rather limited, but if you want a starting point, I can give you one. I actually have your spreadsheet open, but I also want to see what they pull up the slides so that we can talk about what positions to cut. Because we have some great programs and some great things that I know that we want to fund and that we have to fund like the Land Records Management System, Supervisor Boate. Sure, so one of the things I know that Surresor we're had in his spreadsheet that I kept from mine is the facilities fleet replacement. That's sitting at 385 to 50. That's not on a page, it's on the spreadsheet. So on the spreadsheet, say sit around. I have a cup while. I have a cup. I have a cup. I'm gonna. I'm gonna. I'm gonna. I'm gonna. I'm gonna. I'm gonna. I'm gonna bringing that up because that gets us putting that through the capital reserve, which is what super has a wearer suggesting gets us part of the way there. I know there's an ongoing concern about that being something that we use as ongoing expenses, but at least gets us there in this year so we can look at other considerations later. Yeah, if you can, I'm sorry. I just want to offer the board clarification. I know exactly where supervisor stands on this. As part of the proposed budget, we are adding vehicles to the county's overall inventory of fleet. New police vehicles because of new officers, sheriff deputies, things like that. This is intended to add to our annual replacement budget on an annual annualized basis so that we can replace a growing fleet, especially a public safety fleet, when replacements come do. If the board recalls, we also have in the proposed budget $2.5 million from the Capitol Reserve to catch up on police replacements. This is part of the reason why staff is recommending this increase so that we don't fall further behind. In that sense, staff's perspective is that these are annualized replacements and I'll say no more. Well, it may be helpful Dave or maybe Michelle, if you would just speak to the use of capital reserve, versus the use of general fund for ongoing purchase and I guess speak to our principles as well. Yes, the board's principles of sound financial management do say that you will not use One-time dollars one-time fund balances to fund to fund ongoing costs and and we do It's part of again as part of our credit check each year as we go through our fund balances and why they change, when we explain why they went down. We really make a point of trying to say, these were one-time capital, which may have otherwise prevented us from issuing debt, and it's harder to explain when you get into using it for operations. All right. I have Vega and Franklin, like, you know, we go to them, but I'm sorry. Yeah, I'd like to go to Vega and Franklin. I proposed that we cut the nine unfilled positions that have been vacant for over nine months. Sorry, you said the nine for what department? It seems like they're all in one, two, three, four, five, six, or in community services. Development services has one, two, and one for economic development. That should be pretty easy, in my opinion. Did you do the calculations for how much that would save us? And no, but I can. If you can do the, can you read off the positions? How long they've been open? Sure. Community service, clinical service, case worker, associate. It's been vacant for not 290 days. Principle fiscal analyst, 290 days. Psychiatrist medical doctor, 791 days. your business service analyst, 290 days, psychiatrist medical doctor, 791 days, senior business service analyst, 290 days, senior service business analyst, 266 days, senior clinical service case worker, 269 days, and development service is an inspector. It's been open for 658 days. Development service plan reviewer, 350 days and economic development business developer officer 308 days. First, can I just see those real quick? Because I want to call down the relevant directors to make sure to see what the impact would be. So for community service, we can. So we're ready. I'll reiterate Madam Chair, they've been unfilled for nine months plus. So. In Madam Chair, I have a suggestion maybe before we do that. I wonder if it's more prudent for maybe our county exec to come back next meeting with the balance budget rather than having us kind of figure out where the 400K will come from? I'll let you go then I'll respond. Well I wasn't prepared necessarily to speak to that. I would absolutely be ready to come back at the board, ask me to work with the team to come back with the balance budget. And yes, we will in doing that take as much into consideration as possible. That said, I was before Georgia speaks, wanted to make sure that that list of vacancies certainly is a dated one now. There are a number of vacancies that were listed that have been filled or offers may, so I just want to make sure that we are looking at the vacancies as they are now in terms of where we stand. I mean, I ask for vacancy report and I think that's a significant change and as we're filling these positions and updating the vacancy report, I think it should immediately be sent over to the board so that we have an updated. Yeah, that's the one that I have on my copy of the vacancy report is as recent as March 1st. I'll also note that there are two fire and rescue positions that have been unfilled one for 600 and 700 days. I made this point, you know, in our early conversations about the budget. I think that it's important to note that if a department can go so many days without filling a position, I can make the case that that position they can do without it. I'm going to let you speak to that. Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the board. So the question is what are current vacancies? No, we're trying to propose cuts and I am going off of the vacancy report and I made suggestions and this is. So currently we have, so CS is one of the larger agencies in the county. We have 500 FTEs. Our current vacancy rate is actually 6%. The most recent vacancy report has 29 vacant positions. 50% of those are already filled or in the final hiring process, including the child psychiatry position that we had talked about previously for which a contingent offer has been made. The other position that had been vacant for over 270 days was filled several weeks ago. Thank you. Madam Chair, for what it's worth, I don't know. It's almost magical when we ask the school for an update on what they have in their coffers and when we bring up the vacancy report, it just amazes me that it can go unfilled for so long and then out of no refill positions I guess it's a good thing But I will object to supervisor Franklin's request to have the county executive come back with his suggestions Because this is our budget and we make the decisions as to what we want to cut and so I do not support planning to the county executive All right, I hold on second. Let me go through and clear out refresh my queue. Make sure I have everyone because I have supervisor Franklin. Yeah, just follow up on that. The reason why I suggested that for a couple of reasons, A, I think for efficiency purposes that may be better than for us to peruse through the entire budget. And two, as I stated earlier in in the, I mean, the county exec does present recommendations in the very beginning, and then we kind of go back and forth on the budget. So I just think it'll be a little bit more, again, efficient if maybe he came back with a recommended balanced budget, because he already knows kind of where we are on all the tax rates. And so at this point, it's just him coming back to us with recommendations on where to find that 400K. In the dozen mean that we have to accept his recommendations, I think it just helps provide a guiding point. Civilizer, we're at the Bayley. Thank you, Madam Chair. I agree with Supervisor Vega for some additional reasons. We need to go through the budget and we need to review everything. And it's not just to make up the couple of $100,000 that were short, but it's also to ensure that we actually need the rate that we've already talked about since we haven't voted on it yet. There is the opportunity to make further cuts and reduce the rate because of additional savings. You asked for specific cuts. I'll give you a couple and the rationale for it. Deputy Director of Communications, we could save $190,000 plus, move it to FY27. I think you actually asserted something along those lines for some of these things. The Green Building Manager and the Climate Manager combined into one FTE. Save another $139,000 there. Staff support for B OCS Committee. Two FTEs. One for the Budget Committee. One for the Legislative Committee. You can't tell me we have to have one for each on a committee that meets a handful of times each year. It should be at most one FTE to cover both committees with a combined total of maybe one meeting a month annualized. HR transition training, FTEs, two this year, two next year that saves another $313,000 in some change. Come back to this one in a minute. Fire and Rescue Services Analyst, it's been vacant 640 days. Time to go. I'm going to take some umberts with community services. You say you're referencing one that's been vacant for 270 days. I've got multiple that have been vacant for 300. Now they're mostly clinical case workers and that sort of thing and you're asking for. I think what is it? Four more with 13 current vacancies. Until you fill your vacancies, if you want to go ahead and create these positions fine, but fund them with your existing balance, and that saves another quarter million dollars. Library of Office of Programming and Events, given their vacancy, another $234,000, and then the biggie. And I told you I would remind you of this chair Jefferson. You took Umbridge at Dr. Schneider not coming in and visiting you. I don't think anybody in this office got a visit from the Commonwealth's attorney. In fact she wouldn't even been here today unless I all but demanded her presence at the last meeting. And the numbers speak for themselves. I made the commitment to give her some more administrative staff because I think that will help. There is no reason that the staff attorney's line attorneys come while attorneys should be doing the scut work, that their paralegals and admins done if she needs more admins and more paralegals to reduce the load on the attorneys. Great. I'll split the baby, but giving her more attorneys and more staff and then actually increasing the disparity, increasing the number of negatively impacting the ratio of staff to attorneys because she values the attorney more. It doesn't make any sense because it just creates a bigger load on the administrative assistance in the paralegals. I do legal research every day. I write briefs for attorneys. I do their filings for them. So they don't have to do it. So the attorney who you're paying $7,000 an hour charges me to do something at a fraction of the cost and doesn't pass that on to his client. If that's what's going on over there, then that's an entirely different management matter that unfortunately we can't control through her operations, but we sure as hell can do it through the budget. So there's a couple of million dollars to play with here, and I would suggest that at the end of the day, there's enough hundreds of thousands when added together along with some other things where we can actually shave another penny or two off the real estate tax rate. If we're going to look at this, let's look at it holistically, top to bottom. let's not just cherry pick it and supervisor Vegas point. It's our time to make the suggestions, not CXOs, to come back and pick. at it holistically, top to bottom, let's not just cherry pick it and supervisor Vegas point, it's our time to make the suggestions, not CXOs to come back and pick which cuts he wants to make when we might have cuts of greater priorities as a board. Supervisor Bailey, then Franklin. Okay, let me just say a couple things. Everyone, if you could come back up. One of the things we talked about was to Supervisor Vegas question was the psychiatrist that was listed on the and and I don't know if it was you that came during our finance committee meeting and explained that I think you were in the process of interviewing or something like that then that's why it's closed out now. So we just need to have an understanding of how I know it's a lot of vacancies on a report, but it depends on the skill set and where you are in the interview. Could you just kind of with that example explain to us to help us understand? Reddably difficult position to fill. It's basically a unicorn position. And I that term that you use. Okay. So, the longer we keep ads out, the fewer resumes that we get. And so we finally got, I've gotten reached out by someone who had worked for us previously and that's been in process and as I said a contingent offer has been made so we're keeping our fingers crossed that that position will get filled. It's incredibly critical for the work that we do and for the opening of the CRC as well. Okay. So yeah, yeah and that wasn't necessarily for the CRC that was this. Okay. The other and the other positions that were referenced those are often very hard to fill positions we it often takes multiple recruitment to get the people who want to go out and do the work in the community and some of our more heavily community-based programs like our act program a sort of treatment, and our supported living services programs that are very, very community-based. We don't get a lot of candidates. So some of those positions were vacant for quite a while, but we seem to be making more progress. We've been out at career hiring fairs and there's been a lot more interested candidates in these positions so we're very excited. And as that have to do is something else you mentioned in our finance committee coming up to the budget cycle was incentive programs that you might offer things like that. Does that help as well? Yes. And closing up. And because I share her concerns about the list but. We do have the bonus for the clinical position. Okay just as well as some targeted stipends for some of our a few of our other programs. So I would you know I would I disagree with my colleagues. Subwrites a weird about you know it's not your responsibility county exec. Thank you. In terms of because you know your staff and you know what's needed and you staff based upon your manager. So I totally disagree with that. But I think what would help us in terms of really narrowing down the budget with the vacancies is if we could have a more time in finance and the finance committee about the vacancies and where we are, the status of where we are in terms of feeling, filling those positions because that would help us with the budget. But, you know, I just think we need to cut, but, you know, as how we cut and what the needs are from county staff as we serve the community. So we have to be very careful just not to cut because we might not know as board members We might know how we want to save money But the need might be imperative before we cut it so if you could help us in that regard That would certainly help me in cutting If you I don't know Mr. Shurkey want to address it because I have an idea. I think I might get killed by my colleagues, but I have an idea Do you just want to say things before I share my brilliant idea? I'm like it'd be killed by my colleagues. All right, you're just going to let me get killed. I'm happy to have Dave go to slide 14 where we started back on February 18th and go over the next few slides after this. all of this is obviously new and would be new to the county. Some of it would hurt more than others and so if there is a need to go back through this slide deck I'm happy to do. I'm I'm going to jump to page 23. Sorry, y'all. But there is an increase to trip funds. That's recommendation. Reconciliation tax. It's not your whole phone. OK. All right. Never mind. I will keep looking. Um, yeah, I'm sorry. I was. That was a good try. It was a good try. You know, one of the things I actually keep looking. I'm sorry. I was a good try. It was a good try. You know, one of the things I actually wanted to talk to you. First of all, we weren't put plaid because there were a lot of changes to the rate and things. So we are not fully prepared to make the cuts tonight. I do think we should still have these discussions. I would love to hear Mr. Schroer's recommendations, but today really is markup. And I'm afraid I am nervous for my one eighth and if we come back next week, you know, I don't know how much time we're necessarily going to have to digest whatever changes are made. I'm willing to give us another little bit more recess so that we can have discussions, you know, only two people at a time. But one thing changes I do wanna make, and I apologize because I do believe the department head should run their department, SEC fit, but one of the changes I would like to make is to the planning department. I do think that they're woefully understabbed. I know that director Washington was looking at adding more to more people to long range. I'd actually, if we can, shift that to current. I just, again, it's a slight change, but I'm making that change because we talked about current, having two more FTEs for current in our recap. I just wanted to throw that out there. I'm going to let other people speak, and then that's something'm going to want to discuss. So super. Two for planning. This is a revenue neutral. It's the. Shifted. She housed two people that she wants for a long range. If we can use them for current, I see Director Washington. I don't know if you want to address that. All right. Did you come down if you can address that? The only reason I'm saying this, and I hate messing with how you want to run a department by just no current is such a huge need. And it doesn't look like, unfortunately, we're going to have the money to do both. Good evening, Tony Washington, Director of Planning with the Planning Office. Thank you for the opportunity to provide my perspective on this request. From my perspective and from our team's perspective, both divisions, current planning definitely needs additional staff, but Longwage Planning does as well. And if you may recall at I believe last week when I talked about the fact that the language planning divisions workload has grown significantly. They also are here often to bring items to the board, CPAs, CPA requests, zoning tax amendments, zoning ordinance update, other big projects. So if you would like my sort of feedback, what I would recommend is that, or what I would suggest is if the planning office can get, if we were to get two FTEs, so to stay within what's in the budget request, I would recommend that we would get one FTE for current planning and one for long range planning. And I appreciate the clarification. Before we move forward, again, this is Revenue Neutral. I just want to see how, you know, I feel kind of weird taking a vote on this. But I just want to see where people stand on this request. Bailey, what do you how do you feel? Boatty. One in one. All right anger give me the thumbs up that means one Vega Franklin Yes, yes one for current planning and one for long-wage planning. They're both the principal planner positions and Gordy I'm sorry what You want both the? Yeah, that's what you, yeah, one-on-one. So I do one-on-one, so one-on-one, it is. So that's revenue neutral. What I'm going to do, I want to call, we have Franklin angry than we are, and then I'm going to take a break for us to, for people to go through and think of areas where, you know, they feel comfortable making cuts. So Franklin, angry, we're sure. So I just want to just throw out again that it may be more prudent for the county exec and his team to maybe make some recommendations. again, we don't have to take those recommendations. And if we're not going to be in the next meeting. We're not going to be in the next meeting. We're not going to be in the next meeting. We're not going to be in the next meeting. We're not going to be in the next meeting. We're not going to be in the next meeting. We're fully prepared to make some decisions on Tuesday. So that's kind of my recommendation because the way we're doing it now, I mean, obviously we're in a driver's seat, but I think we will continue to be in the driver's seat, but efficiency-wise, it just may take a little bit longer than probably necessary. Supervisor, angry? Hey, Dave, give me that number again. What are we trying to cut? What's the get down? What's the number? 4. 4. 06,000? 406,000 and FY 26. And approximately 3.1 million in fiscal 27. And we can address that 3.1 million. All right. What is laid, like could that come next year? As the county executive mentioned earlier, we do ask the board to approve a balanced five-year budget plan. Okay, so go to slide nine for me. I'm going to ask a question. First and no cuts and audits. We talked about this. Is that not? Oh, I'm sorry, that's. I guess it wasn't. Where's the slide that had a... Now this is what you're seeing on on the screen is the county executives original proposed budget presentation to the board in February. Did you mean the budget recap presentation budget? Yeah. So is that one is that presentation still a lot? Because there was a question about a slide and I'm curious. So slide nine. That this four main and two. Because there was a question about a slide and I'm curious. So slide nine, that this for main in the fire levy, this is what is that money we're putting in to bring this thing? What is that for a million? That is for apparatus contingency based on anticipated tariffs. If this money is not spent supervisor angry, it will stay in the fire levy. Because this money is coming out of the fire levy. Yes, sir. Okay. So that is what that is. What's this one guy in some way? I'm just gonna ask a question, man. So you can't move fire levy funds out into the general fund? No, sir. That would be against a state code. It must be used for the purposes established by the levy. OK. All right. Because I tell you, we've been discussing for a few hours about personnel. So somewhere in there, there's a 400K cut that you can do somewhere in one of these programs of funding at that level instead of nickel and diamond people. So, not maybe not this slide, but there's one of these slides that we can look at and pull out for on your K without dealing with the people issues. Supervisor Weir. Thank you Madam Chair. I think much like we went through all of the potential changes to the revenue stream. We should be going through proposed cuts and I've got a bunch of proposed cuts and and they're not just personnel, and there are some shifts. And I would suggest there's no way we're gonna get to do that tonight. So first off, I'm gonna suggest that we continue markup until the next meeting so that we leave the door open to revisiting rates, because we still have to deal with the monkey and the elephant in in the room which is the school division and what the impact of that is. I have a list to propose cuts some large, some small. And then we have the warts of several board members and I'll just list a couple of these off. District Court T and R program program. If you wanna add in that $48,000, we've gotta find the money for that, the Therafutah Corporation program. You've gotta find the $103,000 for that. And yeah, and then there are other things, like we could adjust the funding on the NET, Distiller House, the Bristol Battlefield. You You know there are a variety of things that we could do And if you if you want to go through all of my suggestions line by line I'm gonna want them done line by line with straw vote. We're gonna be here a while. I don't mind doing it. I got nothing to do tonight But I think I think the focus shouldn't be on just shaving off to $400 and some odd $1,000. It's determining what we need, what we don't need, where else there are savings that can be had, that we can then pass on to both commercial and residential tax payer. So I'm ready to go all night if you want to. I'm also willing to compromise and carry some portion of this over with a list of recommendations to the CXO or some hard and fast deductions that we all agree on or at least a majority of us agree on. But I mean that's part of this job. So I just want to be clear because you're saying something about schools. Because we've landed on that we're staying with revenue sharing So I just want to can you well in madam chair if we're gonna if we're gonna stay with the revenue sharing agreement the revenue sharing agreement Total or the amount of revenue will depend on what tax rate we ultimately land on and I'm not sure we're there yet So we don't know what the impact is but I want to be able at the end of the day to tell the residential taxpayer who's looking at a $270 increase in their bill that this amount of money wasn't was allocated with no supporting use at the end of the day. I'm sorry. We've sent the rates. I mean, we did a straw par. Are you saying that you want to? A straw par. We haven't voted on them yet. So there is opportunity to revisit them depending on what we do with the rest of the cuts. If this is just an exercise to get it $497,000 and not look at the whether we need some of this other stuff or we can fund it with other funds, then why are we here? I mean, that's not, I don't think that's what budget markup is. Budget markup is determining what we can afford, what we need to do, what can be pushed off, what is a moonshot? Because if it's simply finding $497,000 out of the CXO's budget, no disrespect to the CXO, because we changed the rates, then we're just rubber stamping the rest of the budget with no review and I'm tired of that. Civilized according? One question I do have on the CRC, the delayed opening of that, what in terms of the operational cost, how does that delayed opening affect the total amount needed to commence operations for the fiscal year? The, if I can, thank you for that question, Supervisor. The 5.7 million is match funding. So we expect to get 5.7 million from the state as well for opening. Those numbers are not based on, let me say it this way, if any of the funds are not being used, because the waiver application comes through, we are not accepting as many adults or youth, that money will fall to the bottom line. We are assuming, even if we are dealing with an opening in October, bless you, that the entire amount, 5.7 million will be needed. If we reduce, let's say, by a million, then the state will reduce by a million. And we absolutely believe that we'll have some challenges with opening based on the financial forecast that we have in place in terms of the number of clients served. I don't know if Ms. Beckman, you want it to say more there. Okay. I'll answer. Okay, thank you for that. And I agree with Supervisor Weir. I mean, look, I mean, it's, we're find $400, $6,000. We're trying to figure out what should we really be spending money on here. And so, what Supervisor Weir and the work that a lot of the staff, our staff members, they've come up with about a $4 million reduction. And so I think there's some room within all that to be able to take a look at shifting some of those funds to, from general funds to other fund balances, reducing some of the, eliminating some of the positions that have been vacant for quite some time. As well as having, do we really need to be, for instance, on the Washington Airport Task Force fee? Do we really need be spending money on that in the midst of trying to ensure that we're meeting our priority? So yeah, I think there's there's room for us to discuss well beyond the 406 maybe even 10 times that. So I'd look you know I certainly think we going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be recommendations we're going to be so I don't understand why to a certain extent we're acting like we haven't done this before I will reiterate my position and it is not appropriate to punt it off to the county executive It's our responsibility to our duty to our constituents to have this sorted out tonight, because that's what budget markup is. It's not our first rodeo. So I think Madam Chair, that I know that I've thrown stuff out there, others have thrown stuff out there, and there doesn't seem to be the majority in support of said recommended cuts. but I think that we need to kind of go down the line and say do we support these cuts or not and then keep the conversation going. Supervisor Bailey, then I'm going to weigh in. So I know I agree. So the problem is that we can't talk to each other like only one of us at a time. We can't have these discussions, which is why I do like us going through two nights and having these discussions. And you're right, it's not just finding what we can cut, finding, you know, are there other things that we wanna cut, are there things that we really wanna preserve? I'm prepared to go late. You know, I'm dressed comfortably, I'm comfortable with what I'm prepared to go late. You know, but what I think that we do need to do is take a little bit more time and have a few more conversations Because I do feel like we're spitballing You know, I think that we need a little bit more time tonight To go through some things that we really think that we can cut and have discussions around that and have discussions on things that maybe we really feel we should add. But I also want to understand how where people are at, I see supervisor Bowdie. Because I know that people do have families. I know that people have other obligations, but it is my preference at least to keep this discussion, take a recess, look this over and keep the discussion going. If we have to come back next week, I will make whatever work. Well, I mean, technically next week is we are passing the budget. If we were to allow Mr. Shorter to come back with recommendations and such, I still don't think that that is necessarily a clean answer because we're still going to need to have discussion. You know, we're still, even though it's when we're going to do adoption, that meeting is going to go late. So we're here late today. We could be here late tomorrow, I mean, late next week. But these are important discussions to be had supervisor, um, Bowdoodie and Bailey. Yeah. Before I go out, Madam County attorney, I saw you reaching. Do you want to say something? Madam Chair, members of the board, as I mentioned earlier, the Code of Virginia talks about when your public hearing is. And then... I saw you reaching, do you want to say something? Madam Chair, members of the board, as I mentioned earlier, the Code of Virginia talks about when your public hearing is and then when the action is going to be taken. So for example, with ordinances, the first notice has to be published no more than 28 days and no less than seven days before the date referenced in the notice, et cetera. And we work diligently to make sure that the public hearings met all the criteria for the code with the adoption being on the 22nd. So I would recommend that you not change the date of the adoption to whether continuing tonight or not. I would recommend that you keep the adoption of everything next week on the 22nd. And I know staff Based upon what the board does with markup We're all going to be working on getting those resolutions and ordinances finalized to be in the agenda to then be Dispatched and it's going to be a late dispatch on Friday So staff needs to know what it is that you're going to be doing and I would recommend against changing the adoption date. Bowdie then Bailey. Did you have anything else, Senator Bowdie? Yeah, no, so sorry, preserve Bailey, but that's what I was going to say. I get that there's frustration, I get that folks would like more time to set things, but the fact of the matter is is that staff needs needs our direction staff needs to have resolution prepared for Tuesday night. We can't continue this until Tuesday. There's no time to do that. And I appreciate the suggestion that's sort of the value just that, but again, it just doesn't work logistically. So we have to figure this out. And I will agree with some of my colleagues that it's an interesting situation we're in where we agree to these tax rates, and now we have to find money to make it up. Well, those votes are cast. The straw polls, straw poll votes passed, and now we have to deal with the reality that we have. Now I do want to say, of course, respect to the county executive and all the work that he's done. Not this point, we have to find the money again, not only for this budget, but also for FY27. I know that's not great, but it is where we are where it is. And I agree with what was said earlier in terms of let's just start going down the list of folks's proposed cuts. Let's take drop, drop poll votes on those because on one hand, we're saving money on that side, but it too also may make room for things that we know our priorities for us that currently we don't have money to pay for so let's go through the cuts and see where we land with the bottom line then use that as a base of sea do we have money left to then fund priorities that we've identified that we've all talked about thank you madam chair all right supervisor on Bailey thank you madam chair. My suggestion to Supervisor Bowie was that could we have a finance committee meeting prior to Tuesday so that we could, but that's, I know logistically that's a nightmare, but can we have a meeting to go through this where we're, you know, we can really work through what we want, what we don't want, and have the discussions. Because prior to, that's kind of what we're supposed to do in the finance committee meeting. So that's why I'm offering that. No, I don't, yeah, we don't have time to notice it. Okay. That's the issue. Okay. So what I'm going to do is we're going to take a recess and we're going to take 30 minutes. If anyone needs any printouts or anything, please let me know because I'm going to go to my office and we can print them out. take 30 minutes. If anyone needs any printouts or anything, please let me know because I'm going to go to my office and we can print them out. So let me know if you want anything printed out because I'll do that with you. I'm going to take my budget book, my computer. I'm going to have a couple conversations and then we are going to come back and I'm actually going to put a time on that. I'm going to give us maybe 30 minutes. I'm going to give us till 10, 10. I might go to 45 minutes. I know again, I realize people want to go home. I'm going to give us 45 minutes. So 10, 30. And as I said, that's 40 minutes. Roughly, we're going to do 40 minutes. I'm just going to keep it clean, 10.30. Music Where is Chris? I saw him. There he is. He magically appeared. All right. Thank you everyone for the break. I hope everyone is having fun. I know I am. So there are, I did send around some proposed cuts and I did get one response for them. I'm gonna go through the cuts and then I wanna go through the response I received. So from page 392 of the fiscal year, 2026 budget, we were going to increase the funding for the parks and wrecks existing parks improvement. We have that slated at $5 million, but we can maintain the current level of $2.5 million. That would be a savings of $2.5 million annually. We are also able to decrease the contingency fund from to 1.5 million from $2 million. We need a million dollars that still keeps us safe if we make that small decrease. I did have eliminating $500,000 on landscaping from public works. Supervisor Franklin has expressed that that would be a concern because she wants to continue the revitalization of route one. She's had a lot of complaints so that's one we can certainly discuss. And I spoke with supervisor, I'm sorry, Boeity, the other B, about eliminating 349, 100,000 from the Aquantral maintenance and that would be, I'm sorry. Okay, so eliminating that, and then we can also, from workers comp, we can take out 100, I'm sorry, 300,000 from our insurance premiums. The proposed budget has an 800,000 increase, but we can do 500,000. We can do have a million. So those are some proposed cuts. I think that would give us a little bit more leeway. I wanted to open discussion around those proposed cuts. I will go ahead and take out the landscaping. I don't know if there's going to be any opposition to that. But I would love to open up for comments on the email that I sent around and that I just outlined. Holding on me one second was my system's a little slow, Gordy, then Vega. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just to clarify on the Parks and Rec improvements, it says in FY 26 to an 1.5 million is in general funding is appropriated. But looking for FY 27, so we'd be looking at reducing the 27. Future budget, not but so it would have no effect on the FY 26, but it gets us to address the 3.1 in 27. Exactly, yes. Okay. But if our revenues jump, we can always. in the next year. In the next year for we can always that's a more decision for a future date for a few days we can absolutely. Okay. I just to to circle back two and a half million was already in the proposed budget for for fiscal 26. We would flatline that for the time being at two and a half million to balance out years. Okay, and so just to make, you know, so really has no, this has no effect on FY 26. So we'd still have to, you know, continue looking and provide that balance. But this gets after the vast majority of FY 27. So that's good. Thank you. And so actually for, and for, maybe now for that one, and I missed time, but we still have other things that are going to offset this year, the cut, our potential cut in our insurance premiums, the decrease for our contingency fund, and the eliminating for the Ocaquan trail maintenance. So we still have those things on the table. I don't know my screen. Everyone just cleared out so I'm refreshing. There's no one in queue. There's no further discount. So again, I would, you know, we could take out the landscaping. If everyone's fine with this, then we can, you know, I guess take a straw poll on making these eliminations. Supervisor Vega? Yeah, I just want to be clear that there are still other recommendations that some of us want to make. And that doesn't stiple that. No, we can make that, you know, because it's also, it is about making cuts and making strategic choices on what we want to invest in. So I think this is a starting. So, Mr. I'm sorry, he's so for this year, I can grab on my calculator. For this year, the cuts taking out the 500,000 for landscaping for public works, I can actually would it be helpful? I recent this to everyone. Yes, no, you got it. You got it. You got it. So for this year, I guess parks and existing parks and proofment, that would be a zero that would be for out years. We would decrease the contingency fund. So that's 500, 800 for the things we're going to limit hold on. Yeah if you can run the numbers I'm 49. Just just for clarification for the time being we're taking out landscaping half a million dollars as well as aqua quench trail maintenance. No we're going to take out we're not going to consider the landscaping. So what we're going to consider is the 300 from insurance premiums. It looks like the parks and rec existing parks improvement looks like that's not going to change for this park's and the park's and the park's and the park's and the park's and the park's and the park's and the park's and the park's and the park's and the park's and the park's and the park's and the park's and For fiscal 26, the board is $742,000 to the good. But in fiscal 27, we're still to the good, but by $312,000. We are positive in all five years. But in that impact on this year's budget is reduction loss, 114 on. Those three cuts? This does sound good. Wait, hold on. Did you guys have something additional? That is correct. 1149. 1,149. 149,000 in cuts. If we don't have any objections and I can say for clarification because I just want to take a quick vote because we can also, you know, all intent retain other cuts but I feel like this is low hanging fruit. No? Supervisor angry? Just want to go to that work. The insurance premium for the workers comp. So you basically decrease in that state. 800K now you're taking out 300K to get the 500K. So there's still a, there's still some advantage. There's still insurance for you. 500K now. So if, in fact, that they go through some more cuts and find something else, is there any interest in keeping that at 800K? Insurance premiums are always challenging for everybody. So they like that 800K. I'm pretty sure. But it's just a question that if they find more cuts that we agree to if that can stay You know Can you before we say anything of this one because I can table it Is there any advantage to having a little bit more is it what is it changing? You know If anything shall tree the insurance premiums to respond to what supervisor agrees to. Sure. When the estimate for 80000 was put together, we were not complete with our negotiations. Our insurance broker goes out and gets bids from insurance companies for our coverages. We weren't done that was early, so I've confirmed with the P.A.B.S.I.G. Lori Gray, who runs at the She Can Pay Premium is on $5,000. It should be fine. Are you coming for that? Yes, just. Yeah. I'm still on the table. Sir, I'm sorry, sir Boady. Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. And just I just want the question asked because I know what it does because I've read the budget book, but just so it could be socialized. What cutting the aquacorn trail? Thank you, Madam Chair. And just, I just want the question asked, because I know what it does, because I've read the budget book, but just so it could be socialized, what cutting the aquacorn trail maintenance operations would do, it's three employees, but if someone from Safry just say what it does, so people know what we're cutting. No, go south. And what the impacts might be. Good evening Chair, members of the Board, Seth Heller-Vos, Director of Parks and Recreation. So regarding the Aquacorn Trail staffing for the maintenance, those are tied to the bond project improvements, which are ongoing. And we'll be ongoing for the next probably 24 calendar months. And so those positions will still be necessary once all the improvements are made and the trail expansion work is complete. So hopefully those will just be deferred and consider that a later date. But for now, if they're not appropriated in fiscal year 26 budget, shouldn't have an impact on the maintenance of the trail corridor. And I appreciate that. And you hit the nail on the head when I was gonna say is, even if we don't fund them this year, there's not gonna be an adverse impact the trail long term because it's not even fully completed yet. No sir, with the assumption that this position is what we budgeted in the future. All right, hold on, let me supervise our weir. All right, suspect this gets to the heart of my issue with many budget items. You just happened to you up, it's not. I thought I'm picking on you. But if it's not going to be done for 24 months, why are we budgeting FTE for something that's not complete? There would be a question maybe for the budget office. But I believe that it is based on the five-year plan and how the positions are built into the budget based on anticipation and anticipated completion dates. So if we did budget them and they brought any brought them on on July 1, and according to the budget they'd be sitting or twiddling their thumbs because the trail is not complete yet? We would hire those positions and we would assign them to conduct other. Yes sir. You've just made my point. All right everyone I'm quickly sending around the revised cuts that we that I initially sent out because I just want these so that everyone has the top of their box. We're all clear. I'm not sure if I'm copying. So I just wanted to send those out so that we all have them at the top of our inbox. I think that these are easy, low-hanging fruit for us to make cuts and then after that we can entertain additional cuts. Are there any, if Erin had, she has to kind of look. This is what we've been talking about, any objections? Because I want to go ahead, Michelle, I'm sorry. I'm wondering if you want to kind of take a roll call on this suite of cuts. Certainly. Supervisor Ingrid? This is what you just said. Yes. Yes, right here. Yeah, what we talked about. Oh, yeah. Okay Supervisor Bailey supervisor voting. Hi. Supervisor Franklin. Hi. Supervisor Gordy. Supervisor Vega. Sure. Supervisor Weir. Chair Jefferson. Why not? That's a yes. Thank you, ma'am. All right. Now I want to before we go into any additions. I want to open the floor to see you know entertain any additional cuts. I want to look at you, Mr. Weir. How many do you want in a row or do you want to split them up? Because I've got mine and ones from other, and I'm not gonna say who gave them, but I agree with them or did agree with them. So I'm gonna make them, I'm gonna make the suggestion. Anyway, I'll do them one at a time. I use it on your spreadsheet. I use it on your spreadsheet. All but one or two, because I just added two back in. Can you send around the updated spreadsheet? And while you do that, I will go to see it. I can. I don't know if I can create a new spreadsheet out of this without. OK. It would be difficult. So what I'm going to do, I'm looking at your spreadsheet. I've got them highlighted so that I can just whip through. OK. but don't go too fast because we all need to discuss. So what are the things you were looking at? Deputy Director of Communications, push it off till next year. Wait, hold on. Did you want to take out the, because you have facilities fleet replacement? Is that now off? You know, I'm not going to touch that. Okay, so deputy. I'm just going to the ones that I'm willing to deal with right now. Sorry deputy director of communications, push it off to FY 27. Okay. that. Okay, so deputy I'm just going to the ones that I'm willing to deal with right now. Sorry deputy director of communications push it off to FY27. Okay, and that saves one ninety seventy four. What else do you have? Green building and climate manager two FTEs combined one. Okay, what else do you have? And then the last thing under OEM is is actually I get two more things in OEM. Staff will support for the B O C S budget and legislative committees reduced to FTE to one FTE. I don't think we need one for each committee. That saves us 92, seven. And last but not least, split the HR transition training FTs to this year to next year which saves us another 313,000. And these were just the OEM stuff. Supervisor Boating. Yeah, thank you, Madam Dr. I just want to ask staff especially Mr. Shorter since obviously this is stuff, especially in his domain. The idea that one clerk could manage the finance and budget committee, the legislative committee would stood up and the inter jurisdiction committee. Do you see that as a stretch? I do. I want to sort of take a point of clarity. David, you had something you want to jump in on, and then I'll come back to the question on the cuts. If I may ask, just for clarification on the Deputy Director of Communications, are we pushing that to fiscal 27 of this five-year plan, which means there's only one time savings in FY 26. Okay, thank you. Any time I say that, going through this list, that's learning me. Not eliminating, just pushing back. I just didn't know if we're pulling it out entirely and then revisiting it during the FY 27 new process. Thank you. Yeah, what I will say generally, when it comes to the deputy director for communications and the deputy clerk positions, is the offices are already over-text. Yeah. And the idea that we would be talking about, not supporting, when we know that the board has significant ask for both the clerk's office and the communications office constantly. And so yes, for one FTE to support two committees and a third that will be stood up in the next few months would absolutely be a stretch. Appreciate that. And then the question about the HR transition training activities. Again, be sure I don't know if you're the best person to ask for if someone else should. Pushing to that question to FY27 and keeping two FY26, is there a concern there? There is a concern. So what we are attempting to do is transition to a different model. And in order for that to work, you need the FTEs to support the transition. And splitting it up from into two years, we've already done. So the original ask from HR was for eight FTEs. That was split into a staffing plan. So to further split it would essentially be us saying we want to hold off on this transition for HR. Now I will remind the board that we are in transition in HR and the additional support is certainly needed in our HR department. So I hope that answers the question. It does. Thank you. I'm just refreshing. I don't say supervisor Vega. Do we have an updated vacancy report that we could look at? Because I had brought up nine positions, but then, I don't recall her name. Yes. She came forward and you know talked about certain positions being filled but that's still not everything. I do not have a vacancy report as of April 1. We have sent out the latest available. So do I just assume that the other unaccounted for are still unfilled? I think what because we have all the directors still here and They are certainly aware of where they are in terms of the hiring process We we have been very clear with the directors. Obviously we talked earlier today about the fact that we just had a career fair Where some of those positions were, you know, sort of being hired. So yes, there has been some updates. We unfortunately don't have a vacancy report that is current. But if there are specific positions, I'm happy to either myself, Dave, or have the director come in to speak to those positions. Supervisor Boehm. Yeah, sorry. I forgot one and it was one of the ones that I was most concerned about. The combining the green building and climate manager after you. I know I saw Julia out there in the in the in the atrium. I don't know if you want to address it or if you can. Sure. We'll have Julia come in. Good evening, Chair Jefferson. Members of the board, Julia Mano, Director of the Office of Sustainability. Thank you, Ms. Mano. So, Supervisor Weir was just saying that he thinks it's an ability to combine at least for this year, if not necessarily moving forward, the duties of the green buildings and climate manager into one role. What are your thoughts on that? Yeah, well, I appreciate the faith in our offices of efficiency. Those two positions have very different skill sets and qualifications. The climate and resilience manager will be working on actions related to natural resource protection, flood mitigation, and preserving air and water quality actions in the COMP plan, strategic plan, and the CESMP, while the Green Buildings Manager would be working on energy efficiency and renewable will energy support for residents, businesses, and the county government, again in the comp plan strategic plan in CESMP. And if we fund both these positions in the budget, are you confident you would be able to fill them within that fiscal year? Yes. Thank you. Madam Chair. Hold on, we have Supervisor Weir Bailey. Supervisor Thank you Madam Chair. Hold on we have supervisor we're Bailey. Surfer as a word. Madam Chair they're only when I'm going to die on the hill floor because I don't believe it's a stretch at all is the two staff support positions for the board committees. We have two clerks right now that handle multiple meetings a month for us and I don't think it too much to ask one person to deal with two committees that meet periodically at best. I just don't see it. I mean, if we really need one person for an inter-jurisdictional committee that's going to meet at an undetermined number of times in a year, and I doubt it's more than half a dozen. In fact, I would suggest it's probably for it most than we need to rethink what we're doing. Never mind. I'm good. Supervisor Vega-Than Franklin. I had a question for Julie as a follow-up to Supervisor Bowdie, but she left. All right. There she is. Supervisor Bowdie, what you want to be in here? I think we're fun. I'll go to watch it out there. So I'll ask you the opposite question that supervisor Bodhi asked you, because we want to meet halfway at the very least. If for this fiscal year we allocated one FTE. Could you manage until the next fiscal year when we give you the other? I will say I feel that both of these positions are time sensitive. For the reasons of our upcoming climate mitigation resiliency goals, we have very ambitious goals with a 2030 deadline in terms of climate resilience and greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy incorporation. with our strategic plan, the Office of Sustainability will be involved with leading or supporting about 20% of the action strategies in the strategic plan. And again, these are both in quite different areas of sustainability. The Climate Resilience Manager would be supporting 16 action strategies in the strategic plan, which is over 10% of the actions. The Green Building Manager, nine of the action strategies, we are working on a comp plan amendment for sustainability and resiliency that these positions would be critical for on top of implementation of our CESMP for our climate mitigation resilience goals. So the answer is no. Yes. Madam Chair, I'm not interested in this trick and pony show. It's 10.56. So if we're really serious, I'm done. I don't have a question for you. This is not intended for you. So if we're seriously interested in having a conversation about trimming fat, let's just be honest with one another. If we're just going to rubber stamp everything, let's just say that, but if we're honestly going to consider the needs and try to be reasonable with one another and meet each other halfway, I don't think that it's unreasonable if somebody's asking for two that we meet halfway and go with one to provide additional cost savings. But again, you know, we're creeping up to midnight and if there is no sincere desire to actually make any cuts, then we should just say that because it seems like we're going to keep calling every department head up front and everybody's going to make their case and we're just going around in circles and we'll be here until five in the morning. So I wanna respond to that. What is the goal with these cuts? Is it so that we can revisit the tax rates and do further cuts? Is it so that we can look at what we strategically wanna add? You know, are we really using a scalpel? You know, it's hard to say, but I do want to weigh into this process because I want people to really think about what it is they want. What are we trying to go after? What are we trying to get? I would love to hear your answer. Thank you. And the reason why I bring this up, obviously some of us have been here for the first term. This is our second term. I want to use one office, for example, and it's the office of our office of, is it diversity, equity and inclusion, or is it just equity and inclusion? Equity and inclusion. I want to use that office as an example. We've created committees, commissions, we've created departments, offices, if you will, That in my personal opinion and I think that I have a solid ground to stand on at a time were politically motivated. These offices were established with a goal, with a purpose. And this is one office in particular that I feel, and based on the data that has been provided, has already accomplished its goal. They were sent out on a mission to find ABCD. The board was presented with a report. There were no findings, so I keep asking myself, this is an office that their budget has grown since its implementation. And I'm just curious, what does the director do on a daily basis turn that paycheck and in addition to have two employees that work in this office that quite frankly don't fit the criteria of somebody that should be employed in this office, which is why Mr. Shorter, that organizational chart that I've been asking for years is so critical and important when we talk about positions, when we talk about personnel, because we can see, right, what the need is and who works for who, and we still don't have that. And so, you know, I look at the executive management summary that we got. And when this office was established in FY22, it was to the tune of $325,654. And FY23, 392,381. And FY24, 523,269. I, and it just keeps going up. We're creeping to over half a million dollars at this point. And I keep asking myself, what are the taxpayers of this county getting out of this office? Now, we can talk about personal feelings. We can talk about personal ideologies, but it serves no purpose. It serves no purpose. And I want to make sure that the positions that people are asking for, that the offices that are being created, that the commissions that are being established that create an additional workload within which then forces you to come to us to ask for more positions are actually needed. And not us just merely checking a box because it makes us feel good when people go to the county website to say that we have an office. That quite frankly, I don't know what they do. And just showing up to community events, showing up for photo ops, doesn't cut it for me. And I think that I have the taxpayers on my side and they would agree. That's why data is so important. That's why when we look at these reports and we look at the mission, we look at the findings, we look at the results, I can make my case, Madam Chair. And that's why when we talk about these positions, you know, when we talk about how long they've been vacant, it matters. And it makes a huge impact on our budget. I don't know if you want to respond, because I have a response. I mean, so to you. Madame Chair in Supervisor Vega, I don't believe equity and inclusion is a temporary office or program in an organization this size. And I wasn't here in FY22 when the office was created, but for an organization that is almost 6,000 employees, having a program that is focused on culture and making sure that we have a work workforce that is included. I don't believe that that is a temporary program or one that is based on a single report. The staff help with training. They provide support to employees. They are in multiple agencies providing that training training and Maria serves on the cabinet, on the executive cabinet and provides advice across our organization. And so I think there's value there and I would hope that the board, the collective board would see that value and continue to support the office. And I appreciate that and again you know it's not mean spirited. It's just again about being efficient and responsible with public funds. I don't see the value of the office. And again, we can agree to disagree, but the chair, you know, asked a question. And that's why it's important for us to go line by line to look at the asks that are being made. And again, you know, what are we getting? What are we getting as a result? So I'm actually going to speak to that. And I think I'm going to tighten up this process because you're right, it's late. And we are going in circles. So I just want to say with the vacant positions, I agree, you know, it'd be great if we had a more up-to-date report. But at the same time, we just had a job there on Saturday. So there were a lot of people, I'm sure we said there were over 1,000 people there. So if there are over 1,000 people, report, but at the same time we just had a job there on Saturday. So there were a lot of people I'm sure we said there were over a thousand people there. So if there are over a thousand people and there were interviews on the spot, we're not sure what resume is we've gotten. I mean let's be frank we have a lot of people who are looking for a job right now and this is a great time to take advantage of some of that talent. So I don't know what's being filled. I don't know what's in the queue. I don't know who was spoken to. And I think it's unrealistic for today for us to expect an update report because we don't know what's being filled, I don't know what's in the queue, I don't know who was spoken to. And I think it's unrealistic for today for us to expect and up to date report, because we don't know what interviews have taken place. Again, over 1,000 people, that shows that there's a lot of interesting county jobs and maybe some of those hard to fill jobs will soon be filled. As for the office of you know equity and inclusion we are the most diverse county in the Commonwealth but that doesn't mean that we don't have work to do. I said let's keep doing that work but I'm also really going to ask people again it is 1103 why are we here what is the next goal we have things we just cut. We can talk about maybe things that we want to strategically add. We can keep making decisions on what can be cut. But you need, you're going to need five people to go along with you. You're going to need five people. If you don't think you're going to have the five, if we want to get into the, you know, we do have obvious, you know, divisions on how we view the budget and how we view government and how we view spending. I don't think that's gonna be resolved in one night and I respect people's differences You know, I do want to hear from people, but I also want us to be serious on what we really think we can make cuts and what we really think We can make strategic additions. I want us to be serious about this because we can keep going on to five o'clock, six o'clock, seven o'clock. I'm here. I'm ready for it. But I really actually want this to be a fruitful discussion, not what we may want to see, but we know that we don't have the votes for. So I'm asking everyone, if you really seriously have something, if you don't think you have the votes, you can bring it up. But realize that we're going to keep sitting here for that. Realize that we're going to keep sitting here because people want to make their point. I want to land on a budget that we're comfortable with. And if it's not unanimous, I'm fine with that. But I want to pass something and I want to feel and I do respect the work that our county staff has put into it again There's areas of disagreement There are areas that you know we can you know make some cuts to as we did But I want people to be honest about do we really have the votes? Are we taking or is this more about taking a personal stand? Supervisor go ahead. It's not a personal stance. My job is to cut wasteful spending. And I am dead serious when I say that we could save $600,000 if we've really evaluate. And I was just using this office as an example, right? But I am serious about, you know, what I'm talking about and it's not personal for me again. It's about efficiency and it's about cutting wasteful spending, but you're right. If you don't have the votes, you don't have the votes, that doesn't mean I'm not going to bring it up because my duty is to the taxpayers of this county and I have an obligation to bring up their interests. You have an obligation what you feel or their interest, but again, we have a different people with 76 different personalities. And for you, that may be an area that you feel priority, but I will say for the majority, the board, the interest is not there. And the majority of the board does represent the majority of the county. To be fair, to be fair, we represent the majority of the county. So we can keep going in circles. But I want us to be really honest. There are things that I want to see that we are not going to put in this budget. That we're not going to put in this budget. Red is not. And I'm okay with that. I am 100% okay with that. Because I will live to fight another day. We will have these discussions next year and I do look for it to having a real discussion on profits because maybe some of the things we want we can do that through other means. But for right now we're going to have to compromise on some of the things that need to have, want to have and again being realistic. I'm going to go to supervisor Bailey, then Boate. Thank you, Matt Cher. Julia, please. I kind of forgot what I was going to ask, but it just came back to me. One of the things that I just need for you to substantiate in terms of where we're going as it relates to sustainability and environment. You had a phased approach when you first came on board and put together your team. And part of that phased approach was to set the your department up and then phase in individuals that can support the requirements for the region and specifically for the county. Am I correct in that? Yes. Okay, so these two positions that we are looking at was a part of that, if I want, correct me and just tell me in terms, these two positions were the requirement for the next phase of standing at your department, correct? They're the most critical next, yeah, up positions. Yes, but you didn't hire them initially if you wanted to stand up your, that's what I remember, that's what I'm asking you so that we could substantiate why they're there. Yeah, I mean, this is part of our work plan that's been, we have a few years built out in our work plan and these positions are supporting that work plan according to impact in priority. Okay, your intent was to, were you supposed to hire them last year, or are you in the line of where you wanted to hire them now? Oh, they were not in the budget last year. Right, right, yeah. But they're in the phase of where you want to hire them right now. Yes, okay, okay, thank you. Thank you, yes. Supervisor Baudi. You know what, I'm not gonna, I was gonna go around in circles with the previous discussion, I'm not go into. Thank you. Sir, that's a weird. Thank you, Madam Chair. Nothing about this budget proposal or the ones I'm making is personal. If it was, this list would be a hell of a lot longer than it is. And some of these things don't, I don't necessarily agree with, but people, people posited them. We included them, so I think we should discuss them. With respect to the purpose of going through this exercise, it's actually twofold. There are a number of proposals to add things back into the budget that are not currently there. Some of which I actually agree with, but in order to do that, we've got to find a cut somewhere. And this is our fault because we agreed last year that we would issue budget guidance in November, which I would have assumed would have addressed the rate or the potential impact and what we wanted to see and that didn't happen and that's on us. Now hopefully that will change this year with the budget committee that being said. In the order of an order to expedite, excuse me, process of damage went down the wrong tube. In order to expedite the process on these four, I can read the tea leaves. The only one, like I said, the only hill I'm gonna die on on this particular group of four is the staff for the committees. I think one person can do it. I think it's ridiculous to need two for two standalone committees with limited meeting requirements. So I would restrict my ask to the reduction of the two FTE for BOC-S committees to one saving us 92,787. So, our eyes are angry. All right, actually, I'm going to skip a little bit because we do want to talk about cuts by us. I want to talk about things from the, and I'm just going to throw this out here. I don't have a lot of stuff I want to add back in. You know, for recap, the things under trails, parks and green space, forest greens, recreation center study, I say we can hold off on that. We can wait. We can wait and see where we are with proffers and maybe have we have that discussion in a second time. And in later date, there are a couple things that I do think are sensitive. Williams-Ortinary Historic Preservation, that they're a pediatric recreation programmer. The redevelopment slash assemblage study, trap neuter vaccinate. I do kind of want to throw a bone to our planning commission. That's really all that I want to add. That's not a lot. And the reason why I'm throwing that out because it's not a lot, you know, maybe if we can agree on some of those things we could talk about for other cuts, I am really hesitant to, I do sympathize with our clerks. I sympathize with them greatly because, you know, this was a while ago, I'm going to trying to put you on a spot in Miss Mannon, but we had a conversation a while ago, and you had a much larger staff, and then it got cut during the pandemic, and it never came back. because this was a while ago, I'm gonna try to put you on a spot in this band, but we had a conversation a while ago, and you had a much larger staff, and then it got cut during the pandemic, and it never came back. Where I'm sensitive with our staff is, I don't want to burn people out. I don't. If we want the top talent, we have to be cognizant that they need to be compensated fairly and in line with neighboring jurisdictions and that they have a good work life balance. We have to be cognizant of those things. We cannot expect to get the best and keep the best if we're not treating them like the best. So, you know, again, we can have these discussions. I'm not there for those positions. I really am not there. You know, again, I don't know where all these positions land. And I did speak with, you know, Mr. shorter about some of them. Just so I understand because I have a few things I had questions about. You know, again, we can keep going around. We can keep having these discussions. I do want to hear from people, but we also may be at an impasse with some of these things. Supervisor Gourdy. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think for the sake of trying to move this along, we take a look at the things that we, I think we all agree we would like to add such as the 400,000 for the clerk's office for the land record management system, which is desperately needed. It's in the budget, okay, I'm sorry, I didn't see that in there. Okay, when the net solves a little bit of our problem. But, all right, so what about just kind of look at this list, noise ordinance enforcement? It's in the budget? All right. So, so wait to help things out. Look at pages 13. That's 14, 15. This is recap. Those are the things that we could possibly add. Everything else, we're good on. We've made the cuts earlier, so we do have a little bit of wiggle room. I don't want to use a ball that ripple room. Then Madam Chair, like us with the discussion that we've had on the proffers, I think a lot of those things on those pages certainly align within the park proffers that we can find out what's the art of the possible with those related to what the proffers can be used for during the course of the year. But given the fact that we're in such tight straights, I don't know that there's a lot of room to add any of these other items in the short term. So what I'm going to go to Franklin, Bailey and Bodie. I'm going to see if there's anything else we want to add. I'm going to give people who want to make the cuts a little bit more time to look at it. I want to see if there's anything we want to add from those positions. But again, you know, we are, you feel at this point we are kind of starting to go to circles. Reviser Franklin. Sure, I just for my one eighth, I do support the ask on page 14. William. I'm starting to go to circles. Supervisor Franklin. Sure, I just for my one eighth, I do support the ask on page 14, Williams, ordinary historic preservation and therapeutic rec program or arts council swim lanes, but I can also be flexible on those. And then excuse me, one also just also agree with the chair with regards to the positions, with regards to our committees. And the reason being is because if we remember, when we first approved our rules of procedure, I voted against these, but the majority voted to, to in my opinion add a bit more strain to our clerk's office by upping the time that we have to get the agendas together, all the information things of that nature. So, you know, in my opinion the least we could do is if we know that we're creating some of these committees think a little bit more far out and being a little bit more thoughtful about how we plan to support Admin with those particular jobs. So just wanna point that out, we've, it's us that added the strain. And so I agree that we don't want to continue to add to that. Bailey, then Boatie. Thank you, manager. I can definitely, of course, support the Forest Greens golf course. That's something that I wanted to keep in that I can use. I've investigated using my proffers for. So I would like to keep that in. And also the Williams ordinary historic preservation. I could support that. And the therapeutic recreation programmer, one FTE. I could take the art council's grants out the 50K. Because I think that's more of a process oriented opportunity rather than a funding opportunity. So you know we could take that out. And then on page 15, the trap neuter, Vesonet release directive. And I would also like to consider discussion about the redevelopment assemblage study. And the reason being, I'm sorry, did you have it? You know what I think of. All right, I apologize. I think what would be easiest, if we just go through this real quick, we'll just run through these pages. So we could see, get a consensus where people stand on each of these things, drop hole. I'm sorry. I don't know if this is helpful for the board. So we have a positive balance of 742,000 and fiscal 26, but only a positive balance in the out years of roughly $300,000 a year. What I'm trying to tell the board is that you have about $300,000 of recurring funding to work with at this juncture. And so we have the show restraint and that's why I mentioned the items that we want. I want to say this, again I want to go through this, we'll go by page by page. I really think for page 13, we save all that for parks, proffers. As you mentioned, supervisor Bailey, you have looked at that for forest greens golf course. I say for this page, we save all of this to see what can be used for proffers. So I'm going to quickly go down, and I'm sorry, I know people aren't cute, but I want to really move this meeting along. And, you know, I know people have comments and such. I greatly apologize, but I also want to land the plane at some point. So I'm going to go for page 13. I think we should hold up all these to see if we can use proffers. Andrea, can you ask people for a roll call to see if they agree with that or if they want to include that? And if they want to include it, we're going to talk about each of these items. Yes, ma'am. Supervisor angry? Yes, I agree. Supervisor Bailey. I agree. Supervisor Bailey. Agree, proffers. Supervisor Franklin? Yes. Supervisor Gordy? Right. Supervisor Vega? Yes, supervisor we're. Did you really have to ask? Chair Jefferson. Yes, 100% Supervisor Vega. Yes. Supervisor Weir. Did you really have to ask Chair Jefferson? Yes 100 percent. All right thank you. So we are going to look now at page 14. We have Williams Ordinary. They're a pediatric Rick programmer. Arts Council grants, swim swim-length rentals. Again, I do want to keep this to around 300,000 if possible. I also want people to be mindful of page 15. I mean, although some of this is not recurring, like the study, I would say, is a one-time cost. But I don't know if there's any, I know the program or that is going to be a multi-year cost. The arts grants, I mean, we could take that up each year. Slim, swim lane, that's going to be a fee support in that cost. Zero, Williams Ordinary Preservation. Is that a one-time cost, Mr. Sinclair, I believe so? That has a one time. One client cost. All right. With the exception, again, the therapeutic programmer is going to be ongoing. So we have to think about that. That is going to be an ongoing cost. So if we do that now, we're going to have to make sure we have the funds to budget for that. Does anyone have any specific questions about this or anything they really want to say? because otherwise I just want to kind of go through down the line and see what people want or do not want. Are we good? All right, folks, if you can do me a favor, clear yourselves out of queue. All right, so for Williams ordinary historic preservation, actually, if we can take these one by one, it's bad if you could do a roll call. All right, 130,000. Supervisor angry. So I just want to say because you know, I have no idea what we're doing in this preservation. I know this is really this is Brent's room, right? This is Brent's room. This is my it's my district. Okay, Shall I explain? Yeah, because that would really help. I don't know the urgency of this. Because we're working with 300K. So that's 130K. So. It's $251,000. So yeah, can you explain? Well, it's not $250. OK. Yeah, yes. I'm sorry, Madam Chair. Can explain. What this is, Supervisor Angri is a project that was started three years ago, or maybe even four years ago, and they've been doing a private fundraising for the project. It's in reference to the 250th anniversary in Dumfries. But they're trying to expand the Williams ordinary, which we own here in the county to also be, you know, like, agritourism for the county, not just for dump freeze, but it's located in dump freeze. So they've been doing fundraising the whole time and this is a one-time request that they're making $430. Wow. Okay. I just wonder, everybody's going to have a powerful issue with all of these because everybody has got no idea how to even belong. If we want to pass, we can come back to you because I do want us to start to land this plane. We have to make decisions. So do you want to pass? Yes. All right. Supervisor Bailey. Aye. Supervisor Bodie. Aye. Supervisor Franklin. Aye. Supervisor Gordy. I want to support it, but I want to find out if we've got other priorities given our limitation. So I'm going to pass for now. Supervisor Vega. No. Supervisor Weir. Like Mr. Gordy, since we don't know what we're going to have on the end of the bottom line, we're still going to have to make cuts and nobody seems to want them to do them pass. Chair Jefferson. I support it. Did you want to have anything else angry or no? Do Do you want to stay in or? All I want is a trap, no, that's all I want. And this whole thing. Okay, so, let's stay in or no? I'm abstaining. Check for the screen. Yeah, so we have three extensions. So we all right there are put it recreation programmer if you take a roll call or way to be easier I mean I can I'm just writing down yeah you're good um supervisor angry no supervisor. No. Supervisor Bailey. There. Yes. Supervisor Billy. Yes. Supervisor Franklin. Supervisor Gordy. Aye. Supervisor Vega. No. Supervisor Vega no supervisor we're. This is one of the few additions I was actually willing to fund I still will but we're about to go upside down again so you guys got better start thinking about some cuts we are we're not going to say yes to everything I am going to say yes to this yes I am going to say yes to this. Yes, ma'am. Gotcha. Thank you. The next one is the art council grants. 10,000 supervisor angry. No. Supervisor Bailey, who also supervise your body. No. Supervisor Franklin. Sorry, quick question. Do they need the grants? Because it's my understanding that they may not actually. No. No. I'm a no. Oh, I just need our wedges. Just say no, just say no. No. Are you a no? All right, Arts Council. Very good. Supervisor Gordy? No. Supervisor Vega? No. Supervisor Weir? Oh. Chair Jefferson? See, we gotta know. This is a no. We're something down. Swim lane rentals because this is a net cost of zero. Can we all just say yes? These are the kids who came in we all love them They were cute. They were wonderful. They were kind they were articulate and they do need the additional and they do need The additional lane. So let's go ahead madam chair. Yeah, Mr. shorter was about to speak I just want to make sure that it is in fact zero there there are, so yes, this is fee supported and the fees will cover the cost ongoing, but there are some initial costs associated with equipment and the costs associated with the overtime for lifeguards. And so there is a, that's the 30k. Okay. Okay. Okay. So I would just appreciate that in the future we don't put a note in that net cost is zero in the case. Alright, that yet 100%. Alright. So let's go with swim lanes. Supervisor Vega. No. Supervisor Franklin. Hi. Supervisor Angry. Hi. kill it right now. We ain't gonna to take a vote employee home ownership program 1.2 million dollars to scratch it out. Scratch it out. Redevelopment fund reserve. We ain't got the money. Let's go ahead. We're going to scratch that out. Cartenate it response to FTEs. This is an ongoing. I'm going to We're going to come back to this one because we got to pray on that one. Re-development slash assembly study, I kind of am a yeah, it's a one-time cost. I don't know, let's go ahead and take a vote on that one. That's $14 million. Supervisor Vega? Madam Chair, yeah, just want to clarify. I know Miss Washington was here I'm not sure if she's still here Is this for? Well, let me see if she's here This would be more of a Christina it doesn't have to do with the small area plans. No I think the small area plan certainly guide But no, this is economic development. This can make us money. Come on down, Pinky. Pink lady? What's the pink lady's? Pinky, I love pink. You know that Christina. You make us money. So I'm inclined to give you what you want. We have this conversation. But I guess since you're the chosen one for this hour, why do we need to do a study? I mean, what is going to be different than what your office has already done in order to identify? So I think because this is for the recap, right? And so I think when we have circled back and clarified, it's not a study, it's really for for an advisor or consultant that will help us. I'm a no. No. But it's it, but it's it. But it's it. But it's an as it like it's an as needed to help us figure out the structure and how to assemble property and which properties should be prioritized. Thank you Christina. Friends, you know, my position on how much we spend on consultants and contractors We're gonna keep this moving keep it moving We're ready let's go very good supervisor Bailey Supervisor Vega no Supervisor Franklin Supervisor Bowdie No give it Give it courage no wait no, I was saying no to her. Yes I was. You were just asking if I'm going to be nice and the answer is no. Give it all the small area plans, courts district, projects we've got going on. No, I'm not willing to spend another quarter million dollars on a contractor to do something like this that it just boggles my mind. No. Supervisor Gordy? Only if we offset it with other cuts. You're an abstain. And supervisor angry? Yeah, I'm a supervisor Gordy on this. We don't have a lot of money. So what we're going to be cutting it again. Chair Jefferson. I am a yes, but yes, I want to see where we are because I think we're still good. We're good. We are for this year. Where are we? With the inclusion of this consultant for the study, we're at 259,000 and FY 26 and 200,000 in fiscal 27. No, to the good. To the good. All right, so this one passes. We dealt with current planning. We have the trap neuter vaccinate release directive. That's $48,000 So wait hold on let's go with that one Yes, ma'am supervisor angry supervisor Franklin supervisor Vega No supervisor Gordy Think of the cats Superies. Supervisor Weir. No. Supervisor Bowie. Chair Jefferson. Of course, I love cats. All right. The coordinated response in two FTEs, I say we put down a hold unless we find other money. I mean, that's a really important one, but unless we find other money, we just don't have it. And then this one is, you know, do we love our planning commissioners? Do we? This is gonna be $13,000, it's gonna be ongoing. So I just wanna set that up front. Let's take a vote on that one. Chair Jefferson. Yes. Supervisor Angry? I just feel like you're given, uh, this is only 13K. All right, yes. Supervisor Bailey. Supervisor Baker. Supervisor Gray. Yes, yes. Having been a panel planning commissioner, the $800 doesn't go for given the level workload that these guys do. So I'm going to pass but also just want to say for the future that we really should look at some of our other commissions because for instance, social services, they get 100 bucks and quite frankly, they do a lot of important work in advising our social services department. So I just want to point that out that we need a little bit more equity in how we do some of these stipends and we could talk about that in finance and budget all right where are we at on that one Andrea? Yeah, yeah, all right So this is it for the recap. I think unless do we have and we'll go back to cuts because we're still in the positive I don't want to spend to zero. I appreciate everyone's flexibility. Are we still having fun? And are there any other additional things that people really, hills that they need to die on? My bandets sharpened. Supervisor we're. I have a number of hills I'm going to die on okay. Let's take them one at a time senior inspector development services Adding another FTE at 142 six the current position has been vacant more than 270 days You can fund this in 27 once you fill the vacancy have two vacancies? Public relations firms for the EDA take the additional 50 grand. That's out of the general fund, fund it with TOT. Washington Airport Task Force fee $25,000. Why are we supporting a Loudoun County Committee? Which is nothing but Loudoun County and run by the Loudoun County Chamber. I don't care if it's networking. Why are we paying $25,000? Something is not going to benefit the residents of Prince William County. We'll benefit Loudon. I'll start with those three. I'll skip the third rail for the moment, but I'm going to come back to it. Fire and Rescue Principal Engineer vacant 782 days. Fire and Rescue Service Analyst vacant 640. So I don't know how you want to do the supervisor, but I can maybe have you go through three, and then I'll respond to the three, and then you continue. Okay, I can start with this first three. So development service is funded via development fees and not filled until the need. The second one. So that won't, that doesn't impact the job. On the E.A. public relations firm, say 50 grand by fully funding the TOT funds, rather than three quarters of it with TOT and 50 out of general fund or reduce the contract. Here she comes. Yep. Pink lady. Same thing. Sorry I had a call, but pink because I love it. You're like so matchy. I used to see TOT for that one. And I apologized last time I was here. I didn't introduce myself. Christina Wynn, economic development and tourism. And I apologized because I was running in, so do you mind repeating the question supervisor? Can we fund the remaining 50 grand of the public relations firm with TOT funds? Well, rather than general fund. So the public relations contract, effort strategy is really about trying to get Prince William County on more lists. So being like Akkwan, the top 25, you know, small towns to come visit and so forth. It takes a very strategic effort to reach out to those Pacific PR and travel writers and so forth to get on those lists. And it takes at least three years for that to happen. We can do, if we are only doing TOT funds, we can do it on the travel side, but we can't then do it for economic development because you can't use economic development. You can't use TOT funds for economic development. You can only use it for visitor tourism. So the economic development side would not be able to help try to raise the rankings of Prince William County in various industry trade magazines. So how did you arrive at three quarters of it would be on TOT or would be on tourism if you don't know what you're going to do. I did not say that I did not know what I was going to do. I apologize if that's what you heard me say. It seems kind of nebulous as to what. I mean, I get it. I'd rather just cut it to 150 personally and take the 50 grand general fund support out. It. It's not a hill I'm going to completely die on, but I will die on the next one, which is the Washington area task force. That's fine. No, it's not. I still think can you explain the importance of that fee? For which one? The Washington Airport Task Force. So I believe that the Washington Airport Task Force came out and visited it with all the board members prior to the budget season. Long time ago Prince William County was a member within the task force. We have not been a member I guess for numerous years as long as I've been here. The task force is focused on really the importance of airport operations and connecting our business community to the airport. So we have several companies like ATCC and FedEx and so forth that have these immediate need to that airport. One of the things right now that the Dallass Airport is working on and especially the task force in MOA is increasing the warehouse and the storage and especially cold storage. So companies like ATCC, they need cold storage and so these are efforts that if we now have more connection within to that task force and and we are partners, we can help with our business community. The other piece is that we have a subzone of a sub foreign trade zone at Innovation Park and then that helps create that liquid between the Washington Air Force task force. And I believe all loud and fair facts are both at 100,000 each, I believe. And so Prince William would be coming in at 25,000. I would argue that the airport is actually in loud and in all but touches fair facts. So it has a direct row, I mean. It's true. But from an economic development and business perspective, attracting businesses, having access to an airport is almost one of the number one things behind workforce. And so having those connections to our transportation network is super important for attracting businesses and especially diversifying our industry sectors. I just question whether being part of a task force for a loud and centric, loud and development, loud and economic development is worth the squeezing. Okay, that's fine. Okay, thank you. So, okay, so you want to vote on those three senior inspector development services? That's fee supported. So did you supervise a weirdo? Is that one that you want to keep in or take out? I left it again for some reason and I'm not sure why I like to go back and double check my book I'll take it out for the moment I'm not gonna die on the PR floor. I'm going to die in the Washington airport. Oh, right. Let's. So let's let's take a vote on Washington airport task force fee. Supervisor Vody. Pass. Supervisor Bailey. I. Supervisor Angry. Aye. Supervisor Franklin. Aye. Supervisor Weir. You go. Supervisor Vegas. No. Supervisor Gordy. No one knows for Got it on particularly. I pinkie won me over. Yes. It is a 3-3 and that fails. All right, so that means we keep it in What else you get that's been vacant for 782 days and the fire and rescue service analyst, which has been vacant for 640 days if we've done with our opportunities or are they still there? Is Mr. Lechiff Lebel here, Mr. Sinclair? Yes, the first FTE you may recall we found during the analysis that we were doing for vacancy rates. That FTE has been moved to development fees and not being supported by General Fund. The other FTE remind me what FTE is that? And it was the end of the list. Foreign rescue services analyst is the second. Yeah, I need the chief for that one. He's there. I see him working. Good evening. Tom LeVell, fire chief. The second position has been reclassified as a position, excuse me, business systems administrator, excuse me, which actually closes tomorrow. Some of you are pretty familiar that we went through some dramatic changes in our business systems administration. Over the last year, we brought in a new, wonderful assistant director of services. We wanted to allow that person to pick this person. And so that elongated the process, what I'll also say is what's probably worth noting. We're currently utilizing executive temporary workforce to do this work. So we are paying for the position quite frankly at a higher rate than when the position is filled and we would need continue to do that as part of the budget. Madam Chair, I'm not going to die in either one of those hills. I just wanted to point out what we're dealing with on an annual basis. We keep adding FTE. So without objection, I'll simply go to the next one and I'm going to simply note these. I know most of this isn't going to gain any traction, but I think it needs to be publicly noted. There is 366,000 and some change for the housing and community AFDU program. I'm not denigrating the program, but we budgeted two FTE and FY25. They both been vacant for 184 days with one on hold. So why are we adding more? Second one is social service public assistance staffing. Cut the revenues support by half given 22 vacancies averaging 126 days and time to hire a new FTE, the time required to hire new FTE, those 22. I mean, I don't see it happening before halfway through the fiscal year at least. So I would chip for this year only cut that a little bit Community Services Clinical Services case workers. We've got 13 vacancies. We're funding four more Why we could save 221,000 by just rearranging the deck chairs in that department and last but not least in that particular group Library of Office of Programming and Events, you've got 14 vacancies. If you're going to fund them with the vacancies, redo something else, but why create two new FTE when you can't even fill the FTE that would ostensibly fill some portion of that service right now? Mr. Shardee, let's speak about it. Should we have department heads? Joni could come up to speak to the housing program. So according for the affordable dwelling unit ordinance, we have one additional that we are trying to fill right now. We were able to hire a manager and we are needing the analysts to work with that program. We are getting closer and closer to getting the ordinance approved and have the housing trust fund also in place ready to roll. And these positions are very important to get this project, this activity off the ground. Thank you, Tony. Anything else? Sir, vice-preserver? Well, madam chair. I'm sorry, Mr. Shorter. Real quick, did you have something? Well, I was going to move on to public assistance. Okay. You didn't see me in the queue? No, I'm sorry. I can wait. I have, did you, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I was going to move on to public assistance. I'm sorry. I can. Did you? I'm sorry, Mr. Shorter. I was going to move on to public assistance. I think that was the next set of FTEs. With the public assistance program, I think what you all saw as a board in the February 18th presentation of a proposed budget was the growth in public assistance applications in the work happening within public within the public assistance program. That is a program that has a lot of turnover. And it has that turnover because of the sheer amount of work. You would also recall that consistent with the audit recommendations and management responses associated with those recommendations that we need additional capacity. And so those 10 FTEs are needed and are supported by the state as well. So as you can see, as a reminder that the state contributes to the FTEs and is not just locally funded. What was it like looking at the general revenue? I'm not going to die on any of the host I can read the T-leaves, but I think people need to know what's going on here. Wait, quickly I have vague on the queue. Did you want to say something or are you good for now? Because I already questions for Dave, but I can wait. Okay. Why you go on? Next batch is Parks. This is a simple one. Parks and Rec. Senior Physical Analyst. Contract oversight for what this guy was going to do or what this position would do. It's largely been transferred to Ricks. Why do we still have it in here? If Rix going to be largely, and we just did this, you know, why are we funding this for the construction management if transportation is taking this over with his new position? And the second one on Parks and Rix, why do we need the Parks and Rix human resource analysts when we have an entire human resources division? Sure, so with with the first items of buzzer we are I would say the decision that the board made Or will make as part of the adoption of this budget is the starting Place for the conversation around the transportation merger that has not actually happened yet And Parks and Recreation needs the support. This won't actually take place for another year and a half. So any transfer of staff to transportation, a merged transportation department wouldn't take effect until July 1 of next year. In terms of the HR support, Parks and Recreation is unique in the county in that they take in during the summer months, hundreds of new employees, seasonally. And they are not on their own, but they do the lion's share of that work on their own. And so yes, I would say that Parks and Recreation does need that HR specialist to help with the onboarding of so many seasonal employees. Again, Madam Chair, I now can read the tea leaves. I'm not gonna die on the hill. I'm gonna give you a number here in a minute. We've already dealt with an Ed distiller house. We've already dealt with this, the criminal justice to new FTE. I would just suggest we revisit that FY27. And then if we're hiring a marketing and promotions contract for EDA, why are we also giving them a new position that does the same thing? You can have a contractor or you can have an FTE, you can't have both in my mind. That's a hill I will die on. There she goes. Yep. Nope. Nope. There she goes. We love you, Christine. It's just late at night and we're a little silly. I apologize for last time. My feet are cold. Thank you, sorry, Christina, when again. Two different things. The PR consultant contractor is really focused on, as I said, focused on targeting national writers for us to generate earned media and get Prince William County on the various less because those lists make us even more attractive to visitors and to businesses because when you go search for things Prince William County will come up but you have to develop those relationships. The position is in over the past five years you know we've gone from an organization who didn't put on any events or any governor's announcements or conferences or anything last year alone, we've done 17, we've absorbed all of that through our whole entire team, they're getting to be bigger events that are more challenging. We do a lot of job fairs ourselves and there's gonna be a greater need with the federal workforce and helping that out. So that really focuses on the logistics of really putting Prince William County on the map, you know, hosting round business round tables. All of that takes a lot of work to put into. Did that answer your question, sir? It answers the question, but it... Two different, two different questions. I'm good, Madam Chair. Again, I'm not gonna die on these hills. I revoked, I would just suggest that, you know, in these few things I've talked about here in the last 15, 20, 30 minutes. And these are just a couple of what I would have initially proposed. That's 24 FTE. It's probably easily $2.4 million salary and benefits went on average. And I haven't picked a lot of hills to die on, but I've got one last cut. And this cut I am going to die on the hill when I want to vote. And that's the common alternative to the staffing plan. She has not made the case. She did not come to my office. I don't think she came to anybody's office. And the numbers don't bear out her request. What's going on elsewhere in the Commonwealth does not bear out her request. I know I'm going to lose this vote, but that's another 1.2 million and another 8 FTE. I am, I grow weary of. All we're going to take a moment. I'll just leave it at that. We'll take a vote on that for a commonwealth attorney for her staffing plan. Madam chair, I have a question for supervisor we're yeah supervisor we're you're a no on everything or are you willing to find a compromise. I would be willing to give, what is her ask? Eight, four attorneys and four assistants and paralegals combined. I'll give her the paralegals and the assistants, but I don't know how that breaks down because I'm sure the attorneys have a higher compensation. Which you entertained because she was asked and she said if she had to pick one or the other, she'd prefer the attorneys. And that would increase the already overburdened staff because she's increased the ratio of... She's got more work on the administrative and the paralegals than she did before we gave her more staff positions at each of the last two years. So what she brought up as a problem in 2024 has been exacerbated in terms of staff load per paralegal and per administrative assistant. So it's become even more top heavy in terms of load for the attorneys. And I think you're seeing as she was commenting that the attorneys are doing their own data entry, which is ridiculous. And you know, I deal with the legal industry every day. I'm actually part of it. And what she was, I'm gonna be blind. What she was telling me is the situation over there, is what I would consider in the private sector, a really messed up management of a law office. So you don't pay attorneys to do clerical work. You do attorneys to do legal work. Like tricases instead of, you know where I'm going. So that's why you support the paralegal and the assistance to alleviate that from the attorney so they can focus more of their attention in the courtroom. OK, so you would fund that or support that. So just so this is a friendly amendment. So I'm sorry, supervisor Gordy. So just a question and going and this is going to the potential for state funding. Is there a way that we, let's say we fully fund the request at one point too, but any resources that we receive the state would offset those costs. Instead of adding additional FTEs from whatever budget from whatever the state so it would cap it at four for the year. What typically happens when the the comp board makes decisions and then allocates funding to the jurisdiction is we come to the board to make sure that that that that the funding is appropriated. Now, I don't know if we, at that time, would then ask the board if we would take an equal balance of general fund dollar from, I mean, if that's something that I would do or if we would ask the board to. That is an option for the board to consider in the sense that theoretically, you're at this time as part of the budget, funding them with local funding. And then the board could decide to recoup that revenue from the comp board if it comes through. That is an option. Supervisor Vega. Supervisor Weir. I'm still here. How about two attorneys and two paralegals? Would you support that? One attorney, three paralegals manager Franklin what's currently in the budget for the Commonwealth's attorney's office total positions for attorneys for paralegal okay and that's already baked into the budget. That's in the proposed budget, yes. Okay, so are they asking to cut those? Correct. Okay, well, obviously I'm supportive of keeping what's in the budget just from our 1A. Well, we're going to just take a vote because, you know, for fairness, I think we know we're going to land, but let's go ahead and take the vote. What we're going to vote on I'm sorry are we going to vote on one attorney three pair legal? So what are we voting for? I will leave it to supervisor Vegas discretion go ahead and take the vote. What we're going to vote on, I'm sorry, are we going to vote on one attorney and three paralegal? So what are we voting for? Supervisor we're? I will leave it to supervisor Vega's discretion. So what are we voting on, Vega? Again, I want compromise. I support two attorneys, two paralegals. We kind of meet halfway and find a win. OK, we're voting on two attorneys and two paralegal. So we will be cutting. It will be four total positions instead of eight. Roughly. We're voting on two attorneys and two paralegals so we will be cutting. It'll be four total positions instead of eight. Roughly. Supervisor Bowdie? No. Supervisor Gordy? Supervisor Angry? Again, I'm saying 2.7% is what the commonwealth attorney is in the budget. I'm a no. We can do cuts, but I'm telling you, that's not it. Supervisor Bailey? No. Supervisor Vega? See. Supervisor Weir? Yes. Supervisor Franklin? No. Chair Jefferson? No. No means no in many languages. I got Spanish covered French, whatever. English. What was about the 35? 35. Motion fails. All right, before we shift our Viva, anything anything else Bob? Because it was your final hill right? You did. I actually do have one left over but. I wasn't going to do it but I want the hell. Before we move to a different topic, I would like to discuss or take a look at the offsetting cost coming from the Commonwealth and using those to offset whatever cost that we were whatever funds we received from the Commonwealth would be used to offset these costs for these positions. So, so we would not do that as part of a budget adoption next week. What we would do is based on the collective boards feedback today, we would bring a board item corresponding with a budget and appropriation item for Com Board funding. So when we come with to the board, let's say in however many months, we would be coming to the board with an item that has both the budget and appropriate Com board funding and a corresponding request from the board to reprogram general fund dollars. Dave, I don't know if you. That is certainly one option. There's a couple ways to approach it for the board. The CXO is absolutely correct with what he said. Another option is to just accept the revenue and not adjust the expenditure budget at all. All right. Are you good, Gordy? You get. I'm going to throw a Vicarbonne, then. Okay. And that is the funding of the 30 FTE for the collective bargaining for the fire department. I wasn't necessarily an agreement when this was brought to me, but because I was trying to stay neutral and all the stuff and represent everybody's interest and kind of playing fair, I put it in here. It's $3.2 million, where we would fully fund it from the fire levy and not from the general fund. And I heard we can't fund it from the general fund, but if you're funding half of it with the fire levy and half of it with the general fund don't tell me you can't fund it with fire levy you can't have it both ways you can't have the cake and eat it too I know it's a one-year thing Vic this is your baby I'll let you deal with it because I'm not my not my puppy that's a simple question I don't know what's the answer there? That's a lot of money putting half back into the budget. From an purely financial standpoint it would be we believe a use of fire-loving fund balance that would fund ongoing costs. Yeah. And it's from a financial standpoint it's not something staff would recommend. It's a no I think. All right anything else before I go to Vega and I think that's it you're good Bob. All right you're still alive Vega did you have anything else you want to add? Yes Dave what would now the increase be at 0.906 for the average tax bill? I've got a lot of stuff on the table. I apologize. I know it's OK. The average tax bill increase will be $273 or 5.6%. Okay. And then with values increasing, what would the, do you know what the average increase of taxes at a rate of 350 would be? For the, yeah, personal vehicle. That I don't know. We do have the estimates that we were looking that earlier. Let me see if I have it up. Oh, it's that chart, right? Yeah, it's a chart. I thought I had that. Here we go. Here we go right here. Let me try to blow this up. What would that be for test payers? It's this one. Oh, that one. Yeah, much. Okay. You know, 350. It's right there, 350. The 350 column is right here. To the average is $16.48. For automobiles, for trucks and SUVs, it looks like the average would be $22.16. Yes, increase. Is that saving or increase? It is savings at $350. Did you have anything else on you? You need time to do your calculations. Supervisor Vega. Good. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anything else from anyone else? Because I don't know if we really want to go home. We did that earlier. No, we're not. That's all on the can. I'm have one more thing all right what you got Madam chair Dave what was the total increase at 9026 average? 120 273 273 which is three dollars lower than what was proposed in February correct? Yes. And because there's no change in the fire levy, that's $6 more. So the net, we just raised their taxes by $3 net. So we're up to what's that? $3.79 on average, and then we're giving a woo. Anywhere from $16 to $22 tax relief on their vehicle test. That's not a trade I'd make. I think it's disgraceful. I think this is absolutely disgraceful, given what we have promised the public. And what people have voted in favor for in years past. And here we are again, to really, literally almost $300 increase. And if you don't think that doesn't impact those on restricted incomes or flat incomes, I mean year over year over year, 300 this year, 200 last year, 300 the year before that. We got to stop this. I apologize to all the residents of Prince William County. I really do. So I really appreciate the spreadsheet and I made the request because I want to see historically how much taxes have gone up in the average. Let's be real. This impacts people with higher value homes more than anyone else. I want to stop pretending that we're hurting the poor people. Some of the people in fixed incomes are going to see this, but a lot aren't. As I said, I think it's pretty nice home in my Claire. My tax last year was negative. It went down $25.10. My assessment went up and went up greatly. But I would say that I probably fall in that median home or I fall in, you know, what might be considered a nice home on the higher end. I guess for me, again, this is a real partisan difference here. This is a very real partisan difference. But I don't want people to think, oh, here's the board. We're really sticking it to you. Because I know we're going to get emails from people. Why are you doing this to me? Why are you doing this to me? And if I had their address and look them up in the assessments, they probably see a tax decrease. So I just really want to be conscious of what we're saying, because I don't think that we're truly harming people in such a detrimental way. And we are going to have greater tax increases. That is something I want to work towards. But as I've said, I wanted to be measured and I want to be balanced because we don't have the data center revenue to really truly make meaningful cuts. We don't have that revenue. It's not here yet. The data centers haven't been fully built out and we're just now getting to a higher rate. We have a lot of needs in this county that need to be addressed. I want to invest in us and I wanna invest in our future. And I wanna recognize that we are a growing county and that's a beautiful thing. We are a diverse county and that is a very beautiful thing. We have lots of changes. We have room to make these, you know, to make incremental cuts. We're going to get there. We're just not there right now at this second. Doesn't mean we'll never be there. But I believe in us and I want to invest in us. Madam Chair, with all due respect, the fixed income thing works both ways. I've got any number of residents, quite a number of residents in my district, I'm sure everybody on this board has a number of residents in their districts who are on fixed incomes. And I would guarantee you that a significant portion of them paid off their mortgages 10, 15, 20 years ago. their expenditures are going up because of taxes. It's not because the rest grows growing. It's because they've got a stroke of check to the county every year and it's not just the rich people are paying more. I've got several people that I know that I am friends with where their tax bill is going up more than $1,000 this year. And quite frankly, I'm going to catch some heat for saying this at this rate with no reduction. I'm actually starting to feel sorry for the people in the digital gateway because they're going to get really slammed. They've already screamed at us about their rates and how much they're paying. You just made their bills even higher. I don't know how much sympathy I have, but it does bother me that while they're yelling at us about those rates, we're going to increase the tax bill whether it gets paid or not or whether the litigation succeed or not, but I am truly concerned about those on a fixed income. Because to say that they're in one area of the county or that they're in one particular type of house or that they're not as impacted by others by increases in the real property tax rate is just wrong when you consider how long some of them have own their houses, how long some of them have been paid off and how restricted some of their income is, particularly those that are truly ill-liquely. And I get that complaint and I get those calls every day of the week for multiple people in my district complaining about the rate and their fixed incomes. And these are people that live on larger properties that are now valued at significantly more than they ever dream those values, the properties would be valued at. I'm not gonna argue it anymore. I'm done. I just think we've done a disservice to a lot of people. Vega, then Bowdee. Madam Chair, I'm truly stunned. I really am at your remarks right now, but that's not here nor there because, yes, the plane landed, I would say the plane crashed. And you're absolutely right, supervisor, where it's truly unfortunate to use that type of reasoning when people cannot control value increases around them. It's, I am almost at a loss for words, especially when you talk about the least of these. And while to some, it may be insignificant. I dare not try to even pretend to understand how this is going to impact other people, because I sure know how much it impacts me. And it's ironic, because I'm you know thinking about the votes and you know these numbers this and that while actually sharing my personal property bill with some of my colleagues on this day yes in the hopes that when we got to this point we would have some sort of compassion even if it were for ourselves you know who you are and you know what your comments were in regards to that bill so So it's truly stunning to me to try to make that justification, but it is what it is. Now, with that being said, I do want to make a request and my request is Mr. shorter that at the very least quarterly, we get a vacancy report update. Because that also helps us with conversations as the year goes on and we can better prepare. And stop trying to make points on this day as without having an actual up-to-date vacancy report. But the public will know what this board decided to do. And you were writing your earlier comments, Madam Chair. The board speaks through the majority. And when you're talking about tax increases, it doesn't matter which way you look at it, or how you slice the pie. The majority has spoken. And it is what it is. And I just hope that folks remember the importance of your local government and the impact, the direct impact that they literally have on almost all areas of your life. Civilizer Bowdie, the name. Yeah, thank you Madam Chair. I'm not going to belabor this too much, but as we look at these taxors, we look at what we were doing tonight and I was actually more important with a lot more of the cuts that serves her where was what to to do but then sort of backed away from so that's there's that there but more importantly as they have that chart up I just want folks to look at that chart because the average is where the average is I know that for quite a few people you know $12 bucks, $16 bucks, $18 bucks isn't that much but and the high and you're talking about some people are going to be saving $76,000 on their car bill. Which I think is, we're talking about, okay, $270 increase on their house, when they saved $76 on their car, there begins to see a difference there. The other sort of thing, which sort of got lost in all the sois is we did vote to reduce the meals tax by a cent or a percent today. With everything that we've heard from folks, whether it's community members or restaurant owners, I know that, you know, the folks met with all of us this year and in in hinder years about the impact of this. To me, I feel like there's a significant change that we made this year. And I'll be the first to say, I was one of the most resistant people to lowering that meal's tax. Largely because especially in my district, a huge chunk of that is paid by people that come from outside the county. And we have very few revenue streams that we can say reliably, almost a quarter of the people that pay it are from outside the county. But now folks are going back to, well look at what we didn't do on the real estate tax. I don't know what they're talking about, what we just did on the car tax and the meals tax, especially knowing that yes, there have been folks that have shared with us the impact of their business, their impact of their eating habits and what have you. And at least in this time, at this moment, we decided to be more sensitive to that and lowered that meals tax at an impact to the point earlier that made by Mr. Sinclair, not only impacted this fiscal year, but had bleeding effects as the next year that we then had to make up for right here tonight. So as folks begin to communicate to their constituents what we did tonight, I hope they tell the whole story and that just parts of that they want to tell. Thank you Madam Chair Supervisor angry I Came in here today I was not in favor of an 18 million dollar hike on an industry But I think I feel good about taking out 18 million dollars and giving it back to the people because that's what I did now There's a lot more work we can do and we sat here in dollars around every department that we really really could look that and Try to figure out some real major cuts. So I'm not gonna sit there and act as if You know the people that really is municipal, thank you, Supervisor Ware, but, you know, there's some real conversations we can have about this budget in this county. And you know, I did my part, I tried. Every penny matters to the people. I was simply say I did my part. And you know, we'll be back at this again next year. so let's do it. We have a quick question for the Rev. I want to request that we put the revenue share agreement on the agenda for the next finance and budget committee. This is the first time I say it publicly. I give you a heads up but I have inside it publicly. So thank you. All right so So I did say it publicly. So I just, you know, real quickly, so revise or Vega, you didn't share your bill with me. But I would appreciate seeing I, you know, we always talk about the data. So I want to see the data, you know, after we pass the budget and all that, I want to see the data on homes, you know, just like you had broken out with the car tax earlier, you know, people saw or hear zero bill, bill under 100. I really, I want to see a better breakdown and I can work with staff on what kind of information I'd like to see. Because again, and I appreciate what Supervisor Bowdie said, we did a lot, we didn't get to everything. But for me, the glass is half full, not half empty. Because this is one budget. We'll see where we're at next year. And I'd like to continue making cuts. We're not getting everything in one time. We're not doing everything at once. But we can continue to make cuts. This is the start over discussion. You know. But I'm sorry, I hear in the Subaru,'t call it a single FTE. I mean success means different things to different people. But again I am going to reiterate I'm the single mom on the board. Since taking this I have you know this has been my main position. I've taken a tremendous pay cut and trust me it's difficult. I've had to make difficult financial choices, but I would say that I understand the average person because I am the average person. And I know I just like to make those difficult cuts, but the end of the day, I wanna protect the county, I wanna invest in our future, I wanna invest in us. I cannot repeat that strongly enough. I don't think we disappointed people. I don't. I think people want us to protect to protect our education spending and to do better in our schools and I think people want to feel safe in our community. So I do reject the notion that we have short-changed people that we're conning people when the average is going to be $22.75 a month. I reject that notion and people please 75 cents a month. I reject that notion. And people, please reach out to me if we, supervisor, Bodian, I did a budget town hall. Not a lot of people attended. I know supervisor, and you did one as well. I'm willing to listen. Please reach out to me. Send me copies of your bills. I will have the discussions. Because I haven't had thousands of people reaching out to me in concern I've had people reaching out to me with what they'd like to see us protect and what I like what they'd like to see us invest in Supervisor Bailey and then we will call to a journey. Thank you very much, Madam Chair Mentor I agree with a lot of what you've just said and I think that as a board regardless of whether we agree or disagree, we are moving in the right direction to protect a county that is growing over 500 million people here and it's growing rapidly. The unfortunate thing is past boards have not considered that and moving forward. It's been the last two boards, ours and the board before before that we've tried to work together to make sure that we're considering everybody in the county. And so we don't we apologize for demonstrating on the day is in unprofessional ways when we should be communicating more to our districts our respective districts and I I think that we can do better and the newly created finance committee. We had an opportunity to go over a lot of the things that we talked about tonight in the finance committee. So the public would sit up to one o'clock in the morning to discuss things that would just stress them out. We had an opportunity to talk about the stressful things in the finance committee. And some of us decided that we weren't going to do that. We prefer coming to the day and demonstrating. So what I think this is is very positive and moving forward. I think it's an opportunity for us to work together more to create an even better budget. Each year we've decreased the percentages on personal property taxes, on let fire levels, whatever we have done that. Why? Because we have incremental revenues coming in that in previous boards was not coming in. And that's a positive thing. But some of us want to paint it as something negative. So I think what I'd like to do in a positive way is for us to come together more in the next budget cycle, prior to 24 hours before we sit out and do markup. And talk about what the needs are in our communities. And see we can compromise and see how we can govern better because each year the trajectory goes positive and grows. Thank you, Madam Chair. All right. I'd like to motion to adjourn. Do a adjourn. Second. Time out. We have supervisors time. No, we don't. We don't. No, I have a directive. And I have an appointment. We. This was not my motion. We don't have a directive and I have an appointment. We we I was in my motion. All right. Hold on. I'm going to allow you guys to because this was we didn't do this last year. It's one be clear. We didn't do this last year. If you have an appointment because it's time sensitive and a direct if it's time sensitive. I will allow this. But otherwise we're going to adjourn. So please supervise our Gordy than Vega. but we did not do this last year. Guys, make a decision, Gordy. Madam Chair, without objection, I'd like to direct the County Executive's work with staff as a follow-up to Directive 22-04 to draft a public art policy for further board consideration. Consistent with staff's proposal and its memorandum in response to Directive 22-04, the proposed policy should include among other things the associated costs to the county and the county executive's deployment of a policy development task force provide him with feedback as he makes recommendations to the board. The county attorney's office is directed to review the information and recommendations for any legal issues when the work is complete. The county executive should report back to the board with his recommendations during a board meeting or by memorandum as he determines appropriate. Please send that around to the board. I am looking who send it you or a member you're just off. Send it around while you're Vega? Yeah, just want to issue my notice of intent to appoint Mr. Chris Mayors to the Veterans Commission. All right, I have no objections. I don't think anyone objects to Tom's directive. We can give him a hard time at a later date. We'll go to your second. All right, let's vote Guys wait we are really feeling we've got to call the votes. We got to make sure that everyone is that are you yes? Yes, you can be yes. Okay. I'm a yes. All right. Vote unanimous. Thank you. Thank you.