The city manager presented his budget and proposed that the and it is balanced and incorporates resources to many of our strategic priorities. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss any potential adjustments that should be made to the budget. So we had the budget hearing, we've heard a number of folks and thank thank you for those of you who have come to attend and express what your concerns are. That feedback was valuable. Everyone has had this budget, I think since I said May 5th, right? And we've had some time to read through it individually, as well as the opportunity to ask for clarification questions of the manager. Today is the time that we discuss it, the budget proposed together, and formulate any changes that we may want to take. For the process today, I'm proposing that everybody have an opportunity to express their perspective and have us take the time to speak to the things that you find most important or most advantageous for us. And then at the end of those comments, I would hope that if you have any suggestions for amendments or adjustments to the proposed budget, that we begin to do that as well. Keep in mind that the proposed budget is balanced, so staff will have to do some work as they, as if we propose additional reductions or any adjustments that are not one time revenue expenses. As a reminder, the manager has identified 5.3 million in ARPA revenue replacement that is currently not allocated and available to fund one time expenses. Also, please note that we definitely do not have the need to allocate the full amount of this at any time, which would be preserved for capacity for us to address any future policy decisions that may emerge in the future. So with that, let's see, I'm going to turn this over. Again, once after all the council members have been recognized and had the opportunity to speak, we would determine what will move forward and further consideration for any of the potential adjustments. Our policy has been that there are five or more votes for any proposed change. That change will move forward for the staff to do more analysis of the costs, the considerations, and the consequences of that proposed change. And that item will be included for consideration at the straw votes meeting on Thursday, May the 29th. So I believe that that is that I think there's something that has changed and I'm sorry Mr. Mitchell helped me out on the date for that. Thank you, man. I think there are several colleagues that are scheduled to be absent on the 29th. And so I will rather choose a date that most of us could be here. So I think the next opportunity will be June 2nd at our committee report out, but I think there are several colleagues who say that the 29th, they have a conflict, they will not be present to vote. Okay. So my understanding is that we'll let us at come back to this at the end of the meeting, we'll get everything done, and then that's something that we can work out with scheduling. So give the manager a moment to look at his schedule and see how that works for the organization as well. Yes? Yes? Claire fine question. Mayor Marie is going to get us started. I want just one to verify that we want to let Marie start it or do you want me to go over what is in front of everyone? I'm sorry. There's a proposal, a budget proposal. That's in front of everyone. Manager, did you want to kick it off and then you'll pass it so that I can share where we at? Thank you. Okay. I don't think that I have that. Do you, does everyone else have it right here? This is the blue dot. This is it. All right. The agency for neighborhoods. Oh, now I see the red. I'm sorry, it was blue and now it's red. Okay, we'll follow, unless there's some discussion or not, Ms. Mayfield has suggested that we do this. Mr. Jones, is that sub-workable? Sure. All right. So, there we go, whatever it takes to get us through this. Okay. So thank you mayor and members of council. What I will do, customer may feels after me, I'll kick it to Marie to kick back to you. That's it. Thank you for giving us an opportunity to provide support as you go through the straw boats. One thing I would like to highlight is with the mayor said earlier this council has done a very good job with managing the ARPA funds, the carous funds I think $300 million that came during the pandemic and most of those funds two thirds of it actually We went back into the community as opposed to the pandemic. And most of those funds, two-thirds of it, actually went back into the community, as opposed to the city's coffers. hindsight maybe we should have clawed back a little bit of that, but that's okay. That 5.3 million is revenue replacement, so that's available with no time clock on it. So if that's something that you want to allocate over years, you can do it. If it's something that you want to jump in today, and as the mayor mentioned earlier, there's no need to spend it all, but it is something that's available. It's pretty different than I think any of the budget we've had up to this point. Normally there may be a half a million here that's unallocated or things of that nature. So having said that, there have been conversations that are going on. Marie opened herself up for any questions that Council members may have and she has had some. There is an item that's in front of you that Council member may feel has placed in front of you that deals with financial partners that I think may be a good starting point is Marie explains the process that occurred to have financial partners in the budget as well as what's in front of you now. But that makes sense, Mayor. I think if it makes sense to the, are there any questions from council members? That's what would be more important to know. All right, so hearing no additional questions, we're gonna recognize Marie. Thank you. Thank you. And as of the major, say I'll just briefly touch on the process, cheering her team. She worked with a lot of the neighborhood organizations and really got the word out. So we had 50 people apply, around $8 million worth. And then so we, and this was the first year, so if you all recall, you adopted a financial partners policy in October. So this was the first year under that new policy. So we actually had teams of experts pulled from different departments across the city to rank these. And that's where you get the rankings there before you. And the manager proposed a budget based on those rankings and a few other criteria. Then when we, I've got feedback from Selva over you and'll go into detail on Miss Mayfield's rankings. But one of Miss Mayfield's rankings was her feeling that staff should have been a little bit more pure to the policy and the policy it says we will not fund. You had to be eligible, you had to submit less than 30%. So what the original proposal was for those organizations, we just cut the funding down to 30%, but to her point, they did not meet the upfront criteria. And the applications were opened in the fall and closed in January. Oh, sorry, in the end of December. I was looking at cherry to make sure I wasn't speaking what happened this year. So and then but at front end on the application, it said, you know, we were not fund more than 30% and that was stated on the front. And any other questions are in the general process. If not, we'll go over Miss Mayfields. She yes ma'am. Dr. Walenton. Oh, sorry. Just so I'm clear, I heard you say, and I'm sure you're about to show us what Councilmember Mayfield said in terms of being more pure. Can you help me understand what your original position was? Given the policy was there, and it sounds like there was some adjustment to be more in line with the policy, can you just kind of explain what the rationale was? Sure, thank you. So the first what we said, just because of limited funding, we said if you're existing partner and you scored high, we'd fund you at a flat amount of, we didn't fund an increase for you. So if you got 100 and you asked for 135 and you scored high, we proposed 100. And then if you're a new partner, we didn't fund any new partners this year or propose, sorry, propose more than 100. And then you were saying about the, so and if you asked for more than 30% of your budget, we said we can't give you that much, but we said okay up to this much. So we reduced it arbitrarily instead of saying you did not meet, you're not eligible because you did not meet the criteria. Okay. All right. Any other further questions? Mr. Mitchell? I. I did a Miss Mayfield marriage. If you don't mind come back to me at the Miss Mayfield. All right. Miss Mayfield. Thank you Madam Mayor. Thank you and Marie and manager Jones. for full clarification. One one I apologize that this is the first time that a lot of you are seeing this there was a little bit of miscommunication and I didn't clearly share with Marie that I wanted to try to get this out last week so that we could have had a chance to look at it over the weekend I thought I had but but I didn't so I take full responsibility of that. Last Thursday, Marie and I sat together for two and a half hours. So for me, one, what is the definition of financial partner? Two, we staff identified that some of those that applied as a financial partner actually were better suited in the different budget line item. So we see that there are some recommendations through workforce development, through housing, through their budget, where that's really where they were, where some of our applicants belong. The commitment that I made and that I suggested last year and coming into this year is one I would not, because I'm guilty of it, where I would throw in a new partner, that I would not try to add anyone in. We had an application process, as was mentioned, we received 51 applications. The total was around 8.8 million in total. I had asked, okay, manager, what is our starting point with financial partners? I was under the impression that it was 1.5 million. In actuality, we do not have a budget line item that says financial partners. That is a financial partners is something that we have done for many years, but those funds come from general funds when we have offered those dollars and other things. So if you look at the second sheet that's up on the board and that you all have in front of you, you would see that there is an additional column that says proposed based on criteria. It's the second column. And then the third column was the proposed budget that staff submit a task. So when Maria and I got together, I looked at the two basic criteria. One, how did you score? So first of all, let's look at the scoring. So what we did is we went back under each category, great neighborhoods, safe communities, well-managed government. We went through each category, total the number of applications outside of the ones that were already pulled aside because we identified additional funding source for them. And just did old school, we did the average. We did the total number of their scoring divided by the total number of applications. If you look to the far right, you'll see what that average score was. That was the first piece. The second piece is we all remember in our financial partner books, we had a number of items that when you scroll down and look at their total budget, they were in the red because they were over, they were 30% or higher of their budget. Some even requested, honestly, 100% of their budget. Those were the two basic criteria. So once we went together and I looked at the proposed, based on criteria, what we identified, looking at the minimum scoring, and if you look at the second to last line, the application scoring, you will see what the scores for each of the organizations were. So at the four great neighborhoods, the minimum scoring was 47.77. We had some unfortunately that scored 46 or lower. Now what you see in the red was the fact that they missed one or both of the criteria. Either they were over 30% and or they didn't score. So even though you look on here and the scoring may be a little higher, like we have, just do it movement. They score in 49, but unfortunately, your actual total proposal was over 30%. So to try to keep this clear and to keep it as equitable and transparent as possible, those were the two main criteria as we went through. I know all of us received an email earlier today for an organization that does really great work and that's power up USA. Here's the challenge. Their initial proposal request was for 125,000. That 125,000 was over 30%. That is why they're listed in the red. If were to find at 92 because they actually there were two different numbers in Their application so there was a little bit confusion in there because on the front page the request was for 125 in the actual application it had 92,000 so you had two different numbers in there That was one of the challenges with that particular but that that is what the red is outlining. The red is saying these are the organizations that did not meet either of the initial criteria. By us going back with Marie and I and actually averaging the scores, you will also notice that a number of additional partners were added in that weren't in initially. So if you look at the very bottom, the very bottom gives us a total of a million 256, 468, whereas the staff proposal had 812. So that is an additional $444,430 when we just go strictly by proposed based on criteria. My suggestion and proposal is out of the 5.3 because I don't want to spend all of the 5.3 and I share it with the manager. For me, if we're going to spend any other 5.3, we learned last Monday that we have city staff that have had to utilize services and the amazing work that the HR department is doing under Sheelers leadership I would say we put a million a million five over a three-year period there to help with that but if we were to agree and support this recommendation that additional $444,430 would give us additional partners just based on the two criteria. Being one, you score it well, and we reduce the scores. And, or you did not surpass the 30%. Then we also must step back and acknowledge that last year we had a number of concerns with some of our partners reached out where they did not receive their funding in a timely matter. We also had to acknowledge that some of those partners were brand new partners. We had to get contracts and plays had to do other things, but I'm still gonna say for council, we take responsibility for helping to speed that process through, but at the end of the day to get us consistent as we move forward, be very clear of what the expectations and the application is because this is not guaranteed funding. And we had to make some very hard decisions with almost 9 million in requests and having a million or less to actually fund here. So my hope is that the recommendations that I am presenting to you all, that you understand why we have proposed based on criteria, you also see what the previous proposal was, and you see that we actually have a number of partners that score will, that were under the 30%, and we have an opportunity to actually expand it, and that expansion will be less than $445,000 and I will entertain any questions. Ms. Watlington. So, okay, thank you for doing this. Much appreciated. I just want to make sure I understand. So I'm asking you a few quick questions. Yes ma'am. I think I hear what you said over here in column A. If you read, you miss one of the criteria. And one of both. In column E. Yes. This application score. Yes. Yes. Application score. What is this color signify? The color doesn't. The color is. So, and Marie correct me if I'm wrong. The color really doesn't signify anything. Well, we were going through it together. Some of them we highlighted just to make sure that they were over the average score that's all the way to the right. But you see, like you don't see it all the way under safe communities. So, what actually you do, if you look at it, the colors are the ones that were at the minimum scoring or greater. So, like you see the first one is at 55.20, but your average score was 47. So you saw anything above the name. Anything above 47.77. That is what you should see highlighted on one well-managed government. We only had two organizations. The average between the two was the 42.99, so that's why that's highlighted and so forth and so on. Okay. Thank you. That answers that question and then just to follow up on the application score. What you've done here is take the application score. Found the calculus average. They, they're actual score. Yeah, and then you took everything above that, and that's what's highlighted here. Yes. What was the score beforehand? Okay, so the application score was their application score. Initially, under the average score of which, Marie, you still have the original in the sheet, don't you? Yes, the scores did not change any, but originally we said anybody that had at least 50 points. Right, so initially we were all not by 50. And my question was, one, how do we get to 50 versus us actually going through each category, giving that total and creating a true average based on the scoring of the applications we received in each category. So the 50 was an arbitrary minimum initially and you tell us an identified number. Yes. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Um, and then this four, 44 would presumably come from the general fund. That four, for for for for for for for for for for for for for for for which is in the general, is it our product that we still have available. We still have $5.3 million. So if we were, if council were to support this recommendation and additional $444,040, that little bit could come out of that $5.3. Okay. And then over here in the last columns notes where some are ready general fund. What does that mean? So I may be better speak to that. So that was just showing you the current proposed budget. So the current proposed budget, these were the ones that were coming out of the 812. 812,000 that were hitting the non-departmental general fund. Okay, so I thought I was understanding that the original 1.5 was coming out of the general fund initially anyway. No, so if we look, it's sorry, and we can go into more detail too, but if you look at the budget book on page 16, I believe the financial partners, the 8.12 these match to those. Like Smith and Miss Mayfield said, if you look at this first sheet, you can see like some of our general funds, some went to ARPA workforce dollars, Trees Charlotte went to the Tree Canopy Care Program. So if it's blank, yeah, if it's blank then it wasn't in the proposed budget. Okay, got it. All right, I think that answers all of them. Oh, last question, along those aims, because I know that you were mentioning before that there were some that were on this list that got moved somewhere else. That we identify a different funding support system for it. So as an example, under well managed government, in the original proposal by staff, we had tree Charlotte in there. But we really realized that that can go under our tree canopy program. So moving that to the correct budget, then that gave us the opportunity for better alignment. And it removed them out of financial partners, which is what we're looking at today. Got you. Okay, that's helpful. It's also a little concerning though. I say a little concerning because I thought we were optimizing the budget ahead of time. So I'm sorry, Miss Dr. Wartland, did I make? So we did. That was already in the proposed budget, like Tree Charlotte. What Miss Mayfield did then is say, okay, of the ones that stayed in the general fund, let's relook at that 812,000. But the one she's mentioning that got realigned to Tree Charlotte, that was already in the manager's proposed budget. So that, sorry, that everybody join us, can't see. But this handout has the manager's proposed with it, says what was optimized. And then Miss Mayfield took all the general fund ones and all the other ones that were left. The ones that were in the proposed budget on her sheets say general fund. And then the ones that don't and then re looked at all those that were available for general fund funding. Okay, so then maybe there's an opportunity to educate the agencies then if their money is already accounted for within the department budget so that they shouldn't be applying to financial partners because otherwise we got extra dollars sitting around in our own program. No. So I'll try not to make it more complicated. Marinos, that I struggle with this too. Okay. And maybe just the way we have to present this going forward. Two things happened in this budget, for instance, tree shore all of which happened in the financial partner. And I go back to where I think everybody's saying, Dr. Walgiton, is that if there is a pot of money that can take care of these different organizations, stop concerning them in the financial partners. So Ms. Mayfield locked into that and said, so why are we even talking about tree shore oil? Because now it has a funding source and we should have to talk about tree shore oil ever again. Lisk, if I have this right, was funded out of Housing and Neighborhood Services this current year. And while they applied to be a financial partner, it made more sense to fund them again out of Housing and Neighborhood Services. So therefore, you take those, I think those were 450,000 to combine. You take those out of financial partners and put them in this dedicated source for this department or the payment in lieu and then start the process fresh. I think I understand that. What I'm saying is the fact that there was capacity in the department budget to absorb it makes me question. No, what happened is the department budget said, hey, we don't want to fund this anymore. We want to send it over to financial partners and I said no. We're going to do a C if there's capacity within the budget. So in other words, instead of freeing up, it's earned $1,000 for housing and the neighborhood services. By pushing Lisk out, I pushed them back in. I understand what I'm and I'll just say it one more time. The fact that that exercise only happened because of this exercise feels like a missed opportunity to optimize the budget. But you've answered my questions. I appreciate it. Thank you, Dr. Walons. Colleys. Yes sir. Thank you Mayor. I need to get in line. Okay I got you. So first of all I really appreciate your effort to try and bring a little structure into this process. We were so far out of bounds that needed to be a procedure. Appreciate that. I'm curious to know, what is the basis? It used to be we talked about like a certain period of time during which these grants were given or that they were given in order to help organizations reach a self-sufficiency. Do we still have any standard like that? Are there companies here that have been receiving the grants from financial partners for years and years? Sure, I'll take the first step. Marie, so great movement in the committee that came up with the number of criteria. The committee didn't suggest that anybody would be kicked out but started a five-year clock with these. So as far as staff's concern, they followed the broad committee structure, but nothing said that because we have some of these partners who have been in 30 plus years, but there was nothing that would indicate to kick them out because they were more than five or anything like that. So we're not considering that. Not at this cycle. So I raised that in part because if we're contemplating using one time arpemmy, then we need to think about whether that's really one time, right? Or are we supporting sustaining grants that we've made in the past and which we will be expected to make again in the future? So Councilmember Drake's, one suggestion I'm not saying that this is, what I'm suggesting, but even if you wanted to say, if there were $444,000 that you did in FY 26, and if you wanted to set a set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set kind of what you have in front of you with the ARPA funds. How would you like to structure them based on different concerns? But in our current balanced budget we have 800 and something thousand. Is that right? So any excess over 800,000 requires an offset? Yes, either an offset on the revenue side that can go forward or you could use a one time from the offer pot. Right, understood. But what I'm saying is as it stands right now, the budget works. Correct. The run rate budget works this way. Correct. And we would have to get some help from a one time fund in order to exceed the 800,000. Because otherwise the budget doesn't work. That's correct. And I agree. I think I wouldn't want to make multi-year commitments or even implied multi-year commitments from the ARPA funds. So if we want to kind of buy ourselves another year of relationships with the grant recipients, but it would have to be very clear that we have no commitment to do this again. Or for that matter to defend whatever the level is we arrive at this time. Because our capacity for this, our run rate on continuing capacity for this, as the budget is offered is 800,000 and something. So it just want to be clear among us and with any grant recipient that we are doing this in excess of our current capacity only to meet the criteria that Miss Mayfield has suggested. And otherwise I'm fine with it. It's a question of messaging. And Mr. Drake's I wouldn't like to add, I think there's also a different understanding for some of us because I was under the impression that when we started this conversation last year that we were going to be letting our partners know moving forward, here's that five year window. But we had, we get to the next budget cycle and somewhere it seems that well, Council never actually put our hands up to say that. And I am hoping that we get to the place where we make that very clear, because I also agree, there needs to be a window. Whether that window, because I think years ago when I first proposed it, I looked at Philadelphia and Philadelphia had a seven year window because we know especially for small organizations Five to seven years is that build up time for them to help get to self-sufficiency So I think council actually has to Say here is the window whether it's five years seven years whatever it is So that we can be very clear when we go out to community to let them know that this isn't a given because one of our biggest challenges, which a lot of us know is there's an expectation of certain funding. Well now as we're trying to streamline the process, when we're looking at budget shortfalls, we're looking at not doing a tax increase, we're having other challenges. We need to make sure that this is very clear for our partners, but they also need to know that there's an expectation because unfortunately we've had a number of organizations within the last six months that have had to close their doors because that additional funding didn't come in after our initial funding. So in a two year window, organizations that may have been doing really great work, I no longer around. So how do we ensure, so I think it is a conversation where unfortunately we're going to actually need to raise our hand one way or another and clearly identify what is this window so that we can make sure that our potential partners current and future understand. And I think this was in the budget committee meeting. It was to have this, the operation. I thought we had recommended it out, but. But I do believe that you did say yes to the five year window. However, you have an option to revisit. I think that's the way it came out of the committee. Yes. Yeah, I'm not offended at all. We have a good order. And I'm not saying it that way. Yeah, I am saying it that way. We have to say I am saying it that way. Because we're either going to be consistent or we not. Because every time we have the ability to arbitrarily say, yeah, that was a good idea, but last though this, only reason I, this recommendation that I'm presenting to all of you and asking for you to support has this additional 444 in there, is because we do have a little wiggle room in the 5.3 and that gives us a little buffer and it gives us the opportunity to support even more organizations. But the base criteria were those two main items. And from those two can we streamline this so that whatever council is around here, we've given them a strong foundation. And if I may, agreed. All I'm saying is let's think now about where we're going to be a year from now and make sure that the ongoing commitments that are implied or whatever can be satisfied from sources other than going back to one time money. All right, thank you guys. Break it up. Thank you very much. All right, so our next Mr. Mitchell, you're up. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, staff. So I guess if I keep this set of broad conversation, let me first start off by saying. City manager, thank you for the budget. So to me, this is not a budget conversation whatsoever. This is about $5.3 million we have available. how do we still look at some of our organization that really needs our help. I would tell you, in our committee meeting, we had great conversation, but one thing we did not have at that particular time was the federal impact on some of our nonprofits. And so now as we fast forward, here we are in May, we have noticed some of the federal governments. impact on some of our nonprofits. And so now as we fast forward, here we are in May, we have noticed some of the federal government has not either restricted some of the funding so actually deleted from some of our nonprofits. And so that's all I would like to kind of revisit some of our nonprofits and some of them have done tremendous work for our community. And they realized solely on federal funding was a local funding. So Mayor, I don't know if a motion is in place or you like to hear other comments first. So wish one is your pleasure. I think that we have some more hands in the hopper. I think that what we said is that every council member would have the opportunity to present what they want to and then we would go back around Okay, and then take the votes and then be able to do that so that you've heard Everything that the adjustments for every one. Okay, so before that so But that's a great point that we have about the change in the federal. They're pretty much just pulling the money out. Even if you had it, it's no longer there. So I understand. So I think that's what your comment would be, Miss Mayfield has submitted her opportunities for financial partners as well. So. It would be probably faster if we moved around in the queue. So for clarification, are we done with colleagues asking specific questions about this recommendation? No, we're not. We're just about the start, I think. So, I'm going to, if we're going to do this, we're going to do it just in a, around the bias and we'll start with Ms. Brown. Thank you Madam Mayor. Thank you so much Madam Mayor. I know I came in late part of my party but I did let staff know in advance that I would be late. It's a very important meeting. So I'm glad that I was able to wrap up another meeting and still Creek and get here for this meeting. We're just pulling in so many different directions. So I apologize for my tardy, so thank you. At this moment, I saw Council members may feel email. I wouldn't be able to support it because it doesn't support the organizations that I support through the people's budget. So with that being said, I need to know, first I started with any classes. Save our four-distribble ink. Save our children's movement ink. I see Roof Above is not being funded. And maybe some things were repeated before I came in, but I just need to say my stance. I'm fully committed 100% to supporting the people's budget. I understand that we have been given funding to organizations over and over and over and over again for me. And my commitment and my stance has always been and will always be with the people of the community. And when I say that, I mean, I meet people where they add. I like to support different issues and concerns and the scales are unbalanced right now. So I just have to go with my platform and when I support. If it's not coming through the people's budget, I won't be supporting it. They do the work as I stated, as a district rep, with almost over 200,000 people in my district now. With the fastest growing district, with the busiest district in the city of Charlotte and of Carolina District 3, I would have to lean on the experts of the people that rally together, that come and support. And so with that being said, I don't have time to go through everything. I'm not trying to be long-winded. My stance is with the people's budget. With what they submitted, I see some organizations on here that I support. ATV, I was just told that they're going to be getting some additional funding. Roof above, they do amazing work. For the struggle in, save our children movement. And any other organizations that's through the people budget that I haven't had the opportunity to look at because we're so busy and we're stretching so many different directions is what I'm supporting that's it and that's all I don't ask me anything else that's what I'm supporting the people's budget okay do you want to go to miss mayfield Do you want to buy my own voices? Yes. Okay. Do you want to add a card? No, there's a... So, Mayor? I'm sorry. Do you want to go to Miss Mayfield? Do you want to go to Miss Mayfield? Yes. Okay. Do you want to go to Miss Mayfield? Yes. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, Mayor? I'm sorry. I think what's happening is everybody's answering questions related to Councillor Mayfield, then you will start the... Yeah. Okay. All right. So we'll now go, Mr. Drogues, you have anything further to so Mayor, I'd provide. I'd provide. That the only questions came from Dr. Walenton and Councilmember Diggs on this Councilmember Graham. So for my part, as far as outlining the average score and the two criteria, then unless there's any questions, then I'm turning over. Mr. Diggs, anything else that you'd like to, you to make in your remarks? All right, Mr. Graham. So this is specifically to the council members may feel our general? Yes, that's what we were going specific to the proposal by Ms. Mayfield. Yes. Right. Okay, so you said specific. You didn't tell me what the question was, but to your point. Again, I'm not supporting it because it doesn't align with what I support. For my platform, for my foundation, when I first started, I haven't wavered from that. So I cannot support it even though they went over 30%. We're just going to just say they're not going to be funded or we're not going to allow or we're not going to allocate funds to them because they didn't follow process. Let's not do that. Let's not let's not set that example if that's what I heard. If that's what I heard because they went over the 30% because they didn't follow the processes and the application. I'm not willing to support that mayor and I see everybody's face getting disgruntled or whatever. It is what it is at the end of the day. I'm going to stand up for the people. If not me then who they gotta have somebody they gonna have a voice I'm that voice I don't want to be the voice of everybody day I'm going to stand up for the people if not me then who they got to have somebody they're going to have a voice I'm that voice I don't want to be the voice of everybody else I want to be the voice of reason I do but I also want to be the voice that stands out to support the people that need me the most and that's those folks sitting over there in front of me I'm not swaying from that if we can't come to some common ground then I'll just have to stick out stick out like a sore thumb Absolutely understand. All right. All right, and Mr. Graham, we're going to start with you on this item. Really don't have any unwriting as yet. However, there are a couple organizations that I would like to add to the list for consideration, rather the council consider it as a whole or as a part of some type of committee discussion. I'm not sure if it's too late for that, but the organizations in question would be for the struggle just to do it movement on block love, Charlotte, in addition to the organizations that Council Member Mayfield has outlined for additional consideration. So I'm also willing to Council Member Brown, there are others that you think we need to include. That's a part of the people's budget. I just pulled it up, so I'm looking at it yet again, that we need to include knowing that we got a limited number of dollars. And I think Councilmember Dre's is correct that we can't continue to borrow against the the dollars. Because it is one time funding and I'm just going to defer to the council chairman. I think that's council member Eschmer and Mitchell to kind of lead me to the promised line with this one. Thank you. All right. Are you ready? Yes, ma'am. I'm ready. Got it for sure. All right. I do, and thank you, Madam Mayor. I do also agree with the notion that we can't continue to borrow against the ARPA dollars. The ARPA dollars was effectively a one time opportunity that we can't establish a budget around. So I am in agreement that we don't want to establish a behavior of continued support, or even dip into the arpa dollars for continued support for either external agencies that do a fantastic job for the city or even internal departments within the city. So I think we need to be good stewards of those dollars. I also believe that this might be an opportunity to not spend all those ARPA dollars. We were in a position where, because we spent those dollars at a discretionary clip, we were able to garner additional introsphones that allowed us to invest in support of other things. I think we need to be prudent with the ARPA dollars on a go forward basis. So I certainly don't believe we need to go all the way down to zero for the ARPA dollars. Having said that, there are a few organizations that I'd like to shout out that at this point don't have proposed funding. And Roof above, of course, is one of them. They do phenomenal work for us and they undergirt that effort that we have for our unhoused residents. And they reside in their operations reside in District 1, although they're tentacles are wide throughout the Queen City. The hearts for the invisible is an organization that is really and truly doing the yeoman's work as it relates to street outreach and all of the efforts that we are trying to do and that the county is trying to do. Jessica does a phenomenal job. I can just speak first handedly from all the efforts of district one whenever I call her or reach out to her for meetings. She's right there, she is trying to bring the services, she's trying to bridge the gap. And she has a very small staff. And that is one area that I think we could with not a whole lot of money, with some investment can help her out significantly on the efforts for the unhoused within Charlotte, Macklenburg. So I just want to lift up whatever we can do for hearts for the invisible. For the Charlotte Museum of History as well, they've been in front of us time and time and time again. Of any museum entity within the city of Charlotte, we have some wonderful ones, but this one alone does so much outreach to the African-American Latino, Asian, multicultural community and supports their efforts in terms of events and things that they want to do to bring the community together. A really important gatherer for the city of Charlotte and specifically for the east side of Charlotte, they do a tremendous amount of work. I also really appreciate the work that the Carolina Metro's red does from a youth engagement perspective. We don't need less of youth engagement. We need more of it and the work that they do is critically important. I would say thank you for the support for trees Charlotte as we continue to talk about development and investment. Even in looking at our quarters of opportunity, we hear from the corridors that they are our heat islands, that they need support not only from an AC perspective, but from cover, from the heat that's only continuing, every summer is continuing to get hotter and hotter and hotter. So I underscore the support for Trees Charlotte. And I was able to attend the Crowns Award in Prospera is on here as a small business that we are supporting. They do wonderful work, they want an award and so I'm happy to see that we're supporting them. Of course, there's aspects of the people's budget that I agree to a certain extent with what Ms. Brown said, there's aspect of the people's budget that we could probably find ways throughout this over $3 billion budget to support. I think we need to be creative around how we do that. But in a sustainable manner, because again, from an ARPA perspective, I would hate to make promises on ARPA dollars this year with a go forward understanding that those ARPA dollars are no more. So I think we need to just uncover some rocks here and figure out where we can find some funding and support for those entities. Thank you Madam Mayor. All right, Ms. Edgemira. Thank you Madam Mayor. Some of the requests that I see here, I do support. I do support Council Member Brown's request for additional funding for the People's Budget. I know there has been an ask for air conditioning, especially we have learned through CAP how we have 300% increase in urban heat islands. So I know that's certainly something that's in our housing and safety committee that's being looked at. So I think we need to look at that and really adopt a policy that would apply citywide. So I look forward to continuing to work on that with Chairwoman Watlington and Vice Chair Mayfield. I agree with some of the organizations that Councilmember Anderson brought up, especially Carolina Metro Rads and Roof Above. Roof Above is our boots on the ground, providing critical services for our on-house community. Well, I do have additional request. Number one, I've heard from some of our city employees that our paid parental leave does not include coverage for miscarriages and stillbirth. I would like to add that. Hopefully we never have to use that, but unfortunately that's not the reality. So it will be rare, but we would like to, I do not have the number. We're trying to try to stick to the financial partners. And then we'll come back around for. Because I was going to go all of it all at once. Okay, thank you. Okay, but I'll come back to you. We want to resolve one thing and have a. Okay, so I'll stick to financial partners. If I can add, yeah, perfect. The roof above. Well, when it comes to Carolina metro rats, there is already an organization that was recommended as part of our manager's budget. That was actually not hall foundation. Isn't that? I'm not going to do it. Is it... Chip. Marie, I see. Shari. Not whole was, but what are you saying? I'm sorry. So... We were told it's a same organization. So if you can clarify, is the Mattrored and not hall foundation, is that same organization? Within their application, they were not the same organization. They were the collaboration of Carolina Mitchell Reds and another organization take it. Okay. Two different organizations. So well, okay, take out because I thought they were the same organizations. Second, I guess I need to learn what the differences between the two organizations, because we can save that for later. But let me come back to financial partners. I would like us to add... um financial partners. I would like us to add... Sorry. Okay. Okay. Yeah. I'll come back because I'm trying to. Yes. I understand. Mr. Mitchell. I'm sorry. On the financial partners. I'm going to follow some of my colleagues and please support the Carolina Mitchell res. They are two different organizations in District 3. I'm a joint colleague in District 2, I think for the struggle, it's a tremendous work in the corridor. And the male place in District 5, Reggie, need to continue to support Mrs. Singleton. So those will be my three mayor. All right, thank you. Ms. Malena. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So first off, I think it goes without saying that this is some tough work. I mean, you almost wish we had the funds to fund all of these amazing organizations throughout a community that are doing great work. We have some organizations that are mentioned already, that are already doing some. I'm sorry. Go ahead, Ms. Marina. We have some organizations that are doing some, you know, great work. And so not to add or subtract to anything that's there. I think we've all seen a lot of the emails that have come in. And I know that there's been some particular asks that are already on the board that I could not agree with more. I think, especially in E-Charlotte, I have to lift up the fact that those 28 precincts that I represent have been underserved. Many of them for a very, very long time. And so, I guess concur with my colleague is the male's place. They do great work in District 5. And without that particular organization, a lot of our community members wouldn't get served. Also, I have to mention Carolina Youth Coalition because last year was the first year that we partnered with that organization. And that is something that is absolutely amazing for our youth. I can't speak to enough about the need for resources for our teens and tweens. As we see an uptick in crime across our city, every resource that we can deploy for our young people that can get them interested in college and goals and opportunities is something that I know that we need to look at. So I absolutely ask that my colleagues join me in providing assistance to Caroline and Youth Coalition for another year because last year was the first year that we partnered with them. I think honorable mention is also Charlotte Museum of History. That's a substantial ask and I know that that's a big one, but finding a way to bring them on as a partner. I know last year we were able to provide some assistance and I got a call from Miss White about a partnership for an exhibit and et. So, I'd like to continue ongoing partnership and look for avenues to see how we can keep that each Charlotte staple intact. Honorable mention, I gotta say, I'm glad that we are partnering with Safe Alliance with what we have coming to the Alvamara Road corridor. I think that particular partnership is a particular mention to lift up and emphasize. Also, again, dream key partners, they do outstanding work throughout our community. Partnering with us to provide housing resources and other opportunities for our community. Crisis assistance ministry, I think that touches many humans in need across our community, no matter where they live. Just so many that we've been able to help. And like I said, I wish that there was significant funding, sufficient funding to lift up every last one of these, but those are the ones that I'll add for now. Thank you Madam Mayor. Ms. Johnson? Thank you Madam Mayor. I just have a couple of questions. Councilmember Mitchell, ask if we could send this back to the committee to revisit. Is that right? Is that we're going to be doing? if it's already in committee if my understanding is correct. Isn't that correct? Ms. Eshmira. So the policy. The policy is in the committee but what Mr. Mitchell requested was that the organizations, some of this request, could come back to the committee so that we can make records. what Mr. Mitchell requested was that the organizations, some of this requests could come back to the committee so that we can make recommendations. Okay, so then this is just kind of for cursory as discussing if it's going to be starting. I think it's trying to make sure that Miss Mayfield has presented a position for this and I think we're trying to figure out is that what the council would choose to do but then we're also picking up as we're going through that these are the financial partners that each council member wants to support. Okay. So I agree with council member Mitchell that the committee could take a look if there's a way that we could support some of these more of these organizations. I don't recall I was trying to get the 20-25 budget approvals printed but it seems like there are a lot of organizations that just aren't getting funded this year and I don't know what what happened or what's different but there just seems to be a deficit. I would ask if we could take a look at page 246 and 247. So I wanted to ask about the tourism, the hospitality and tourism dollars, and ask was there any of these doubt? If we could go over the balances, Mr. Manager, I want to make sure I understand them correctly. So the Convention Center Tax Fund is the balance, $93,521, $600. Councillor M. Johnson, could I have the CFO address your question to round? Yes. Okay. So yes, 93,521, 600 is the total revenue and then you'll see that balance with total expenditure of 93-521-600. So all of the funds are allotted for in this coming year. Yes there is a portion there at the bottom you see reserve for future years. This will go into fund balance to help with future projects, future debt service, future commitments that you've made. So $27 million, $29,000, $29,000, $985 is reserved for future years, right? Correct. Okay. And if that's the convention Convention Center fund so the Convention Center debt service fund There's what's the balance there? So for Convention Center debt service you have 15 510 425 as revenues and Then you have the same amount for expenditures and that is specifically for debt service interest and related bank charges. Okay and then the tourism fund. All right the tourism fund is 57 million 748 for both revenues and expenditures. And reserve for future years is 22,779,215, right? All right. So my concern is consistent with what it's been for, I guess the last five years, we have a pot of money that we're not using for, that we have the opportunity to use. And there was one expense in the budget that wasn't funded. And I think it was for Charlotte Boome, a Boome organization. It's $90,000. I think we could attribute that directly with hospitality and tourism. So those are the kind of consequences that we have when we have a fund that's excluded from our operating dollars. So I just want to bring that to your attention. There's $90,000 that Charlotte Boone was a great organization in District 4 and throughout the city. That's an opportunity for us to improve and for us to be more inclusive and equitable in our funding. I will say that I support the people's budget, which includes organizations like Ruffa Buff for the struggle, Heel Charlotte, Freedom Fighting Missionaries, or I hope I didn't get it wrong, Kenny, I'm sorry. But as a second chance city, we definitely should be funding the reentry organizations. I also want to lift up crisis ministries. I saw that they received significant funding. I think that's significant and we should definitely support that there on the front line. They're doing great work. Dream key, I also have a question about. So dream key, it looks like all of their, how much were they awarded from the city? So in the proposed budget, if you, it's on the page 17, I believe. So it would be 1.3. And then, but there isn't note that these services, now that there's several organizations that do this type of work, the plan for 2027 would be to put this out for RFP. But they're in a current proposed to get 1.3 million. So isn't all of that from a federal grant? The 1.3 million? So from the city, they requested 390, right? 390,000. And how much of that were they awarded from us? From financial partners? None for 26 for financial partners. So I think that we should know that as a council that's all federal funding, they weren't awarded as one of our financial partners. We know the status of the federal government, how volatile that is and vulnerable that is and I think we just need to keep that in mind. So that's the concern for me, Mr. Manager. Organizations that, and I know we want accountability and outcomes, but organization that our community depends on, such as DreamKey didn't receive it, it wasn't awarded, you know, financial partners. So I hope that we can send this back to the Budget Committee and take a look at that. I also support Carolina Red as a baseball mom and grandma. Grandmother, right? So definitely, no, I'm not Grandma, Nina. I just- So Carolina Red as well and I just look forward to going back to the committee and I'm taking a look at it. Thank you. I think our last speaker now is prepared Ms. Ashmara. Yes, thank you Madam Mayor for. So if you can go back to the line item for me, where you had roof about. So I also agree with Councilmember Mitchell about the mails place. They do great work, especially with our youth. Dream key partners, I agree with Councilmember Johnson. Also, I'd like to add, Carolina is Asian American. They are filling in the gap in terms of workforce development for immigrant and refugee community. They have a special program that supports vulnerable community, which is Montenegro community, that program has led to very successful pairing with the employment after the workforce development program has been completed. I know we have that in our application package. So I'd like to add them. And also the save our children moment. I know Rodney and his team does great work with engaging our youth and summer time is coming. We need that funding more than ever. So that's all I have. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Mr. Chair. Yes, Mr. Jones? Just for a little bit of clarification, if the council members want us to list all of the different organizations and the people's budget, we can do that. That's what you also would like us to do. The other thing, and I'll just pitch in for Sean right now, a little bit about dream keys. It's everybody's correct., would you clarify what you just said about the People's Budget, please, sir? Sure, like we could actually list if you want us to do sole nation, heal, surely, crisis assistance ministries. If we want to just do the list of all of the, what we call like financial partners in the People's Budget, or we can leave it just as supporting the people's budget. Yeah, supporting the people's budget is fine for me. I mean, we have that, so yeah. Okay, okay. Supporting the people's budget, I mean. And then with Dreamkey, just a little bit about the philosophy. So if you go over to page 17 of the budget book, even with the federal grants last year, there were a number of CDBG funds that we thought it would be better to put it through a competitive process, an RFP. And so instead of doing dream key this, that way this year, we want to do a-year lead main mainly to get this conversation with the council If this is something that should be more competitive process with an RFP or just goes directly to them And that's why we didn't pull all the money it was to test the temperature of milk to council So I'm sorry I miss Johnson what we talked about before we got before you had a chance to get into the space that we are going to go around twice so that everybody has the opportunity to and so we'll start with you. Thank you and go around the dius. Can you scroll down to see what was captured? For me. Okay, yeah, I didn't see that third line. Okay, freedom fighting minstinaries, Ruffa Bove. And some of those organizations are in the People's Budget, Dream Key Partners, Carolina Reds, Power Up, Charlotte. The males please. And save our children movement. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Just said. Okay. Okay, thank you. Is that Melina anything? Thank you Madam Mayor actually you know it's funny I don't have any history would save our children's movement but I want to say and I want to highlight again as we think through our budget and opportunities to be great partners across our community. Every opportunity where we can provide resources for our young people is something that would benefit us from a safety perspective, from a working parent perspective overall. It's one of the reasons why I lifted up some of the ones that I did. So I actually, I just want to put that out there. And the Save Our Children Movement incorporated, I would like to know, is that an existing partner? Is that something that we've done over time? Can somebody answer that? Ms. Mayfield is going to be able to give everybody on the council some idea of what's available under the plan that she worked on with Marie. So is that what this is? Yes. So we'll get her, she'll cap this off and then we'll know a little bit more about it. Okay. Thank you. All right. Mr. Mitchell? Thank you, Mayor. The only two I'd like to add is Save our church movement and Carolina Youth Coalition This day and time we got to make sure we can provide opportunities for you. So I like to add those two Okay, Mayor. Yes, can we go around and come back around this whatever you your order is, I will follow. Ms. Esmera. Just for financial partners? Mm-hmm. Right now. You put them on the list. So we can wrap that up. I'll admit you're okay. So we already added the financial partners. The only ones that I agree, there is a council member Molina talked about youth coalition that's actually on the east side. That's great work. I would also like to add that. Okay, that's all I have. Thank you. Madame Proton. Okay, thank you, Madame Mayor. I would also like to lift up the Save Our Children movement. And I also want to underscore the work that the Carolina Asian American Chamber of Commerce does in the community. I think it's really good work. The other comment that I would make about the Charlotte Museum of History, and I've already supported that earlier. I just want to make sure that I say, we can support these institutions without giving them their exact ask. Their ask is their ask. However, we can garner some support. So I do agree that the ask for the Charlotte Museum of History is a bit large relative to some of the other Ask however, you know if we're able to support them in some manner, I think that would be helpful. Thank you Madam Mayor. All right. Mr. Jones, do you have anything? Mr. Graham? I don't think all the organizations are most interested in seeing funded are, that's already been listed. I just point out the obvious is that there are a lot of great requests and limited funds, and that's going to be, that's going to be the devil's in the detail. And so I'm not sure who's going to scrub this and kind of make it realistic but right now I think we're we're way out of guidelines. We have to raise taxes. We can do it one of them both one of two ways. All right. Thank you for that observation, Mr. Graham. Mr. Drake said taxes. All right. Correct. There isn't. I don't have any nominations here. I think we're already kind of straining back to what this may feel let us away from. And the problem is when you have a large multiple of applications, we're going to get into this hopeless process of trying to trade off how important is this deserving organization versus that one. So I hopefully can still look upon this may feel the framework is a starting point bringing some objectivity into it. It's like that this is not a judgment about your organization. We're making tough decisions because our resources are limited. So I would just observe that. The other thing I would like to see is, in the handouts we got, we don't have the historical amounts. And I'd like to know what's past history was of grants to these organizations. And in particular, I want to see which organizations had a history of receiving grants or now being cut off because that's a different situation from new applicants and could be very harmful to them. So I think we can put an overlay of individual pluses and minuses on the starting point that Miss Mayfield is established. But please, let's not go back to looking at all 6 million. Thank you. All right. Miss Mayfield, I think several of us were probably not engaged in what you had suggested. But before you go into the in a deeper way, I was going to ask Miss Brown for her final comments. Yeah, I wasn't here when she engaged. When I read an email as I said it before mayor and not you know I just I need to support what I support so I look at it again I'm a fair person I think everybody can say that I'm a fair person on this council and I like to see Teamwork and move together, but I also stand for what I stand for and that's for the people's budget With that being said a lot of these organizations that we're supporting and we're talking about their taking hits because of the No one would say but I'll say it. They're already following short so now is a time for us as a a lot of these organizations that we're supporting, and we're talking about that taking hits because of DEI. No one would say, but I'll say it. They're already following short, so now is the time for us as a council to step up and support the people that we can support in our community. The people that show up for us every day, it's an election year when we go to the polls. I'm sure many of us wanna be re-elected, And they're going to be the ones that's going to rally around having us reelect it. At this point, I'm reasonable. Councilmember Mayfield has more knowledge. She's a senior tenure Rep she's been on the council longer than me that doesn't change my fight that doesn't change my desire to fight for the people Who I'm fighting for the people that I care for so whether you've been here 10 years, or you've been here 10 minutes, you fight for what you fight for, and that's who I am. When I'm talking about going down the budget, I know we don't have the money. Every nice if we had $100 million to give everybody exactly what they asked for. But for me, in my position with the people's budget and the people that we're fighting for, I love freedom fighting missionaries. Mr. Kenny Robinson does amazing work. he's proved who he is in the community. He didn't sign up for a finalist or partner. He's trying to come in through budget and do another way. When we get through that topic, I'll be more than happy to speak on that. Greg Jackson with heel Charlotte. He didn't sign up to be a financial partner. I think there's something going on right there. So while I love and support Mr. Jackson in his work, he's not on the table right now because he's not qualified for the funding right now. It doesn't disqualify his level of work, but what he's doing, but I'm not going to even entertain that because he's not a subject of matter at this moment and God knows I love Greg and fight for him to the end. We're fighting for organizations that are in existence, that are standing that come to these meetings that show up some of which we funded last year. So why I said I don't support, what council member may feel sad? I can also go back and retract that if we come to a reasonable common ground on supporting those that went outside the 30% because in your mind, if you're feeling out of application and you wanna be funded and as a desire to elevate your work and help the youth in the community and save our children's movement. I support councilmember Melina when she said in district five how she support her children's organization. I support her and that is well but save our children movement is in the heart of West Boulevard and Remout Road. If I don't fight for them, I'm gonna fight like I've never fought before. Because it's where I come from, it's my foundation. They are doing great. a West Boulevard and Remount Road. If I don't fight for them, I'm gonna fight like I've never fought before because it's where I come from. It's my foundation. They are doing great work that's not even recognized. The cameras don't go out there for the work that they're doing. The media don't go out there for that work, but if somebody gets shot, if there's gun shots and there's a lot of game balance and children laying out on the street, They're going out there for that, but they don't show up for the Apple School Care programs. They don't show up for save our children and movement, made transportation needs, and went from West Boulevard to Sugar Creek. in the street, they'll go out there for that, but they don't show up for the after school care programs. They don't show up for save our children and movement, made transportation needs, and went from West Boulevard to Sugar Creek every afternoon, partnering with Hill Charlotte over at the hotel before Hill Charlotte program terminated over there. So these organizations are doing great work. So save our children's movement. I just wanted to speak up for that organization because they've been around for a very, very long time. Because mainstream media, they might not be popular to them. They definitely should be popular to us. Thank you very much. All right, Ms. Mayfield help us wrap this up. Yeah, okay. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So for all my colleagues, if you look at the second sheet, where does started, of which some of the organizations that you mentioned are on the second sheet? So this sheet is from Marie and I sitting together for two and a half hours last week. If you look at the second sheet, you see that there is a column that says propose based on criteria. We had two basic criteria. We first had to come up with the scoring. Now the initial scoring next to the proposed funding by staff, that was a scoring of around out of 60, a scoring of over 60%, they identified 50. We went back in, me and Marie, and broke down each category in great neighborhoods. How many applications we received? Added up each one of their scores, divided by the total number. That is how we got the basic average. So if you look to the far right, the average score, just for great neighborhoods was 47.77. Everything that is in red that is highlighted was either they were out of the scoring or they were over 30% of the budget. Some of the items again that are mentioned are mentioned are already in here. Boom Charlotte initially did not make it. Once we rescored, they scored high and their budget was under 30%. Because we as a council, said to our partners that your budget should not be over 30%. Some of the items that I mentioned, I love the mills place. I am the one who initially put the initial one time funding in place for the mills place. The challenge is your scoring was low, even when we went in and re-read the numbers. numbers. So also some of the organizations we identified an additional partners. even when we went in and reread the numbers. So also, some of the organizations, we identified an additional partner's funding source, whether that funding source was through the budget of Housing and Neighborhood Services through the budget of workforce. So just looking at the two basic criteria, the recommendation that is in front of you all that I presented, reallocated. It also changed the total number. We also funded a lot more organizations than what was in the initial proposal from staff. By changing the scoring, by looking at who is a pool based on being under 30% as well as scoring well. Now, if we want to say as a council and we want to vote on the fact that we are not going to score applications, because it is no fair to have an organization that submitted all of their paperwork that reached out to get direction to get direction to help with their application and score a 47 or higher or Score a 58 and then you have a organization that scored a 34 or scored a 40 But we're saying because we like the organization We should put you back into the budget. That's a challenge So So if we're going to say as a council, that we're going to just remove scoring all together and come up with some other criteria, then that's a very different conversation. But for this conversation, when we said, we received 51 applications. So one, the initial agreement from a number of council, a number of council, we didn't vote on it to say 6 plus a number of council members agreed that one, we're only going to look at the applications we received. And we weren't going to add no one's in. Get you ready so you can apply in November. But if you didn't apply, that was the first piece. The second piece, how do we come up with a scoring? Because we had over $8 million, almost $9 million in requests. And we didn't have $9 million to allocate. Scoring and then the over 30%. Again, some that I put up on this board are actually in the proposed budget that I have in front of you just strictly based on the criteria. Taking out personal preference, taking out any other information except what you presented on your application. To hopefully get to the place that we're not at right now, which is we're just adding in organizations without there being criteria or overlooking the criteria. Some of the recommendations from the people's budget are in here. Some of them actually apply. For the ones who didn't apply, yes, the manager identified 5.3 million. The goal was not to spend the 5.3 million, I would hope, by just adding additional partners in. My biggest challenge that I am hearing around the table is that, although we had a scoring system, we are saying whether it was staff scoring initially at 50% or even rerunning the numbers where we actually brought the scores down. Some of these organizations did not score will. So we are going to say, even though you did not score will, we want to fund you and what is the message that that is sending to all of the partners that did apply and were able to prove not only the work that they are doing but the impact. We know the federal government has had an impact on all of these organizations but we also know that we are talking about not doing a tax increase even though the county is. We also don't look at our budget to say how much is the county funding some of these partners because a lot of these partners really fall under county services, but the city has stepped in for many years to help offset and to assist. So we're not going to have a real conversation around a budget increase, and we're not going, and if we're saying collectively that we don't want to utilize scoring. So we're going to have to come up with some other way to identify how your application and the work that you're doing. Because it's not about, as my colleague just said, trying to find winners and losers, we had a basic criteria. And from that basic criteria, this was the bare minimum that we needed. For us at least try to have a real conversation knowing that the ask this amount and we have this amount to work with. So I want us to keep that in mind and I also would like for staff as you've added additional items. Pull out the items that are already identified in here because my colleague, Carolina Youth Coalition is in here in my proposal. Unfortunately, it was not any other. Now, boom Charlotte is in here in my proposal because not only did they score well, they were under the 30% threshold and they did what they were supposed to do based on the criteria we had for this budget cycle now moving forward We have the whole arts and science and we have a whole committee and a board and we created that But that's not what this was when they applied so not only did they score well they also Met both for the criteria at the end of the day is six plus votes, but I cannot support the addition of anything outside of the 51, 50, 51 initial applications and anyone that did not score well between the two basic criteria. Because we gotta have consistency. Now, here's the great thing. It takes six votes. So if you all decide as a collector, I'm just asking them, we got to have an immediate conversation of how we move forward because to create a scoring and then say, well, we're going to set that scoring aside because this is what we are going to do. It creates a challenge moving forward. So we have to have a foundation of how we move forward in this process. Thank you Madam Mayor. I would like to ask the staff if they could compare the city and the county decisions on the financial partners. I think that might be another value add to the conversation before we make a final decision. Miss, yes, Miss Brown? Yes, Madam Mayor. So I just want to say this. I respect what my colleague just said. I disagree with it respectfully. No disrespect intended. I didn't vote for that criteria policy. I want that on the record. If for the record, I was one of the ones that did not vote for the criteria, because I thought it was unfair, it was by it. So I wanted for the record again. I didn't vote on the criteria. It won because we need six votes. just remember that one of those six votes was not mine. Okay, thank you so much. So. we need six votes. Just remember there weren't those six votes? Was not mine. Okay. Thank you so much. So, Mr. Jones, where do we wrap this one up? Well, Mayor, I think we've gone through financial partners a couple of times and I think you would go back to the beginning if there was anything in the budget that the council members So would like to add to the straw vote process. Okay. Can I? Can I say in your notebooks or the materials that you have, each council member should have a way to document and as we go around through this to develop the remaining changes that the council person would like to see happen. Yes. I just had a question for Councilmember Booth Mayfield. And thank you for your words. I appreciate it. When you said, I totally agree with the scoring criteria. I know the committee did a great job of trying to vet through that process. But when you said that there were entities that didn't score well, was there a threshold of, if you're above or below this number, if you're below this number, that's not well. If it's above this number, that constitutes okay, or scoring well. So if we go back when staff presented the initial budget to us, I had asked, hey, what are you going to, what staff, what are you going to look at to help us narrow this down? And have a conversation around 51, at that time I thought it was 51 applications, 51 applications in over 8 million. Are you gonna bring a recommendation back to us? Everda, the conversation went back to budget committee. Unfortunately, I was out sit, couldn't get online, so I missed that conversation. So then I followed up with Marie to ask, what is the criteria we're looking at? And staff advised that it was, what was identified was a 50% threshold. So to help narrow it down if the goal, what you were able to receive was up to 65. In the scoring, staff identified 50. I then sat with Marie and asked and said, how about we look at this? Let's look at each category. Total up the number of applications, those scores divided by the total number applications. Let's get the average. So if you notice in the application score, just looking at Alliance for Center for Education, They scored a 55 point 20 on their application. By just adding up the few applications we had in that category that gave us an average of 47.77. We had applications their score was 46.5. The only reason just do it movement, even though they scored well, did not move forward is because also their financial request was over the 30%. So those were the only two criteria. We changed the scoring and because we changed the scoring in the second column, which is the recommendation I have. We actually had, excuse me, more partners that qualify. But we had quite a few partners where their application was in the 30s, in the 20s. They were below even the 50% and we reduced the 50% 47, 47, 42, 45. So we reduced the scoring to try to be more accessible. Just during the average. So once we did that average, it brought it down. But unfortunately, you also had over 30% of your budget that you were requesting. And because we had so many requests, we had to figure out a way. And this again, this is just my proposal. We all have the ability to have met with budgets there. This was just the recommendation that I submitted for consideration for council, just saying, how do we create a process based off of what we said last year. So that we don't keep every year changing rules. We said last year we were going to do it a little differently. This was one of the recommendations that came out of it, the scoring as well as we let everyone know no more than 30. I'm with you and I completely understand your approach. And so if I can read it back to you really what you're saying is for each category and you use great neighborhoods as one example when you take that average score you're basically setting the middle of a Gaussian curve, right, of like right dead in the middle of performance, right? And so then if we were to do that, then I understand that that makes sense and then by default any entity that would score above that Gaussian curve is already above, they're already performing well. The question is though, especially for these larger categories like workforce and business development and safe communities, but there are quite a few entries in there as opposed to well managed government. For these large safe communities and workforce development, But we'd have to then see for workforce development is the average is 45.5.1. What we have to understand is what is the standard deviation below that that is sort of statistically significant? So if the average is 45.51 is 43.16. So it's a question. No, because the way we did it is we did each category individually in order for there to be parity in it. Because some categories we receive a lot more applications than others. but keep in mind, some categories, you have fewer applications because we identify additional better funding source for them. So that's why those applications were removed from financial partners because they actually landed in one of our departments. I get you, what I'm trying to say is it might be hard for someone who's sort of removed from that process to say, hey, this is a basis point or a couple basis points difference. How is that relevant or significant? And so I think we got to draw the line in the sand somehow, love your approach. I think that's a good approach, but just further explaining where that line in the sand is in particular below the average because if you're above the average, then your performing or over performing relative to our criteria. So I just think we probably need some more language around that. But thank you for that approach. And I appreciate that. At the end of the day, that's what this process is. We're adding deletes. We were I, I'm not even going to say we I was hoping that we wouldn't do what we've done today, which we have done every year for a decade, that we were actually one again, not as the one who didn't even apply. And two, have that base criteria. Because again, if council decides we don't want to have a scoring mechanism, that's a very different conversation that we must vote on. Because some of them did not score well. And if we're still going to say, well, we still want to fund you because we see or we think you do good work. Unfortunately, we also have some organizations out there that are not. We're not going to have going to that deep conversation right now, but we have some partner organizations where our other partners in the community cannot get them to answer the phone when people are calling? And these are major organizations that are reaching out. I have one particular organization where the executive director has sent a notification to all of their staff that you are not to send any of our people over to this particular facility. So there's a combination of conversations happening on the ground, but for what we were charged to do. This was just my recommendation and my suggestion on a way to move forward. At the end of the day, wherever we get sick, that's how we move. I'm just saying I cannot. Because I had already stated that I would not previously. I cannot support adding anyone new that did not apply. I did not apply. I did not apply. Because I had already stated that I would not previously. I cannot support adding anyone knew that did not apply. And if you did not meet the base criteria, I cannot in good conscience support it. I'm going to need us to do whatever we need to do to help you or to support you. But November, for you to write a stronger application. But if you didn't meet those two bare minimum requirements, I cannot support it. All right, thank you, Ms. Watlington. I think I just got two quick things. I thought that Anderson was going to different place in and maybe this question was already. I can't, I don't think we can hear you. You might just put a little closer. I said I thought that Mayor Pro Tem was going a little bit of a different place and it may be because the question was already asked but as we are looking at these, I just wanna make sure that I'm clear. As I understand it, each organization self-selected, which category they connected to. And so you end up with a lot more applicants in one category versus the other. In some cases, you may see that the score was higher for organization, but because they were in a different category, they fell below whatever that average is. Is there a, did we have a mechanism to ensure that we confirmed whatever category? I'm sorry, you guys. The Watt-Linton has the floor. She's asking a question. Did we? If I may, no ma'am. And that we didn't confirm any necessarily beyond if they had a current nonprofit or we're working towards their nonprofit certification. The other we took at face value. Okay. The reason I bring that up is just because as we think about this process going forward, if there is a set amount of funds or slots by category, then maybe people will be a little bit more, though maybe think twice about which category they end up in. Because if I'm looking at this and I scored higher than somebody else in another category, but I just happen to be in the wrong slot, I might fill away about that. But I definitely think that there's some work to be done on the process, but I think that the work that you all have already done has been an improvement to it. So thank you for that. And then my second question is a process check. Even where we are, is the idea that we're voting today on these particular items? No, that was not the plan for today. We have to have votes to move forward, but we were really trying to just get what do you want to see as being different in the manager's recommended budget. That's pretty much what this meeting was about. And that's what the next stage of what we'd like to do is to begin, I think we started over here first, but on the second round maybe came around. So everybody had an opportunity. I think to express. Miss Brown, yes. My mic wasn't on and closing very quick and I'm done. I won't say anything else. I think the people watching know my stance on what I want to do and how I support. There's no great area for me. But I would like to say that process is which I didn't support and scoring systems that bias and they can be subjective. It just depends on where they're coming from. We don't want to get into putting all those emphasis on and saying strong words like basic Qualifications to qualify for this because it depends on who you're asking if it's basic or not and that's a fair statement that I just made I want to also say that if we go into a scoring system and we talk about schools and children the kids at score low We would not give them an opportunity just because they score low. We gotta be careful about what we say when we talk about score and low. Again, it could be biased and look at as being subjective. So I don't want to be a part of that conversation either. Thank you Madam Mayor. Thank you very much. All right, Ms. Johnson. I know, I will. Thank you. I just want to clarify, Charlotte Boome for me. I wasn't necessarily advocating that they be included in the budget what I was saying is, I think there's a more appropriate funding for them. They ask for $90,000. I think they should be funded, but I think that should come from the arts and tourism fund. And then that for free up $90,000 for one of the other organizations that applied. So we would kind of get two for one. Also, if we're going by a scoring sheet, I wanted to know if the rubric for public. Is that published anywhere? Yes, ma'am. It's in the financial partners package. It's public. It's public. It's published online and we can send the link out. Okay. Yeah, I just want I want the public to be able to see how that was scored. So organizations that didn't score would know where they were able to improve. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Any other additional comments? Mayor Patten. No, I think we are done. Yeah, we are done on the financial bar. Well, hang on. I'm going to let the city manager comment. So Mayor Pro Tem, this is draw votes. So while it won't be final votes today, five votes move any of these items forward to the next time that there's a conversation. So the city manager just so. Yes. Yes. Adjustment. Adjustment, I'm sorry. Yes. To move forward yet. So city manager just a question for you, a point of point of clarification for the ones and I don't see my row up here. I think it's more than at the top here. Yeah, so for my row here, I lifted up Charlotte, Museum of History, and I think that entire ask of 400K was placed in there. Should I, City Manager, make some modification of that ask, or should we just go all or none? What's the approach here? sure so let me do two things one what I think I heard you say earlier they're actually Or should we just go, you know, all or none? What's the approach here? Sure. So let me do two things. One, what I think I heard you say earlier, there are actually two requests from the Charlotte of Museum of History. One came to financial partners. There's another one that's an exhibit that is a big time exhibit that's coming. So I think that should be a part of it. But Marie helped me out. I think what happened is in this process, if you move something forward, it just means there's more analysis that's done to it that comes back to you so that you can make a decision. I just wanted to make sure we're clear on that. So if we're somehow that moves forward for additional analysis, it doesn't mean that necessarily the entire amount will be approved. Thank you. And thank you for that. And what we did for the existing partners in the proposed budget was proposing the same a flat amount moving forward. So and if you're a new partner, you could get up to a hundred. Thank you for that clarification. Really quickly just to add to the mayor pro tim and to make sure that we're clear there are two particular asks from Charlotte Museum of History and one is here but there's one kind of outside and I we can talk offline there is an exhibit. So this would be the time to bring anything up? Yeah, so they're actually bringing an exhibit from the Smithsonian and from what I understand based on Miss White's explanation is that they've already partnered with the county for a portion of it. And there is federal funding as well. So I think there's two different lanes for asks. And I think one is more of a funding structure application, I guess for operational budget funding. And then there is this one. And I'd like to isolate because again, I don't know if that's what's reflected in the $400,000 ask is both reflected in the $400,000 ask or not. So that would be a separate one that y'all could vote on. Okay, so and again, I don't have, I recall the other ask being somewhere in the ballpark of about 300 K. I believe 350? 350, okay, yeah, I remember that. So that would actually total 750 K total for the total ask. So of course that wouldn't be something that we could do. But those are two different lanes and I did advise the person that I spoke to that there are two separate asks. But again, I agree with the mayor for a time. I think, you know, maybe it's not all. We could talk about what that means. I would like to see the Charlotte Museum and the East Side staple move forward as a partner. I guess the question is how and if, you know, they move forward as a partner with us. That's all I have. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you very much. I want to commend you just going to feel the importance of the talent that you put before us to determine how we can do things very well, but also do them in a way that we can allow us to be supported within the budget that we have. So what I want to do is just recap again that if there are five or four votes for any proposed change, that that change will move forward for the staff to do more analysis of the costs, the considerations and consequences of the proposed change. And the item will be included for consideration in the straw votes that will take place on Thursday, May 29th. I mean, sorry, we changed in the date. What is our new date, Ms. June 2nd? June 2nd, right? June 2nd, sorry. May 2nd, may that note? So what we, what I'd like to do now is that since you've had an opportunity to look what's in the budget and I hope had an opportunity to do this. So now we want to have your feedback. Are there any changes that you would like to see happen in this budget that we have not spoken about from outside of financial partners. We're going to move financial partners. We're finished with that discussion. But anything in the budget that you would like to see, I think there's a grid that I don't know if everyone else has this grid. The grid has allows each person to be able to vote. This just the grid is on the first part of the runoff show for me on two so after we get the list then we'll come back and be able to look and see how the votes go all right is everybody prepared for this all right so I think we started out over here the first time no no the last time here all right so let's go miss Brown. Yeah, my friends not ready, so I think we started out over here the first time. No, no, the last time. All right, so let's go. Ms. Brown, do you have any? Ms. Brown's not ready, but I do want some changes. I'm sorry, I'm emailing. I'm just talking about doing a million things over here. So I'll come back, please. Okay. I need to answer this email. All right, Ms. Watlington. No changes to the manager's recommendation other than the financial partners that we just done. Ms. Mayfield. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So the manager is, I believe, working to get some information back from HR. One, I wanted to get some information for full council on the grading of our staff. So when we look at specifically our staff liaisons and what they're grading and or pay as part of the recommendation from the people's budget was up to 26. I believe the manager had identified that we are not necessarily financial in a position to do 26 now, but we are currently at 2324. 24, so the proposal is to get to 24, so we're trying to move, but also one of, that's one piece. The second piece was I was checking with the manager. If, however, this move for, if there's anything out of the 5.3? Left, I was asking what would it look like if we were to allocate 1.5 million over a three year period to further the conversation that's happening in human resources since we just learned last Monday that we have city of Charlotte staff that have had to utilize the resources for various needs and to look at Those departments since we are we do have that information to see what those pay were because I was under the impression impression that when we getting to 23 minimum that was the base for all employees but evidently that might not be the case so we'll be helpful to know those departments where we are under. Minimum 23 if we're trying to get to 24 and then additionally we all received communication from Mike Finneas with the fire department questions regarding our proposed insurance. And the cost for the out of pocket cost, there was also a question that I asked the manager. I was looking at the 5..3 million completely different than trying to spend it outside of the $444,000 that I identified. I was trying to see if there was a way that we could potentially have a grant to offset those medical costs, those out of pocket costs because some of our first responders, whether they're police or fire, they they have children and or for their own health needs, those out of pocket costs can exceed over 4,000. So we know we make a choice. We either try to get a low monthly payment with a higher deductible or vice versa. Well, I was trying to find out, and I'm hoping to get information back in collaboration with HR to find out if there a way that we could have a grant that can help offset. We'll have criteria around it, but to offset those out of pocket costs because that is causing a financial burden. So those were, excuse me, in the primary budget, the main items where I would like additional information, the pay grade, because grades have make a difference for our staff to make sure that our employees are comparable for us being now the 14th, no longer the 15th, the 14th, the largest the 5th, fastest growing, we want our people to be able to afford to live in our city. So those are the main ones that I would like for us to get information back on. So thank you, Ms. Mayfield. That was exactly what we were trying to get at, and that was really done well. So thank you. So now we'll go to Mr. Driggs. Thank you, Mayor. So no tax and cre. Yes, vote me in, we're done. But still, there are a couple of things to think about here. A big picture. And I've mentioned a couple of times, I do have a concern, this budget is very lean. And that's a good thing, but if you look at things like FTEs and so on, we're stretching, we're stretching it and that's what we're having to do in order to avoid a tax increase. So I just have a concern about the future. I think we issued $400 million of a bond debt which was $200 million more, almost $180 million more than we had previously established as our capacity. So we're running up the balance on our credit card and all that has to come back from somewhere. Tomorrow will come and therefore I appreciate this budget because it is balanced. It keeps the city running and I'm confident in the integrity of the budget process. I just have a kind of a future structural concern about what we may have to do in the future in order to sustain everything we're doing. I wanted to mention in particular what caught my eye was on page 14. The municipal debt service fund is down by 27,830,000. Is that related to our dead issuance? Or why does that number down that much? All right. She's page 14. She's 14. She's so good. So let's see. You're looking at the change for fiscal year 24. Okay. Yeah, the change in fiscal year 2024 was minus 27 million. I'm just wondering what the statuses of our municipal set service fund. I mean, it is balanced for the model that we have been providing to you. There have been some upfront cash things like the purchase of the red line, which we knew we were doing with cash, and then we were going to be funding that back into fund balance, but it is structurally balanced. So we have, in effect, the receivable against the commitment to repay the red line money that would then part of which get the constructionally balanced. So we have in effect the receivable against the commitment to repay the red line money that would then part of which would go back to this. Yes, and that has actually happened during the fiscal year 25. Right. So you will see that impacted in the fiscal year 25. All right, again, I'm just concerned about our debt capacity. And I wanted to clarify And I wanted to clarify too, Ms. Johnson, you talked about an arts and tourism fund. We have an arts and culture line item in our budget, and we have a hospitality and tourism. And she's not here. OK. So I just want to clarify, we did in the budget, we've got $11 million for arts and culture, which is a general fund item. And then we have the hospitality and tourism accounts. And those should be looked upon as almost like an enterprise fund in themselves. Because the money that goes into those comes from specifically authorized sources from the general assembly. Taxes are levied. And the burden of those taxes falls on the people in the hospitality and tourism industry. So although we oversee that particular entity or that particular process and although it isn't an enterprise fund, we should look upon it kind of like the airport or something where if an internal economy, there are stakeholders, and certainly we should not discuss any change in how that works without a prior conversation with the stakeholders. And I think since they may be watching, I just wanted to be sure, and Mr. Graham, you may want to amplify on that. But so basically, I don't have changes as such proposed to the budget. I appreciate the construction. I will also note that if you go into the enterprise fund budgets, which we really don't have to study because they kind of pay for themselves. But there's a lot of good stuff in there. The capital planning in water obviously aviation is a huge deal for us. And it's a good opportunity to express our appreciation to American Airlines for our partnership with them in how the airport has managed. And that extends to negotiations with them on the lease and many aspects of the operation of the airport are actually a partnership with American. So worth pointing that out, we have great debt ratings, and I think one of our challenges will be to make sure that we continue to But I regard that as a reflection on the budget process as a whole and the integrity of our management So please do about that don't want to recommend any particular changes and Hope we can get this done. Okay, Mr. Graham Thank you, Madame Mayor. I have no changes to the budget at all. Other than to compliment the manager and his staff for really putting together what I think it's a really, really good operating budget. Obviously the values of community can be found in this budget. And certainly the conversation we had earlier in reference to our financial partners demonstrates that we value the nonprofit grassroots organizations that we do business with but more important that we also value the funding for aviation. I think that Ed just talked about that and Charlotte Doug is internationally here for the enterprise fund. What we're doing with public safety cats, the quarters of opportunity housing, a wide variety of things, the establishment of the Office of Youth Opportunities, I think it's a great opportunity to really engage our youth, the fact that repaying folks, they're kind of work for the city, 24 dollars an hour, which is about $50,000 a year a year I think is a really good point to take. And I just hope that, you know, I know we talked about the odds fund again. I just hope that as a council we practice financial discipline as we go through the next couple of years. It's really going to make sure that we really are laser focused, narrowly tailored and disciplined regarding how we utilize our funds. Thank you. All right. Mayor Protang. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And I really don't have any substantive suggestions for the change of the budget. I'd like to thank the city manager for presenting a balanced budget. It's an integral part of our position as a well-managed government. And I greatly appreciate that. And these conversations, like we had today are meaningful and we have to, the hard, but that's the benefit of sitting in the seats that we're in to have these conversations around trade-offs. I will say that my conversations with CMPD and Charlotte Fire have been very insightful. And if there are ways in which we can support Charlotte Fire, who's always number one, whenever there is a 9-1-1 call, they are first on the scene 24-7-365 within a four minute response time. They are having challenges, as Ms. Mayfield mentioned, with their health care. We're having challenges with the pay grades. I went out to visit the academy and spoke to them. And if there's a way in which we can support them as it relates to those immediate challenges in this budget, or in other ways in this budget, but then addressing it in turn as we move forward in the next budget, I think that would come with great appreciation from Charlotte Fire as well as CMPD, who do tremendous work in our city. The other piece I just want to mention is we have this benefit and we had a meeting, I had a meeting with some of our intergovernmental colleagues and we were talking about The challenges at a federal level and the trickle-down effect of those dollars and pass through dollars And I mentioned that we're fortunate enough for the city that you know We don't we don't largely depend on those trickle-down dollars from a federal level Of course in certain areas they help with matching funds and with some other initiatives. But the fact that we have a balance budget and a well managed government that is not necessarily dependent on one particular source. But through well managed enterprise funds as well as our municipal funds. I just want to lift that up because that's wonderful management. So thank you Madam Mayor for the time. All right, Ms. Esmerer. Thank you Madam Mayor. Mr. Manager, great job on the budget. Year after year, you continue to surface expectations. no property tax increase, but also recognizing the hard work of our employees, goes a long way. And I think you have done that budget after budget. And obviously, our bid is divided not recognized the budget staff, Marie and your entire team. Great job. I know you had some very difficult decisions to make, right? Because every department comes to you and asks you for additional resources and you make those tough decisions. I just want to thank you because I understand those are conversations that can be difficult to have. While we want to make sure that we do not pass additional tax burden to our residents. Thank you, Marie, for a great work. I think Councilmember Mayfield rates some very good points on the financial partners process. As the chair of the committee, let me tell you we we haven't perfected this policy, but I promise you we'll continue to work on it, and hopefully we'll get the majority behind the policy, because I can tell you, at least from the comments I've heard today in the room, not very many agree with the scoring system. So we will work on that. That's still on our committee. Well, I do have a couple of requests. I see Sheila here in the room as well as Christina, who have a very amazing job with all the benefits questions. Thank you. Well, number one item I have that I did talk about the paid parental leave. We want to make sure it covers miscarriages and stillbirth. I heard from various employees where they experienced a stillbirth and they were not able to use the paid parental leave. So I do not know what the number would be, but I'm sure it would be, hopefully it's rare. Second item I would like us to include is, I do not have numbers, I would like us to understand how much would it cost if you were to increase the minimum wage to $25 per hour. And I do agree with the request made by Councilwoman Mayfield about health care benefit cost. We did hear from a couple of public speakers, especially firefighters. So if we can review that benefit and see how we can optimize it. All right, Mr. Mitchell. No, I have one last item. Yes, I have. I thought you were done. No. So as you all know, trees are near and dear to my heart and so are the people. We have level two arboretum designation and I think that's something we should be very proud of because not a lot of other cities have that. And we have over 100 species of trees in the city of Charlotte. There is additional request for 37,500 that would provide us the necessary resources to continue this level to designation. And that was the number that I had requested that I received. And that's all I have. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Now, Mr. Mitchell. Thank you, Madam Mayor. By the time you get around to us, City Manager, all the accolades have been saved. So I'm going to be very brief and say, job, what I've done. You know, it was always a challenge for us, public servants, when there's no property tax increase, but there's still a lot of needs. And so I do think you was right to present a no tax budget, because now we're here in our county is presenting a tax budget. And I think we're always sensitive, not to have our citizens tax twice. So nothing but nothing on the budget, great job. I do have two things though. I would like maybe some more work to be brought back to us. And so first council, we approve by care of $650 million for renovation to our bank of America stated. Nobody will ever sit and I seek again and prove such a high giving to a very important entity in our community. We still have a commitment to our small business and we agreed part of our 650 million that we would adhere to 26% aspiration goal. City manager I would like for you if you can bring back some type of RFP that we need to put on the street and hire a firm to make sure this City Council over five years period of time can hit that 26%. We all know about the narratives going on nationally and statewide, but it's up to us who sit in this seat to sit a strong message until our small business. We're going to do our best to take care of you and Charlotte. And so I would like to, it's a five year commitment, so we got to understand that we're going to need an entity to help us do outreach and compliance. Make sure we can get those companies throughout the state to participate and compliance, make sure they can get paid while they're on the project. And so, sir, I have a ballpark figure what RFP goes in our days, but I would like to have Monica, you and Monica to engage in bringing us something back of having RFP out for the City of Charlotte 26 participation on the Bank of America State. Okay, thank you. Ms. Molina. Oh, you have one more? I have one more. Okay, sorry. Councillor Mellon. That was an excellent first start. I want you to know that. Thanks, Mayor. The second council may feel that Mayor Pro Tem and I attended a ribbon cutter for the institute who have moved their headquarters here to Charlotte. The institute is talking about providing capital startup businesses as well as provide space for some of our corridor opportunities. Sir, if we can find a way to support the initiative, I think it would be good once again to our small business community. But Councilman Mayfair may have pro-ten with us as well. So if you all want to add anything, when you go into the library, they already pay in respect to some of the pioneers, Carol Lilly, Ray Kennedy, Ron Leaper. And so they are doing the right right and I think we need to kind of embrace them somehow some way to support them. I shut up, Mayor. I think you're on a good track. Okay, but we do have Ms. Molina next. I'll be brief. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Again, like my colleague said, you know, once it's going around the table, you probably like, okay, I heard enough. No, but as always, Mr. Manager and your team, thank you all for what you do. This is a unique challenge because again, I know we got the presentation. You presented to us balanced and then we're offering these adjustments and saying go figure out if you can do it or not, right? And not to belittle any of the submissions that we've offered, but Councilwoman Mayfield has a good point about the process that we agreed on as well. So I think we do have to have some kind of pow out to say what we see as far as adherence is concerned. I mean, it's just a lot to balance. So I would like to bring up one particular thing. There was one email that we all received anonymously and I'd like to gain a little bit more understanding on our salary employees as opposed to our hourly employees. And the deviance in what they're actually receiving as a raise, as opposed to our hourly employees. The one thing that I enjoy aside from the service portion of this role is the partnership with the team Charlotte members that are really close to us. And a lot of those members are their salary, right? And, you know, irregardless of what their salary is, we have, you know, inflation, they have families, you know, they make plans in particular just like anyone else. And I think if we talk about fairness, especially what the one email that we received addressed as far as, you know, they're not being a particular raise for those members of our organization in the same percentages as we do for some of our hourly employees. I'd like to take a particular look at that and make sure we're being fair. I think it's important to keep great talent. And you know, I know that even in my own life, I definitely have a line in the sand where I live. Me and you have had this conversation. I maintain my life such that I can walk away from anything that don't serve me, right? And if you want to keep good talent, you have to make sure that that talent feels as though they appreciate it, as though they're being paid fairly, as though they're being treated fairly. And I think we have to, we've done a great job in many respects. We lead by example with our sea app goals, we lead by example with our pay for our hourly employees. I'm proud to say that our organization pays a decent wage, a minimum decent wage of 24. It can be better, it can always be better. But 24 is a great start for our hourly employees, but to make sure that we extend that across the board is something that I'd like to raise up. And that's all I have. Thank you Madam Mayor. Mr. Johnson. Thank you Madam Mayor. Great job, Mr. Jones. I just have a couple more questions for Teresa and Marie if that's possible. We talked about the hospitality and tourism funds. I wanted to clarify, if you could look at page 251 So I got the numbers for the Convention Center Tax Fund and also the Tourism Operating Fund. 251 is the Hall of Fame Tax Fund. Is that also included as one of the Tourism Fund? It is. So there are the three Convention Center, Tourism and the Hall of Fame. Okay, so for the Hall of Fame, the total is $24,608,700, right? So the spending or the amount for future years is what? 11,725,717. Okay. So if I added up those three future year totals, it's about $40 or $41 million. That's sound about right. Sounds about right. Okay. So I would just add, you know, it's great that there's not a tax increase, but rather than saying, you know, there could be a tax increase, I think we should take a look at all of our funding before we burden the residents of Charlotte with the anymore taxes. There's $41 million. That's a lot of for future dollars. The totals you all have heard, there should be no, in my opinion, there should be no fund that is excluded from operations and from the general operations. I know it's not something we've done before, but we are in a crisis. We're in a crisis with housing. We know the volatile federal situation. So I would just keep putting that before us that we should be able to consider at least a percentage 1% 0.5% to go towards operation. So I would just say that again I also would lift up Charlotte fire we have heard from Charlotte fire about their health care We've heard from Charlotte fire for the last few years and And also, CNPD, if we could do, I don't know what that would require that there's no weight when citizens call 911. We really have to do something about that. That's still a problem. We've talked about it, I think my first year, Mr. Jones. So we have to do something differently when it comes to 911. And that's all I have. Thank you. Okay. Yes, so just a clarification about the item that says reserve for future years. Okay. So as a reminder, again, each of these funds, we said there are the three hospitality funds. They are very specific revenue sources, guided by the statute that says how we can spin those. For each of these three we maintain separate models and those models include things like debt that you've already issued. So in one particular year we may see that we're putting some money into fund balance, so for the Convention Center, that's the $27 million number that is going into fund balance. But that fund balance is what's helping to support existing debt service, future debt service. And all of that ties back to your hospitality revenue, capital policy that you have, which says that you will maintain 100% of the next year's debt service along with some additional reserves. So things like something called a recession mitigation reserve and things like that. So even though this does show as money that is not committed in this particular year, it is committed through the modeling that we have for each of these three funds. And that modeling is required by the state or that's our policy. That is best practice to maintain those models. Right, so that's, it's best practice. However, when you're in a crisis, I just believe all hands on deck. And to have a fund that's exclusive to tourism, to $650 million to the Panther Stadium. To those kind of expenses when we have so many unhoused, we have individuals who can't afford to live in this city. So I just think we need to really take a look at our spending model. Thank you. I think that includes in the changes, the misjudgment of the staff. And Mary, I think it's just, yes. And then I was going to be here. Thank you so much. I was engaged in work, so thank you for going around the day. It's, I want to say to Mr. Jones, thank you for your hard work and your staff. You guys are amazing. I can't even imagine what it takes to put a $4.5 billion budget together and have it balanced. I also want to address, I know Mr. Kenny Robinson, free and fighting missionaries did not apply for a financial partner, but he was asking for funding and he has he understood that the process that he went through the first time he complied and did everything was supposed to do. His organization reached out to you, separate and asked you for an additional $1 million for housing. Did you hear that? Is this your first time me bringing it up? Is it the first time? I know that Mr. Robinson, I have a meeting scheduled. I'm not sure if anything made its way to Sean. But we do. Which made his way to me. Okay, so I just wanna bring it up and he's doing a proposal. And so I would like to support it. It's for support housing program for the McKinney-Vento students that are homeless and don't have anywhere to live and see a man. So it's an offset of having housing for children that are unsheltered and don't have anywhere to stay. So that's coming through. And that's the only thing I have. Besides what I stated earlier today. Thank you for all your hard work and the things that you do. I do echo Councilmember Melinas point when she said for the staff that is on salary. They work hard as well. And I would love to see them get an increase, but my first preference would be for the city employees to be increased to 25 per hour or 26 per hour to ask them for, do the people's budget. And I don't have anything else, Mr. Madagher. Thank you so much, Mayor Pro Tem. I yield back to you. Thank you so very much, Ms. Brown. Everybody has had a chance to offer any suggested changes or wanted to have anything researched. I think I'd really like to have a better understanding of our conclusion of the work that Miss Mayfield has done. Is that something that we will move forward on and continue to look at? Or is that something that the council would see differently? That would be helpful, I think. Miss Mayfield, yeah. So normally when we get to this point, we go through each item. Mine is up there to see whether or not we can get five. If we don't get five, then it gets removed, we keep it moving. So are you recommending that we do that now or once we get the responses back? I think that it would be helpful to have the responses back, but I wanted to make sure that we weren't leaving what you had done to a separate place on the books, I guess. And manager Jones, you can help me clarify. I feel like it goes in this category of add and delete since I did add items. And in my particular proposal, it did add an additional $444,430, even though it was split up between multiple, but I would take whatever directions you all recommend. I am fine with us doing our standard process of going through each line. Do we have five? If we think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think We had this large number, Miss Mayfield has proposed, I believe, constructively a different framework and that's where the 444,000 comes from. So are we voting, are we accepting that a reduction down to a million two when we vote on 444,000 or what exactly are we doing? I wanted to make sure that we had what Miss Mayfield and the council had the entire, she's up there. I mean, she's not up there. The statement is up there for funding the financial partners based upon the proposed criteria. Mr. Jones. That's all you might want. Yes. But it says additional funding, additional to what? To a million two, which is a number that's in her proposal, that's not a number that exists anywhere else. I understand that, but we still have to go through this. So, and there will be a question for the manager, but what I, the way I'm looking at it, if we just look at this as Add and Delete's time, then even though my proposal has multiple organizations, the proposal is an additional $444,000 from the staff proposal of $812, which gets us to a new total amount. So I think that's what needs to be put in there is that the new budget amount that I'm proposing is a million to 56 468 but it encompasses multiple groups. But I think it's also kind of a separate conversation of do we have five to support additional and to support this proposal? If we don't then we go we remove mine and just go each line item like we previously done. You've done a great job of explaining. That's what I was thinking. Is this one time to make this additional funding as Miss Mayfield just, is the product is the work that's being, what that was discussed, would that be appropriate to make it one check for five votes or what? Okay. Does everybody understand? I'm ready to go with. Okay. I have three people that want to take. So let's go with the manager first and then we'll come back. So thank you, Mayor Mrems, Council. Because many of these items are very similar, I don't think it's any additional work on the staff. If you sent all of these to the next step and it could help, but if there's something that's so egregious that you don't want to have examined, I'm just trying to be helpful. That's great. Okay, so I think that's a question of if there's anything. Okay, so I think that what Mr. Johnson said is there anything on this that you would like to have a conversation or a vote on today, but other than that, he would just have the staff to all of this. Five vote, five people. We have to move all of these four. Okay. So, Mayor Manning has been a clarifying question. So if we, if the manager is saying that five, we need five of us to say whether or not we want all of this to go forth. The question I have for our budget team is I mentioned earlier if you were going to remove some of the items from the ad and the lease, if they were already captured in the proposed based on criteria. Because I think it was only like two, maybe three that was in that twice so that we can get a total because that's the other thing that we need to know is what is this total ask? Because it feels like that 5.3 that we think we had is already gone. And there's a lot of duplication. Right, and so I was trying to clear the duplication if it's multiple people supporting just put all their names together so that we can get a better number. And if I'm hearing you correctly, manager responsible for the right to be responsible for the right to be responsible for the right to be responsible for the right to be responsible for the right to be responsible for the right to be responsible for the right miss? Yes. Just one other, one other addition and it's, so I think this would be a great opportunity because we endeavor to have a process to make sure we get that word out now. Right. So to say plainly that if this is something that we're going to maintain going forward, you know, for future councils because we're in an election year, we don't know what the future council will be or what they would decide. But right now at this moment, there is a process by which we make this decision through an application, right? And meeting that criteria and based on what the Mayor Pro Tem said, who obviously has some mathematical advanced understanding when she's talking standard deviation and things of that nature. But there really is a deviance in the percentages and who actually qualified based on the criterion. And so getting real clear about that, making sure that we have that information kind of standardized so that all of our community members who endeavor to partner with us have a clear understanding of what the expectations are. Because I think we lost some people too in the process, right? They didn't realize we had the application process. There may have been, you know, and we could assume a whole lot of different things, but just to make sure that we kind of are saying, that's something that we want to do, and when that deadline is, so that people know that there will be an opportunity to apply for, let's say, the next budget in November, right? I mean, right? I think that what we've been trying to do is get that kind of, I guess what you would call policy in place, that would go to the committee to do that because we don't have it, you know, we're working right now with what is our budget and if we can do all of these things then we would take that, how do we codify that into the committee? Okay. Okay. With that work. Yeah. I think, you know, just make it. We're preparing for the next time. Right. We're already, we're already in the process. That's what I'm saying basically, is to say, you know, now that we're here, we see that there is, you know, some community members and organizations that have been less touted a process for various different reasons. the reason. So what is the do it differently and to be consistent? Yeah. I think that's it. So right now I'm asking if it is appropriate to have a vote on these items as a whole and that we would come back and the staff would work through them and bring them back for the meeting that we will be having on the second. So move. Second. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion on it? Ms. Johnson? So I just want to go back to Council Member Mitchell's recommendation. Were you, weren't you asking, the send back to the agenda? I mean, the committee? Yeah. Okay. Yes. The financial part is with me. Right. miss understand. I think it's not all of the line. Right. Let me make sure I stay. Okay. That's the manager wants to miss Johnson. So ask the question again. The financial partners will not be voted on in this budget. So that was referred to the committee. So the financial partners discussion, I'm sorry. So the financial partners discussion will occur after June 9th? No, no. The changes to codify what we were doing would be, you know, we talked about where we would have applications and all of that and Ms. Melina was saying that. And so that's what we'll go into committee for discussion, but that would be after this has taken place. Is that correct? I think I'm so in June 2nd. Yeah, if I may zoom is the next BGR committee. And so my motion was to have this at the BGR committee at 1.30 meeting and then at the 6 o'clock meeting with our council, then it's a recommendation for the financial partners on the the- For the financial partners on- I think in the evening this would be in the afternoon. I thought that what Ms. Molina was saying is that there are some things up here that we've talked about that we wanted to make sure that that's in the process and I thought that's what the committee would do but the council would vote on these things that are on the screen. So. And I agree, Mayor. I think the only challenge, the original schedule, we will vote on the 29th. 39th. And I know there's three to four council members that would be absent. Right. So I was saying Les vote then on June 2nd at 6 o'clock. We should have the floor council in place. But I was I'm asking the question of whether or not the. So for example up here we have review a parent parental leave to cover it. Would that come through the be? No, just the financial partners, not the other line items. Because we are only working in the financial partners policy. Not the other line items. Right. I. Okay. I. I. Totally. Sorry. I believe this is consistent with what you all did last year. And it's just a recommendation so maybe we staff what we were typically get the council to consider that night we would preview with the B.E.I.R. Right. That's what they did last time. Yeah, okay. So we have a practice and so we'll go ahead with that. Is everybody understand this is going to go into the budget committee? Do we need a, do we need a, just the financial partners, just the financial partners? No, the other items. But we still need a vote to say that this is what you want the staff to review and bring back information and doing it. So we have a motion and a second to do that. A motion to the first committee. Committee. Second. All right. We have a motion and a second to do that. Committee. Second. All right we have a motion and a second. Are you prepared to vote? If you're prepared to vote please raise your hand. And those who are out of date forward, that's in front of us. Yes. All right. Is there anyone there anyone in opposition to that? Anyone against it? Any opposition? Councilmember Mato that motion was to refer to the committee per councilmember Mitchell recommendation. Emotion in second. Now that has passed. Just to find that action. On the remainder. That's right. Right. What date we supposed to have June 2nd. June 2nd. So we're going to talk about this again. But that's what we did last time. For to come back to full council. On the evening of the second. Right. So in committee, we're going to talk about all of this. Yes, ma'am. just to come make the poor council. Yes, ma'am. We are going to talk about all of this. Yes ma'am. Just about to come make the poor council. Yes ma'am. We have to make a recommendation to expedite things like we did last time during the last budget cycle. Okay. They're going to work with the staff and then the staff will have an opportunity to present and then that would hopefully help us make this process a little bit. Okay. All right. God bless you. I think that's the end of our meeting now. Do I need to close? I need to close that. I'm sorry. We have other items. We want to have a motion on the rest of the agenda items. Oh yes. Okay. Now we're at the place. Thank you. The other items that are there that have been requested by council members Are there is there anyone that would like to Make a motion for review of all of those or any one I'll make a motion to review all of it and Mr. Manager if you could provide your expert opinion and recommendations on June 2nd second So I can all right we have a motion and a second any discussion on this. Hearing none all I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. That don't give you enough time. Yes you get these answers right. Yes. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. All right. So with the understanding that he has enough time all in favor please raise your hands. Anyone opposed? Anyone opposed? Okay, so that carries off of those things that we've proved on our budget this time. So now Mr. Fox, let's see what's our next item up to the... Mayor Mary, and Mayor remembers the council. This was the budget meeting. It was a special note a special notice meeting. You're now getting ready to go into, you can adjourn this meeting. You're then going into a specially noticed zoning meeting. That's going to be in the council chambers starting at four o'clock. And then you'll open that in the proceed with your the action That is on the that is an item to be addressed at the four o'clock meeting Today I'm a full downstairs because I think there needs to be a motion to adjourn this meeting. Second. All in favor. All in favor. Yes. Yes. There. you you 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 going to have to go. I'm going to have to go. I'm going to have to go. I'm going to have to go. I'm going to have to go. I'm going to have to go. I'm going to have to go. I'm going to have to go. I'm going to have to go. I'm going to have to go. I'm going to have to go. I'm going to have to go. I'm going to get you a new one. Thank you.