 It is a 501 and I am calling the Board of Finance to order. Mayor Murrow Weinberger cannot be here today, so I am filling in for him. The first, oh by the way, I did your pollster chain, he is going to be a little bit late. Great. Thank you. We will go ahead and get started in the interest of time. The first item on the agenda is the agenda. Is there a motion on the agenda? Thank you. Any discussion? All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? And the motion carries unanimously. Is there anyone who would like to speak at public forum? Okay, so I am going to close the public forum and we will move on to the consent agenda. Is there a motion on the consent agenda? Any discussion? All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? And the motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. This is our first deliberative item, item 4.01, use of council and initiative funds for the voices of St. Joseph Orphanage Memorial and Healing Garden. I will let you start. I think there's a few, one or two participants online. I know that Molly Gray is online so maybe you could admit her. I don't know who else. Molly, I have allowed you to talk. I believe Kristie Swanson, I'm going to allow you to talk as well. Thank you. And if I may, Brenda Hannon, who's a former resident of the Orphanage, I've asked her to join the meeting today as well. We're raising funds on behalf of the former resident so I felt it appropriate to ensure that her voice and the voice of the former residents was also supported and available here today. Absolutely. Thank you. And I have enabled Brenda's microphone as well. Well, thank you. Councils have seen the request and we've also provided them with the case statements for your fundraising. In some fashion, while this is so perplexing and difficult and complicated, this particular request is pretty straightforward. I think I'll let the folks who have been involved speak more about the history. But this is part of an initiative that has been pulled together by former residents to help them reconcile the past and help us as city councillors and the city itself. Remember the past and remember our duty to continue to serve children. And so this is just one piece of it. So can we see Molly or Kristi or Brenda could lead off and give us a little bit of backstory. Sure, absolutely. Maybe I'll begin and then turn things over to Brenda. By way of background, as you may know, there was an orphanage on North ad the St. Joseph's orphanage that was in operation for over 125 years and housed more than 13,000 Vermont children in that timeframe. Closed around 1975 or 1976. It was a licensed Vermont facility DCF or formerly SRS place children there. And what we know from not only an investigation led by the Attorney General's office which I was previously part of and also part of the start of the restorative process is that there were allegations. Unfortunately allegations that could not be prosecuted of abuse in a number of forms, physical abuse, sexual abuse, mental abuse, there were allegations of homicide. And while the traditional criminal justice system, both because of the statute of limitations challenges and because of evidentiary challenges, couldn't provide the justice the traditional justice that the residents deserved. What did come out of the investigation and ran concurrently to it was an incredible restorative process. The process is called a restorative inquiry. It's a form of restorative justice that aims at bringing to light and really documenting what occurred for the public record for all time. But it is led has been led and continues to be led by a group of survivors and with that I do want to turn it over to Brenda to talk about what they've achieved which is just remarkable. In this memorial garden, which would be at the site of the former orphanage keys, keys like park keys litch park, think I have that right. It would really be an opportunity to not only honor and memorialize the experiences of the former residents but be a place for the community to come together and to heal and the design infrastructure and everything has been led by the former residents together with the former residents of Burlington parks, waterfront parks, recreation and waterfront. So we're really at the stage of it being shovel ready, and now it's the opportunity for the community to get involved in making it a reality. So, with that, I'll stop talking and hand things over to Brenda, who is here on behalf of the former residents. Brenda, are you are you with us. Yes, I am. Over to you. Thank you. I was just asked to attend this afternoon so I don't have very much prepared, but I just would like you to consider and be aware of how important this memorial garden healing space is to all of us survivors, but to also to all of the children that have gone before us to be remembered to be recognized to no longer be forgotten and to hopefully have a peaceful healing space so in the future we can remember the children of yesterday, but also concentrate on the children of today and tomorrow, so that what occurred could never or will never happen to our most precious resources, who are the children. And this is what the importance of this healing space means to all of us in the voices of St. Joseph's orphanage group, and we are certainly hoping that you get on board with us and make this become a reality. Thank you. Thank you. I don't think so. I mean, certainly Brenda spoke for everybody and put a few notes on my request. And I certainly think it's so appropriate. I know the group is asking everybody they can think of but I think we as counselors should give some of our funds directly. I'm sure that city back in the day. I'm really old enough to remember SRS and when we as a town were directly involved in welfare services. It's passed on all of us and I hope we have a better system now. I think we've learned. But as Brenda said, this is a memorial to both what went wrong and what should go right. Excellent. Thank you. Is someone ready to make a motion. We'll move to approve and recommend city council and authorize the designation expenditure of $10,000 in budgeted city council initiative funds to support the creation of the children of St. Joseph's orphanage memorial and healing guard. Thank you. Thank you. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. And the motion carries unanimously. And thank you to everyone who's on the line working so hard on this initiative and thank you Sarah for bringing it forward. Thank you. Thank you all. I'm going to speak about items number 4.02 and 4.03 are connected and I'm going to speak on that. And so it's okay with the board. I'm going to speak about both of them because I'm also realizing the reverse border would have perhaps been helpful. As you will recall, we had a monumentous vote in November when the voters approved up to $165 million worth of borrowing for our new high school. And these two motions before you are a piece of that. 4.03 is actually the first piece of borrowing. My office is in good contact with the school district and as a piece of that 165 million the first trunch we've decided on will be 40 million and that will be a bond anticipation note. We anticipate this money getting us through late summer or early fall when we go back out to the bond market. And so that is the purpose of doing this bond anticipation note as we've talked to both bond council and our financial advisors. It appears to make the most sense to do this bond anticipation note kind of a short term borrowing to be able to get us through to the fall and we'll do one big bond issuance then. And then 4.02 is kind of our standard authorization and you've seen this every time we go to do any kind of capital bonding, and that allows us to reimburse ourselves or in this case the school district to reimburse itself for capital improvements that it spends from its general fund in advance of getting this capital money. So I'm happy to answer any questions. But as far as I'm concerned, both of these are in the course of doing regular business. So I don't think there's that much to see here. But again, happy to open it up to questions and or motions. Yes. Sure. When the school district presented this bonding, they laid out the scenarios that they would spend the money. It's consistent with what they talked about. Yes, it is. And it is. Thank you. I meant to put that in the memo. It is consistent with what we looked at in terms of how it might affect our credit rating. And I'm happy to answer any other questions. Any other scenarios and this is right in my. Any other questions? Anyone that wants to just thinking. I am very amenable. Okay. With that I would recommend that the council approve both of the attached resolutions of your 4.02 and 4. Great. Right. Is there a second to that joint motion? Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed. And those both passed unanimously. And that brings us to item 5.01, which is our initial presentation on the police budget. We have two budget presentations. This being the first, we'll take some feedback. And then we'll come back. Probably first week of June. There are, I realize many areas of interest with police issues. As the chair of this meeting, I am going to keep us focused on issues related to the budget. And there may be some issues we need to kind of put into a parking lot for later. With that, I'm going to turn it over to the acting chief. And please fair enough. How can I forget that? I will share my screen and leave it just. Thank you. Thank you everyone for having me. And for giving us this opportunity to share the work that's in this. This was. Helped in measurably by CAO shot by. And was also reviewed by, of course, the mayor, et cetera. And his team, Jordan and Samantha both gave very important input to this. And, you know, we're working on that. And to be able to, to hold it even more between now and June. Thank you. You know, I know that it's, it's almost a broken record, but the fact is that the biggest thing that we face at this moment still is our headcount department. I think an interesting story that we're going to try to tell here is that the headcount isn't just about officers. Officers are the farthest down with regard to, you know, past historical norms and current, current authorized headcount. But there are other rules that we're building too. Right now we have 27 officers on patrol. We have 64 officers total as of May 1st. That hasn't changed with me. And I'm going to turn it over to the mayor. I'm going to turn it over to the mayor. I'm going to turn it over to the mayor. I'm going to turn it over to the mayor. I'm going to turn it over to the mayor. I'm going to turn it over to the mayor. I'm going to turn it over to the mayor. I'm going to turn it over to the mayor. That hasn't changed with me. May 1st and today, 15. There are 58 of those 64 who could be deployed. And 27 of those are on patrol. Next. This is a picture of the clip that we've had in the clip that we are seeking to climb again. Again, not back to those norms of 97, which was the average from 2015 to 2020. higher than where we are. That's good. But we're doing it not merely through the author, through sworn officers to get to that 87. We're also seeking to build other kinds of resources. And some of those are unique to this police department. They've had great success. They are the result of work that you, as the council authorized, the Public Safety Continuity Plan of December 2020. And we are working hard to fill those roles as well. We have six CSOs currently out of an allotted 11. We also have a CSM. So that position is hired. And we have a CSS or Community Support Supervisor. And five of our allotted six CSLs. So we're doing well with those roles. You'll see some of those folks here. You'll see our service dog. We have a dog who works with the CSLs and is a therapy dog, Rocky. And you'll see some of our staff there. Lacey Smith, our CSS, is seated in the upper right corner of picture. Yusuf Abdi is one of our CSOs. He's seated. And our new CSO is in the lower picture as well. Next, please. This is a picture that I was trying to work on to sort of give a picture of how the proportions have changed within the department. Please forgive me with regard to the two numbers that are in the right hand pie chart. Samantha corrected me on that. And I didn't make the correction in the document. The percentages are correct. 37 versus 63. The numbers of dots that you see, which are representative of individual employees, are correct. But the number that you see underscored, 51, is wrong. It's 87. Is they authorized for sworn? And the number that you see under professional for 37 is also incorrect. It's 51. So what we've seen is we've seen a shift in the proportions of the police department, one in which we are emphasizing sworn police officers less and other kinds of employees more. Next, please. This is just another way of looking at it, which is our actual counts. The actual count in May of 2019 versus the actual count right now. Next, please. Here's pictures of our hiring. We are the upper right hand corner is our officers. I regret that one of those officers has resigned during the police academy experience. We're looking to make sure that that doesn't continue. We always want to keep as many of our academy recruits as we can. The employees in the lower part are a range of non-sworn professional positions. And I like the rest of the profession and trying to move into the terminology of professional and not civilian. Don't care for the term civilian. I think it unnecessarily dichotomizes the workforce into what is not civilian. We're not a military unit. We certainly do have sworn officers, and that's a distinction. Those officers take an oath under pains and penalties of perjury, and it allows them to do certain kinds of things, including swearing to documents that everything they produce is ultimately under pains and penalties of perjury, that our other employees don't. All of us take oaths to the city, including all of you. But the oath that is taken under pains and penalties of perjury is unique to the police officer role. However, that doesn't mean that the others are civilian employees. They're not, they're professional employees. And they include a number of folks down there, including dispatchers on the far left, including the CSLs, two CSL that are in that group, a redaction specialist that we hired, and then CSOs in the photograph, my left, but on the right-hand side of that photograph. Next, please. Thank you. Recruit and retain and patterns. We've looked at this before. I've updated it through this year. I think that the bottom paragraph, which was suggested to me by CAO Shad, is very important. It talks about the degree to which other agencies are experiencing this around the country. It's a survey that's not necessarily entirely representative. It's not sort of a mathematical survey or something done by a zombie that has a statistical significance. It's a self-reporting of 182 agencies, all of which are members of the police executive research forum. But their spawnstaffing decrease has been real, and yet not anywhere near what we've experienced here. Similarly, their resignations are up, but also not where we are. And that puts us in a position of recognizing that we do have to work hard to rebuild these gaps that are larger than other agencies, despite the fact that the profession as a whole is in fact experiencing some of this. Next, please. And that's this goal. We've articulated it before. We're still working on it. This budget is important to continue to make those moves. Our efforts after this budget was approved by you last year have been honest and we are pursuing them with full energy. We brought aboard three lateral officers in calendar year 2022. I had not anticipated that, so that was a good thing. We had four police officers in the, excuse me, three police officers in the class that graduated in calendar year 2022. And they are now full-fledged officers. They've all completed their field training. They didn't lose any of them, and we're very happy about that. Carol and Erwin Morris, our recruiting officer, as you saw in the previous slide, brought in six police officers in January for the February 2023 Academy in this calendar year. As I said, we've lost one, but the other five are anticipated, excuse me, four of them are anticipated to graduate in the very beginning of June. One of them injured himself and is still an employee. We hope to cycle him into another police academy class, but he's not going to be a graduate of this current class. And he's not going to be an effective officer by the end of September slash October, which is when we hope those other four will be available to us. And that's great to have those four officers out and in field training during the summer helps, but they don't count as effective officers yet. But we're making good progress. What we have now in front of us is the opportunity to bring aboard another five to six for the August 2023 class, and we have some laterals in line. We need to have at least three, right? This is our ambitious but achievable goal. 6.3 recruits per class, and we're on track for that. We've achieved it so far, and we're on track to continue it, and 3.4 laterals per year. I hadn't anticipated any in 2022. So the fact that we got three in 2022 was good. We have not yet had any lateral fires this year, but we do have laterals in our hiring process. I'm hopeful that they will be able to come aboard. Will we have all 3.4 for calendar year 2023? I hope so. As I said, we're looking at two right now with another who I believe is showing interest. So this is the strategy, and this is a little bit changed from last year. The retention, keeping the personnel. The competitive contract is something that you as a council delivered, and we are grateful for it. Recruiting, attracting new recruits, lateral officers, strong hiring incentives. We are working on that still, and we're seeing good progress on it. And then strengthening CAPE, because the three-part strategy has evolved now to talk about what else are we doing? CAPE is, of course, the system that we have for alternative, excuse me, apologies, not alternative resources, for other resources that allow us to address social service needs, crisis advocacy and intervention programs. They are, we're seeing strong social service public safety gains from them. We want to solidify those. And a component of that is Burlington Cares, which we've talked about so much under other names, including the crisis team, including the CAHOOTS-esque team. Next, please. Thank you. The retention first and foremost via this contract. We're grateful for it. We're going to need to do more, I think. We are still seeing more departures than we'd like. That includes people who hit the 20-year mark, and we want to be able to retain those. There are other officers who are, we anticipate losing to other agencies. I'd love to be able to try to figure out how not to lose those officers. Some of that is making certain we can maintain internal momentum, which includes promotions, includes the opportunity for people to have different career paths. Next, please. Recruiting via marketing. And we do have ideas for this. It includes a lot of ideas around digital content. We have an RFP out. We've got responses for that RFP. We are still getting those responses. The RFP is publicly available, was publicly available. It's probably not on the website any longer, but can easily provide that to any of you who are interested. And the responses we got are all good responses. We're lucky to have three very strong responses. Right now, a sticking point, frankly, is as always is the case when bringing the ward team is the pricing. Next, please. And part three, the new services. So that's the door sign above the cake door. And cake, although it is in the Burlington Police Department, is a separate part of the police department. There's a great deal of autonomy. There's a great deal of independence. And going into that part of the building can often feel a little different. I was glad to have the opportunity to share a little tour of that with Council McGee. I'm happy to give such a tour to anyone who wants to come and visit. And more importantly, I would encourage you not to come with me, not even to come with Lacey Smith, but to go and speak to the people who are in Cape and get their take on why I do believe they want to be integrated into the largest public safety component we have in our city and in most cities, just the police department. There are a number of different parts here, all of which I think function best when they are integrated as much as possible and where their collaboration can be as seamless as possible. Next, please. And this is the meat. So I moved through this as quickly as I could, I think you all know, I'm happy to go on about any of those slides if you ask. But we wanted to get to this picture here, which is where the rubber hits the road as it were. If we need potatoes, it's your, take your pick of metaphors and expressions and similes. This is the place where the dollars and the donuts are. I guess that was a cop joke and any burden one. It wasn't perfect. But anyway. How do you do that anyway? I think it was perfect. So. And then, you know, I'm hopeful that you've reviewed it and it somewhat speaks for itself. We do have a budget that we are working that is level set in all ways aside from our need to continue to grow. So we do have obviously built into this budget, the anticipation of growing towards that 87 with regard to the sworn of growing towards the 11 with regard to the CSOs, that one CSL that still eludes us. And it may be more than one. I believe that one of our current CSLs is interesting transitioning into police programs. And that's great, but it means that we'll have one spot in the CSO role. And again, as we experiment with these other pieces and as we begin to develop into other pieces, including cares, there is growth there as well. And so as a result, you know, we do, we worked as hard as possible to make sure that it is a budget that is level funded with the exception of the person. And I think that's about it. I'd love to take questions and hear what everyone else. Yes, Councilor Farada. I just had a question about a big growth plan. Does it take into account a retirement or you know, normal nutrition? It does. So I don't want to have to make it or switch back to that one chart, but one of the things that we included as an ambitious but achievable goal was a 50% improvement in retention rates. The retention rates that we've experienced over the past several years is about, excuse me, the overall retention is around 40%. That's the aggregate retention. That's a number of the cascades. In other words, that includes people who've had plenty of time to leave and probably are not going to leave now until they retire. They've hit 18 or 15 years. The likelihood of departure is small, but it also includes classes that were just hired and it includes the recruits that we currently had in the academy. So the aggregate of all of those groups is 40% retention right now. And so the object is to increase that by 50%. What that would do is it would narrow us to a world where we still lose, I still anticipate losing the tirees, but I hope to lose a little bit of somewhat fewer recruits and somewhat fewer current officers. But the projections I have do, in fact, account for departures more than nearly retirees. Anything else would not be realistic. So I have projections that basically sort of keep up with this statistical goal and say, in April of 2024, I anticipate losing an unknown person, one unknown out. In May of 2024, I anticipate losing a named person who is hitting his or her 20-year mark. And I account for all those as I project forward in order to establish that goal that we established last year, we're trying to stay on track for of getting into the 80s and close to that actual allotted hit count by FY20, in some time or two. Yes, President Bell. I think so actually the best person to answer this. So looking at the last slide, the last slide you go to this slide is under airport services. It says that the state-of-the-art budget, 613, you know that actually that's in FY26. So FY24, initial budget is 578. I see that number. Yes, yes. So then when I go on to the actual budget that is the spread down, sort of looks like an Excel spreadsheet. Now that one is attached. Probably would have a good level of cost by line. Okay, so on that one, that one has revenues. So on the revenue, I think it'll work. So the revenue on that one, revenue, which is right here, is $1 million. It's $1.1. So I guess the question is, if it's $5 million, it's $78,000 expenses. There is something else that's not counted. So what is not counted? Everything besides salaries is not. So where is it? It's in both level. It's still in the form. All right, on the PowerPoint, the one right there in front of you, where is this other number? Oh, so the operating budgets per se are not in this chart. This chart was this current business salary portions. Okay, so if you go to the other one, then it's gotta be somewhere. Where is it also? It is not. So in this one here, which has been found. Yeah. In here, on the line item, let's see, O5-1 airport. It does not have line item operating expenses. We haven't gone back to trying to figure out and do that, which is still only has salaries in the O5-1 budget. Everything else is still in O5-1. So there was supposed to be a, what was called, and it is O5-1 airport division. There should be an O5-1, should be an O5-1. So we're only matching to see who it is. I realize that it's not any exact science. Right. We've got different, there are different ones, and depending on who's there, is how much it is. But it should be a little bit closer to all part of the 502-1.1 budget. Yeah. So the theory is all these officers that are assigned to the airport, salaries are in O5-1. How they get there, which is training, uniforms, gear, vests, all of that is in O5-0 because it's part of that whole recruitment. It's not tracked by body. Once the body exists and it's assigned, we don't sit there and tell them how much stuff are you wearing on your gear? What do we need to do? But don't they all wear a balance sheet? No, right. So what we do when we work in the airport for the contribution is we go, there's six people at the airport. It's six, well, when it was a hundred people for officers, it was 6%. We just did the percentage based on the count. So if you wanted to do that, by the day it was 12, it was 10, whatever it was. But I mean, well, I mean- So it's not in a expense, line nine of expense. It's not tracked as a line nine of expense, but there is an associated percentage, which is six people on the operating budget of O5-0. So if you wanted to just take the O5-0 budget, the uniform budget, and you wanted to divide that by 87, by 87, and times it by 87. Right, and times it by six, five by 87 and by six, that's your value. And so the bottom line here is that we have not yet, the only thing that is in O5-1, which for people following along at home who may not know all our codes, is our airport line. Right now that just has salaries. We could then add the benefits and other costs and disaggregate that from uniform services. Sorry, but I mean, let's see what that, Councilor Powell is saying is, why isn't the whole budget, operating budget, and trying to explain why it's- We'll leave it on there a little bit closer. Totally, but we would never get any expenses hit it. I guess what I'm getting at is, you could budget the allocation there, but there would never be any expenses because each person in the department doesn't have an expense. Yeah, it depends on who they are and how long they've been there. So if you want to do the math for yourself though, maybe next year we get some improvements to this chart. I think that's a good- Yeah, that is helpful. And I think between these and my office, we can figure out how we can make that. I present it. So yes, let's get using, okay. Thank you for that. No, I always do to the states. We know what it is, can you tell that? Yeah, I mean, it's a 10 page budget and it's, is he built on thing for someone who doesn't live free at this all your time? You know, as to where are you listening for certainly from. And even for people who have been there as well, because I go, you know, I have to think about what is a, so, yeah, well, I've got that in average. But yeah, anyway. And it was the council that had asked, it's only been two years since the airport an hour by the request. We're still improving. Yes, exactly. No worries. Councillor Chen, go ahead. Thank you, CFO Chad. Thank you, Chief and the co-presenter. Along the same lines as Councillor Paul's question in terms of the airport, I wanted to understand the distinction between airport services and uniform airport services. And also to clarify whether or not those services are contracted and how much of it is a contract itself. So the airport, there's an agreement between the airport and the police department for airport security services, right? And the current agreement is that there's six police officers assigned, that's a key word, assigned to the airport, which means that where they report, right? So if they're outside their own vacation, the obligation is to fill that slot. And when we fill that slot, we fill it from what we call uniform services, which is the downtown reporting staff, police officers. So the agreement is for six police officers at the airport, so that's the agreement. I'm sorry, what was the second part of your question? Yeah, yeah. Yes, I understand the contract between the police and the airport, I completely understand it. And I believe that also the city council is definitely looking into a resolution to look into that type of contract, I think a long time ago. But what I just don't understand is as part of the budget, you have a line where it's just airport services and another line, uniform airport services. I just did not understand what's the difference between those two. I'm not sure that I understand the two mixed together, other than you can't have an airport services, police officer assigned, unless they're coming from the uniform pool of officers. Is there a line on the spreadsheet in the PowerPoint that totals uniform services in the airport? Yeah, maybe they did some total there. So I think maybe what might help Councillor Zheng and let me know if this gets at your question is it's really the same pool, they're all uniform services officers. But two years ago, this board asked for it to be separated because as Lisa mentioned, the officers at the airport are a commitment that we're making to the airport. And those six officers then become unavailable for our general pool of uniform officers. And I think we wanted to be able to understand both what we're paying for those officers and the revenue we're getting from the airport. So we're just tracking those six separately, although technically they're all part of the same pool of where we're trying to get their part of that 87. And in the chart on the last slide of the PowerPoint, it's a little bit further confusing and I'm just gonna pull it up so everyone can look at it while we're talking. Because, since you're 20, you did not have an airport too. And because looking here, FY 2021 and 22, we actually had uniform and airport combined. They were all in this uniform line. It wasn't actually until last year that we separated them. And so that's why I made this combined line down here so that you could have an apples to apples comparison because I realized if you tried to compare FY 20, this number up here to this, it wasn't apples to apples because you'd have to go look at airport and add them up. So if you want that apples to apples, it's more like actually what we spent in FY 20 on uniform and airport is actually remarkably similar to what we're asking for in FY 24 for uniform and airport. Does that help? Yeah, yeah, this is actually very, very helpful. Thank you. That's all I needed to understand and thank you for clarifying. Yes, and the other question that I have is Catherine for a cheerful chat for you and it is specific to the percentage of the police budget compared to the general fund, right? And also wanting to understand within that, within the police officers fund, how much is of it is going to non-sworn, non-uniform staff and how much is it is going to uniform police officers? Right, so the admin budget is actually separated. We did separate admin as well. We separated airport and we also separated admin which also was the way it was done many, many years ago but it is now a separate line item. So you can see that now for the... Yeah. Okay, so it is separate. So an admin is only professional staff and not police officers, not sworn personnel in the admin side. The chief of police, for example, is in the uniform budget, the 050 budget. He is a sworn person therefore he is in the 050 budget even though he is technically an administrative functioning police officer. So the 050 is, Councillor Chang, the 050 is in the long 10-page spreadsheet, the multiple-page sheet. On this sheet here, the one that we're looking at on the screen or the one that is very similar that's the last page of PowerPoint presentation, basically uniform services and airport services are all of our sworn police officers. That includes myself and it includes everyone down to the level of recruit in the police academy. And so the aggregate total of that uniform and airport services, that is the salary line for every sworn employee of the police department. The administration is the professional employees who are not in dispatch. And then we have dispatch and communications and then we have community support which currently includes the CSOs and the CSLs. And we're actually, I think that it's probably best to break the CSOs out of that and make that a CAPE category. That's for another budget, one that really talks about only the functions that are part of CAPE. Answering your question, Councillor Chang, it would not be difficult. I don't have it right now but it's a quick math exercise that I could get you after this meeting to just go through the budget. And I think you're asking for personnel costs of how much is going to uniform services and then I would actually then give that to you for administration, then dispatch and community support. And how much each of those is a percent of the BPD budget. And then someone else had asked for this at a previous meeting and I haven't but I left it in my office, the percentage of all of the departments as a percentage of the general fund budget. So I could get that to all the councillors after this meeting. Wonderful, thank you. And that person was me to just understand how much he's talking about. I'm sorry, I forgot to send it along and you will get it this time. No problem. And lastly, this presentation is calling it as an initial presentation and are we expecting another one or this is the police presentation. Yes, you just missed the beginning of the meeting. We did something similar last year and I think it depends a little bit on the amount of feedback we receive at this meeting. We're calling this an initial presentation in case we received enough feedback that we would need to circle back. So I guess I'm gonna just leave that open for now. As you can see, this is the full presentation you've got from every other department. So if we don't need to meet again, I'm sure you would all love to have an evening of your lives back. But if we need to, I think we're signaling what the word initial that we as the administration are more than happy to meet again as needed. So I think in the next half hour or so, we'll probably come to some consensus on that. Thank you. Great. Thank you. There are questions. Yes, I'm sorry to be. Thank you. Thank you both. My questions are, I guess I'm just looking at the shift in public safety resources and trying to go out and say, one, but he or she and there wasn't a collective worksheet. But she's a little bit different. Numbers, I'm curious why in calculating the totals are using community support as an example. And not using the full personal service totals. On this chart here? Correct, yeah. That was just a simplification of presentation style. And salaries obviously is the biggest part. And then benefits are usually in with 43 and 57%, just because there's city centralized benefits. It's not if you use the police department as any control over. So we just didn't confuse it with benefit costs, but it could be another addition if you wanted to. And the number would be bigger simply because of benefits. But it's not in my night of budget that the police department can't do anything about. Sure. Yeah, I think it was really for simplification purposes. And this is a chart that we have been tweaking since FY 21 to make sure that it has the most useful information for people and that it's a helpful addition with the detailed budget and not too confusing. And we were trying to have everyone focus on the major mine items, but if it's distracting to not have it mine up with fringe benefits, you can certainly add those. It's just the main, as Lise mentioned, the main items that we can control are salary, overtime and attrition, and then benefits flow from that. But it was not, it's really just that, just ease. Okay. I think it is helpful to know the total support. What you have in this state, right? Did you see that? Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's so great. And there in the zero, and I think that's where my confusion comes from, it's clicking benefits. Yes, correct. You just got to balance out, it's a cross check, right? Which is always good. But behind the scenes, the cross check with the salary is just into all the benefits and all the other, you know. A few semesters of accounting in college, how's the part of it? Yeah, yeah, forward. Yeah. So the benefits are there. It's like a great CAO's chart was saying, it's just a matter of how much, how much more do you want in this already kind of tiny chart? You know, if it's really lying, so just decide what is really important to put in the thing. But the operating budget, it's not in there either. I mean, there's a lot of things, everything is here. I didn't add it to the list. Yes, I put it online too. Other questions? Yes, it sounds so perfect. I think it will be hard. I'm looking at the 10 page document because that is the budget document. So I think it would be really helpful to have, in addition to the actual amounts, the budgeted amounts, and if there is, and obviously, if there are greater expenditures, we would have had people have done budget amendments. So I think, right, you know, but if we have not spent the monies, and I know that, you know, sort of the narrative theme consists of sort of like historical, and I think it is really important to put these numbers that we're gonna have them, and it really is needed there. There's context that's needed in relation to the budget. So the actuals, they're too budgeted and that they were aimed or aimed at sort of a narrative description of what would be helpful. Otherwise, I don't know that this information is as useful as it should be. And then I hate to say it, but I mean, there are a couple of line items where there are significant decreases I saw in expenditures. And that's, you know, could be great, could not be great, but there are also some significant changes, increases in the requests from the 23 budget. And I think it would be very helpful, not just to me, but to the public, to get an explanation of what that, why, you know, and so, and I don't think that there's anything nefarious or anything, it just would be okay, like we are going to be, and you sort of said it, I'm looking at a police uniform service, and this board example, 500, 5,000-100, the full-time we're gonna be going up $600,000. And I think that just sort of matching what the increase is anticipated to get would be just helpful, very straightforward and simple. We're looking with this $600,000 to get this many officers, you know, maybe, I didn't find that to be particularly helpful, but just something, some narrative that matches up the alliance with what we're gonna be getting. And I saw something, here's an example where we have other personnel services, special duty, where we're anticipating $50,000 less, $6,000 less, that would be, you know, if that's a positive thing. So the line is 5,200-105 on page four of 10, 105. So that's the outside duty stops, right? I'm reading what you have here, do you tell me? Yes, yes. I don't know that that's part of the deal. But that's why I think you're asking and it's a narrative, because we know what that means, even when numbers do not. Yes, and I can muddle through, you could convince me, I really want my constituents to understand so that they can see, you know, are we spending what we need to be spending or what we can be spending and what are we spending it on, what are we saving? And it's just real clear, it's not smoking mirrors and I'm not accusing anybody of that. I'm just saying, let's put it out there and I don't need, we're the team. No, I don't. No, I don't. Because I don't think it should be done, you know, any systematically where things are even. I don't think that that needs to be explained unless you want to save, you know, good things for that. But otherwise, you know, so, you know, there's not all that many, but there are enough of them that, and I'll sort of leave it to your discretion in terms of the one is significant, one is not often, no, capital and equipment, we're saving $28,000, that's pretty good, right? People should know that I think Councillor Barlow was saying this exactly last week or the week before saying, when we can save, we should be telling people about saving. So, here's an opportunity to do that as well. So that would be, I think. Excellent. I'll work with Lisa and the acting chief and I think we should be able to produce that. Just one note on your request on which columns appear in the budget. This is something we came up against last year and it is one of the limitations of new worlds. And it's the number of columns you can have. So that may be something you and I can talk about behind the scenes because I think it's a max of eight, which means, you know, I prioritize actuals and I think that was helpful for the other departments. Here we'll just make a different kind of calculation and we don't have to get into all that now. I just want people to know, I can't just add all of the budgets here with all of the years we have because we'll just run out of space. Appreciate them. Other questions or comments? And I was noting we have about 15 minutes left. Maybe the worst we ended early if there were no other questions or comments. Anyone online going once, going twice? Twice? Anyone else in the room? Any further comments? I would take a motion to adjourn or I would adjourn us without any problems. Any objection. That's the worst part. I'm gonna do that. Thank you to everyone. I am adjourning us at 5.59 without objection and we'll see everyone upstairs in about half an hour.