Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-05-20 Finance Committee Summary MinutesFINANCE COMMITTEE SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 11 Special Meeting May 20, 2025 The Finance Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Community Meeting Room and by virtual teleconference at 1:00 PM Present In-Person: Reckdahl, Lythcott-Haims, Burt (Chair) Absent: Call to Order Chair Burt called the meeting to order and roll was called. Public Comment None Agenda Items 1. FY2026 Budget Wrap-up and recommended FY 2026 Budget including FY 2026 Municipal Fee Schedule Lauren Lai, Administrative Services Director, provided a slide presentation about the FY 2026 proposed operating and capital budgets and municipal fee schedule wrap-up including budget conversations and calendar, updates since May 7 budget hearing, Parking Lot categories, revised Parking Lot – expenses (table 1), revised Parking Lot – revenue (table 2), general fund budget balancing projected multi-year financial forecast (table 3), Nonprofit Partnership Workplan phase 1 and recommended adjustments, categories – items not on tables 1 or 2, mental health direct funding – highlights, debt ratio and financing best practices, other funds, updates on citywide fees Cost of Service study, technical adjustments and oversight Committee reviews, Committee recommendations – move items from “yellow” to “green” and recommended action. Chair Burt had questions about cost of issuance. Director Lai explained there is a fixed cost in the issuance cost. That is about $300,000 in today’s market. There is another portion, underwriting and otherwise, that is a ratio of the principal borrowed that grows. If debt is issued, financing long-term assets should be ensured but also looking at the cost of issuance making sure there is bang for the bucks. Issuing new debt to finance long-term asset is important. Typically, it is not to finance pay-go things or something that may have a very short useful life. The asset should be ensured to pair with the debt service period. There is SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 11 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/20/25 opportunity around refinancing existing debt. The City has a debt policy as required by state law that governs when new debt is issued, what kind of debt is issued and when debt is refinanced. The policy sets that at least a 3% net present value savings is needed. The water bond is complicated because there are state credits. If the state credit goes away, there could be substantial net present value savings. If the state credits stay in place, the net present value is on the margin of the 3% so does not indicate debt refinancing. Quarterly meetings are being instituted with the FA to ensure opportunities are seized and brought back to Finance Committee. Councilmember Reckdahl asked about refinancing. Paul Harper, Office of Management of Budget, recalled a parking garage loan from early 2000s was refinanced. Tarun Narayan, Manager Treasury, Debt & Investments, indicated the most recent refinance was the General Obligation Fund in the 2022 timeframe. There are no savings at the current interest rates. Ed Shikada, City Manager, remarked Staff noted that instituting a quarterly look at this would set more routine to that on an ongoing basis. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims inquired which one was the biggest. Mr. Narayan replied the biggest one was the Public Safety Building at around $100 million at 2.13% interest. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims asked where the money for the debt service comes from. City Manager Shikada answered it was a parcel tax or other form of revenue. Chair Burt stated the Public Safety Building and Cal Ave Garage are out of general fund. Mr. Narayan added if a Certificate of Participation is issued, existing money has to be found. A General Obligation Bond is usually a parcel tax. A Utility Revenue Bond comes from the utility rate payers on an ongoing basis. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims asked about other reserves. Director Lai replied that speaks to the budget cash flow component. Any time debt is reviewed requires looking at the debt service annually over 30 years and identifying the source. Mr. Harper clarified the debt service for the Public Safety Building and the Cal Ave was built into the TOT funds transferred from the general fund. That is a portion that covers the debt service. City Manager Shikada pointed out that ultimately the general fund is the backstop. Chair Burt asked about the gas 5% for 2026. Director Lai answered there was one in the proposed budget and it evolved from there because there was a prior proposal to the climate credit. It went from 13% and dropped down to 5%. Kiely Nose, Assistant City Manager, remarked the drop was due to other changes. This is specifically the residential utility bill and reflects the switch from using the 2025 Cost of Service Analysis with the climate credit and switching it to using the current rates growing for the additional cost to do business while the 2025 Cost of Service Analysis is finalized. It is based on continuing the use of the prior Cost of Service model for the time being. Councilmember Reckdahl had questions about updating the fee. Director Lai explained the fee updates are done on a granular basis based on the level of cost recovery. Not everything is at 100%. There is a policy directed by the Committee that says 100%. That policy can come back to the Committee any time in the near future. The Committee can update that policy and it will go to Council for full adoption. The fees the Committee has been deliberating on will be effective SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 11 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/20/25 July 1 for those that are non-property related. The ones that are property related take about 60 days. It is important for this to be done in a timely manner in conjunction with budget development. These will all come to Council on June 16. Most will be effective July 1. This is generally done on an annual basis in order to consolidate all the user fees and the members of the public understand where the fees stand. Another deep dive needs to be done into the fees to see which categories might be set at 100%. It was suggested when Staff brings back the fee policy, it can be discerned from Finance Committee which categories they want to put into the 100% category, look at that in comparison to the user fee schedule and discern if there is going to be a material impact on that new classification. If it will be material, a mid-year adjustment can be made. If it is not material, the recommendation will be to bring it back at the next budget cycle. Chair Burt did not want to wait to establish the 100% category at the policy level. Director Lai stated it was understood clearly there will be a 100% category. There is a need to understand from a policy perspective which fee categories fall into the new category. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims indicated guidance and recommendations as to what would fit in that category and an estimate of how revenue will increase if that is done. Director Lai indicated the referral is more than just updating the policy but also a workplan looking at existing categories, cost recovery and maybe a recommendation of some movements based on either participation demand and/or what the market would bear. Chair Burt had questions about the historic filled and vacancies. City Manager Shikada agreed to obtain that information from HR. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims asked about stormwater. Mr. Harper replied the stormwater projects are funded specifically by the stormwater fee dollars. That is a separate fund. Public Comments 1. Hamiliton H. urged the Committee not to include the $2.2 million in cap and trade funds for rebate to small and medium-sized businesses. 2. Adam S. stated buildings in the United States need to be built stronger and more secure. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims had questions about the single-role ambulance. City Manager Shikada explained the expense was related to the hiring of the administrative staff earlier. Mr. Harper added there will be administrative personnel hired early on to help set that up and onboard those personnel and then the actual personnel that will staff the ambulance. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims was not comfortable with the vagueness of the placeholder of unknown general fund expense savings and fiscal 25 ending balance carryovers. Chair Burt had concern about the ending fund balance being implied to be part of the $6 million. Director Lai explained part of it is become the numbers look the same. It is indicated anticipated fiscal 25 fund balance will carry over that is not represented above. This is the only notation of the fund balance. It is not included in any of the reduced appropriations above and not included to offset any of the shortfalls above. It is just a footnote. Slide 5 fiscal 26 column SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 11 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/20/25 represents the additional cost for services related to fire and nonprofit allocations, some of which were originally omitted. The line items are related to retaining $6 million dollars of Uncertainty Reserve. In order to retain $6 million expenses must be reduced. That is what the three line items are. None of that assumes any of the fiscal 25 carryover will be taken. The memo indicates that is only to the extent contracts can be identified that are closed project that could relieve some of those expenses. Contracts are being identified that will be let go to relieve and unencumber funds that can put into that number. No fund balance from fiscal 25 will be swept into the $2.7 million as an easy exercise. A small portion of the surplus from fiscal 25 could be used for the $6 million. Chair Burt would be more comfortable identifying the FY26 general fund expense savings that are yet to be determined and having another line which is FY25 end-of-year fund balance TBD. Director Lai heard the wishes of the Committee. Before August 19, there will be an exercise to develop a recommendation that supports the $2.7 million. It was acknowledged that the desire was to find all that in 26 and not dip into 25. If that is an option, it will be brought back separately for consideration. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims had questions about the new first responder earnings and harming support for Bike/Ped Safety Action Plan implementation by taking a million dollars from Measure B. Director Lai explained 25% was assumed for the first year to give a certain level of conservatism in the assumptions. Amber Cameron, Management Analyst added it is believed the fee will be able to be collected as it will be an add on to the bills that are currently sent to the insurance of the ambulance transport patients. The thinking behind starting off with a smaller amount is to see how the other increases are tracking. The base fee is being increased and the intent is to make sure that what is anticipated will be collected. It was discussed internally to come back in mid-year and adjust based on six months of actuals coming in from the fee increases. Director Lai stated part of Staff’s analysis in looking at alternatives to funding capital came from the discussions had to identify other sources of revenue. Measure B Local Streets funding has flexibility and can be used toward street maintenance. Street pavement and improvement has been funded as part of the general funds base transfer. The proposal is to take $1 million for the next 3 years which is where the cash flow is stressed. That will relieve the general fund. That leaves $7 million remaining for bike/ped and is not an ongoing reduction of that resource. It will be transferred the next 3 years and then resume 100% in Measure B for Council’s future distribution. City Manager Shikada added the Measure B guidelines refer to the allowable uses. Prior approval is required by VTA before a city can use it for other types of projects. Councilmember Reckdahl asked about the rental and reservation fee revenue and if work had been done to see what it would take to allow businesses to do video conferencing. Director Lai replied Staff analyzed the revenue relative to the GRA increase on May 7. The GRA increase was 6.8%. Based on that, the proposed budget has more capacity. Kristen O’ Kane, Community Services Director, agreed to look into rental facilities bringing in more revenue on weekdays. That time is used to program some adult classes and programs which brings in programming revenue. In order to allow businesses to do video conferencing, work would have to be done on the AV equipment and it had not been looked into. Councilmember Reckdahl suggested outreach to the startup community might be worthwhile to try to do weekday rentals. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 11 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/20/25 Councilmember Reckdahl had questions about the BSR balance. Chair Burt remarked that budgeting principle of whether the interest would be a way to the BSR more stable as a percentage of the GF that would subtract those dollars from expenditures for the GFs. Chair Burt advised folding the budget stabilization reserve and the Uncertainty Reserve together and look at what should be the budget stabilization reserve. Chair Burt suggested setting out an early goal to reduce $4 million and cut the projected FY27 deficit in half. Director Lai asked Mr. Harper how combining the $2 million into the $54 million would change the 17% ratio who replied that would put it up to about 18.2. To get the BSR to get to 18.5 would require $2.8 million. Chair Burt asked about when the decision had to be made on doing a debt service on Fire Station 4. City Manager Shikada replied Staff would have to look into that. Councilmember Reckdahl wanted to know how much paperwork delay there would be to finance it. Mr. Narayan stated to do the bond issuance would take about three to four months. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims preferred keeping the two reserves separate for catastrophic support. Chair Burt explained the Uncertainty Reserve had outlived its purpose. Councilmember Reckdahl opined appropriate reserves is a necessity. Chair Burt replied that goes to looking at the reducing the capital improvement expenses in a given year. There is a need to go back and make sure Staff has those reductions align with the understood direction and think about contingency planning. That is giving early direction to reduce structural costs for FY27 by half of the projected deficit and keep as a possibility some additional debt financing for major capital projects. Councilmember Reckdahl inquired how liquid the market is in bad times. Chair Burt commented during COVID the federal government allowed borrowing whatever was needed. This administration could not be counted on to be similar. City Manager Shikada remarked during COVID certificates of participation were issued. Chair Burt stated in general, bad economies mean interest rates go down unless you have a stagflation bad economy. Since the early 1980s, there has been a correlation between a down economy and downward interest rates. There are federal government fiscal policies and fed policies. The fed policies have been the driver of reducing interest rates when economies are down. Mr. Narayan added the City of Palo Alto is highly rated and a low debt issuer. The bonds are highly desirable. There is not an issue that the bond could not be issued at any given time. The only issue is what the interest rate will be. If a lot of debt is issued, it could potentially impact the rating and tie into the rate of the bond. Chair Burt did not anticipate doing the additional debt for Fire Station 4 would materially impact the bond rating. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims asked about exposure with regard to federal dollars. City Manager Shikada noted that grants are expended over a period of time. That would not be a way to look at the risk. Director Lai concurred that while there are impacts because the federal government has an impact at the local level, the budget operationally does not rely on federal SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 11 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/20/25 funding. Most of it relates to grants for specific projects. Staff is working closely to making sure those go through and monies that won't be reimbursed down the road are not committed. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims wondered about the trickle down of funds from the county. City Manager Shikada replied the county is heavily dependent on Medicaid, as an example, in order to run the hospital system which is a integral share of county expenses. The City is not dependent on county revenues other than as a pass through on things like property tax. Transitional housing has grant funds for construction. County funds are anticipated to a certain extent for operations. These are decisions that can be made on a fiscal year basis should there be interruption on cash flow. Director Lai summarized the Committee wanted to go back to the concept of moving parts to continue to focus on, maintaining a reserve level to enable responsiveness. The Uncertainty Reserve may be phased out at some point because of discussion about when the amount may not be as influential in the two buckets. Combining then will change the 17%. Coming back with the offer for fiscal 25 and how the year will be exited might put context into the UR and BSR and possibly combining the two. The other aspect is debt financing and the concerns about what would happen in a downward market. Reserves on hand would be looked at and the high credit rating continue to be maintained. The high credit rating provides the ability to exercise debt financing swiftly and with low cost. The discussions around fiscal diligence supports the ability to pool financing when it is needed and have a market that is receptive to lending to the City. Staff continues to monitor and would come to the Committee more quickly should the situation evaporate and get worse. On June 3, the Q3 report will be received for the current year that will show what was received in revenue and expenses and some of the projections. Nothing that has been received to date changed what Staff supports the direction of the Council which is to retain half of Uncertainty Reserve and come back with a plan to manifest those savings in capital and expenditures. Councilmember Reckdahl wanted to see the total reserves total 58. That would have to be found at the end of 2027 and mean there would be time to figure out how to cut costs further. Doing the 642 and maintaining the BSR percentages would be another $2 million. Chair Burt had concern that if there is an $8 million deficit projected for 2027 and there were deficits for FY28 and FY29 and they were declining to 2030 going into the black modestly. That is the reason to try to address those structural deficits on a gradual basis. Director Lai commented a multi-year budgeting process of the annual budget is done. Hearing the Committee wishes to make the reserve more robust is good feedback. A portion of any type of savings should go toward shoring up the BSR to get that percentage ratio higher and anything left might go toward shortfalls, CIP or otherwise. Councilmember Reckdahl thought it was important to cut ongoing expenses. In fiscal year 26, non-essential positions should be eliminated. Chair Burt added looking at certain consulting contracts and any other knobs that can be turned. It had already been identified that the Committee did not want Measure B fund balance transferred to street paving. The Committee wanted to make sure any anticipated FY25 surplus was not included in the $6 million in reductions being sought for FY26. Director Lai confirmed the $6 million needs to come from FY25 onward and leave the fund balance carryover to be utilized and appropriated otherwise. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 11 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/20/25 Director Lai asked if the Finance Committee would be receptive to moving the $1 million down to deferred CIP as a placeholder and make the 2.2, 3.2. Staff has an exercise to come up with all the projects. Given that Measure B will be struck, the $1 million would be put in CIP. Chair Burt recalled that at the last meeting, $4 million in one-time reductions and $2 million in ongoing was being reviewed and did not know how that fit into the formula. Director Lai replied both of those would still have to be adhered to. The two standards to be met are a minimum of $6 million and a combination of $4 million one-time and $2 million that is ongoing. Those are placeholders. The Parking Lot will be revised so it is $3.2 million of placeholder for deferred CIP with $2.7 million for general fund expense savings. Staff will come back with the detail on August 19. It may be a different combination to meet those expectations. Chair Burt had questions about nonprofits. City Manager Shikada stated there is a proposal from YCS for what is now called Youth Connect in the group of proposals that the Policy and Services Committee will be reviewing. Chair Burt described about the confusing process for nonprofits applying for funding. Council gave direction that Policy and Services will recommend to the Council how those dollars get allocated. The nonprofits will have line item allocations in the budget and the $100,000 will go to P&S to decide among the others how to allocate it. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims recalled what prompted this was that AbilityPath had come forward with a large request and it was unknown how to process it. Councilmember Lythcott- Haims felt like it was the Finance Committee’s job to allocate the dollar and P&S’s job to sort out the complex nature of the City’s support for nonprofits. Chair Burt pointed out the difference between the audit recommendations and the structure for the application for those dollars. What P&S is going to be evaluating is criteria that is not the same as answering the question of what nonprofits are most important to the community to fund with a consideration on whether they are addressing diversity, equity and inclusion. The process has been reverse and the criteria are problematic. The criteria is Staff recommended. City Manager Shikada added it is discussed and approved by the P&S Committee as a recommendation to the full Council. This will all come back to the Council on the 16th to be reconciled. The Committee can either agree with P&S's conclusions or decide to modify them. City Manager Shikada agreed there was a miscommunication with YCS on their continuing contract but would not describe the situation as rampant confusion. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims had heard from nonprofit leaders that they are feeling confusion or uncertainty about what they are supposed to be doing. There is concern the extent to which somebody might be double dipping because they are getting HISRAP and also applying for money from another bucket. City Manager Shikada noted this was one reason the title Nonprofit Partnership Work Plan Phase One because the phase one is the operable term. It relates to the discussion Council has had on the question of HSRAP and whether to increase the total funding to HSRAP as a percentage of the budget itself. There is that bucket of both policy issues, which organization receives the funds and ultimately as it relates to HSRAP as an example, how much money the city wants to allocate to human services as a percentage of the overall general fund. The focus on resource allocation is the biggest umbrella under which the various points in time and methods during through which the City has made both funding decisions as well as making decisions through use of City facilities and the implicit subsidy SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 11 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/20/25 associated with that. Chair Burt agreed there had been issues on funding levels for Human Services and Finance Committee has worked hard to increase that but not all nonprofits are in the Human Services category. Another aspect to reconcile is the point of view of those requesting information and the reality of those having to supply it. Councilmember Reckdahl asked if there is HSRAP, why would there be another bucket that also allows human resources to apply and two separate criteria and no crossover. Chair Burt stated the basic concept is to what extent is providing funds to these organizations leveraging what the City does through partnering in terms of those entities being able to raise additional funds as a result of the City contribution but also providing services that would cost more if City Staff attempted to provide them. It is cost effective to provide services to the community that are valued and needed as opposed to hiring more City Staff to do so. City Manager Shikada shared that in times of fiscal constraint, public agencies need to reflect on what the core priorities are and how to use the resources they are provided with to pursue those core priorities. The discussion has focused on organizations the City wants to support. Those organizations provide services that are the responsibility the City is entrusted with pursuing with the funds available to the City. The criteria that was discussed by the Policy and Services Committee to be used in this cycle were based on the City Council's priorities as the rubric through which to evaluate the proposals. They do not directly align with which organizations they want to support. The Policy and Services Committee will be meeting the following week for a first review of the applications in addition to the meeting that is scheduled on June 10 to do the deep dive, evaluation and deliberation on what recommendations to bring back to the full Council. Chair Burt remarked that the application over-emphasized Council priorities which by definition focus over a certain timeframe. City Manager Shikada clarified that the P&S Committee will be evaluating all of the proposals and the funding they have to work with, including those additional four organizations that received funding last year, will be roughly $400,000, not $100,000. That does not assume the allocations provided last year to those four groups will continue as they were budgeted last year. City Manager Shikada understood it would include YCI as part of the evaluation. It excludes the community event CSD grants line item. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims thought it was clear the YCS/YCI was meant to be included. City Manager Shikada remarked it was the recommendation of the Finance Committee to proceed with the direct allocations to YCS as well as the other four organizations. When it went to the full council, the conclusion was to evaluate all the applications. Chair Burt recalled it was that Staff made a mistake on YCI and intended to put it back in. Therefore, it was not a part of the Finance Committee’s specific recommendation on what to do with the other ones. It was Staff saying it was back in the budget. City Manager Shikada clarified it was a lack of communication to YCS that the fact that their agreement ended meant that they needed to apply through this nonprofit funding. No recommendation or assumption had been made that it would be a direct allocation as opposed to proceeding through the evaluation among the other nonprofit proposals. It was the unanimous recommendation of the Finance Committee that direct allocations be made. Chair Burt commented the Committee had not taken deliberate action on YCI. Staff admitted to making a mistake and voiced their intention to put it back in the budget. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 9 of 11 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/20/25 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims commented Youth Community Services has had funds since 2017. It has always been 50k from the City matched with 50k from the county. This was a blip that got misunderstood. It seemed to be coming to the end of its term and Staff did not include it. It was not meant to be in the bucket of things that are subjectively considered year over year. Councilmember Reckdahl wanted explanation of the Nonprofit Partnership Workplan Phase 1 Rec Adjustments slide. City Manager Shikada explained the changes reflect changes to the budget. The other column reflect a question of how it is allocated to the specific organization. Chair Burt observed the Committee could make their budget recommendation to the Council on the basis of their recollection. Chair Burt directed the Committee’s attention to the original slide in order to move things from the Parking Lot to Recommendations. Sandra Blanch, Human Services Director, presented a slide of data from 2019 through the current year categorized by general fund showing filled positions in comparison to the budget and total budgeted FTEs for all funds altogether. The general fund totals variances between 2019 through the current date is only 19 positions. Several positions were restored after the pandemic. Councilmember Reckdahl had questions about outsourcing. City Manager Shikada did not recall any significant outsourcing changes during this period. Prior to that, the largest was related to custodial services and landscape maintenance. During this period, print mail and related functions were looked at but there was not a conclusion to change the service models. Chair Burt added following the great recession, there was a deliberate consideration of what could b outsourced. State law has changed making it more difficult for cities to outsource functions. City Manager Shikada stated during this period, the animal shelter was changed. That was less than 10 people. Chair Burt observed those were additional people that would be added back to the count. Councilmember Reckdahl asked if the scope had been expanded. City Manager Shikada said that would need to be looked at individually. Director Blanch gave an example that last year a few positions were added for the JMZ because of the expansion. Chair Burt remarked there are clearly areas that scope was expanded but others that are not as clear what the basis is. The tendency is to look at the positions that are budgeted as opposed to the positions of employed people performing functions. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims asked how many unfilled positions have gone unfilled year over year. Chair Burt observed the Committee relies on the city manager and his staff to look at how systemic cost reductions can be achieved in the least detrimental way. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims asked if it would be better to have a more accurate budget of FTE in the first place. Chair Burt thought more accurate is valuable. Chair Burt recommended the Council see this. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 10 of 11 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/20/25 Councilmember Reckdahl asked for a head count of how many consultants had been hired. Chair Burt explained there are contract employees that do functions similar to their own and there is a variation in that. There is a need to get the breakdown differently from the master list. City Manager Shikada replied a report had been issued that would go to Policy and Services Committee the following week on this topic. A list of contracts has been provided that the Council approved last calendar year as a way of seeing the range of services. It is something of a continuum from what might be surge staffing to special expertise that is not in-house to a whole team of engineers and construction managers managing a larger program of capital improvements. Chair Burt observed surge staffing was a better term for the contracted services and would be a valuable category and that this was more of a financial decision. City Manager Shikada it was for the Council as a whole but this was a way to start the conversation as a way to talk about the methods of service delivery. It is an issue of how expectations are set with Staff on scope of services and how the relationship in management of consultants is handled. Chair Burt requested to have it routed to the Finance Committee. Councilmember Lythcott- Haims was comfortable with it moving to Council as planned. Councilmember Reckdahl asked about Jed. City Manager Shikada remarked a couple years ago the Council added ongoing funding to Community Services for youth mental health. The expectation was to tap into that as a primary source but additional funding may be required. If needed, City Manager Shikada suggested it would come out of the CMO contingency. Following the City School Liaison Committee's discussion and recommendation that the City pursue an agreement with the Jed Foundation, the city manager’s office is now taking the responsibility of setting up a meeting with Council Members Stone and Liu, along with Staff with the Jed Foundation to finalize the scope of work that will then come to the full Council for approval. Councilmember Reckdahl inquired if there was any PAUSD interest. City Manager Shikada answered the primary role for CSD will be potentially activities such as issuing surveys to their staff or the PAUSD community as well as providing data that would be used by the Jed Foundation. The question of what that engagement will look like is a part of the needed scope discussion. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims added had confidence that the Jed Foundation is adept at being an outsider who comes in with methodologies for bringing the community together in ways that may have been elusive. Mr. Harper discussed a slide that showed what is in the Parking Lot and asked for the Committee to formally move it to recommendation. City Manager Shikada clarified this is the budget allocation and not making any assumption as to how the actual funding decision is made to specific groups. The Committee proceeded to discuss which items would be moved from yellow to green. Director Lai confirmed that the details of the placeholders would come back to Committee on August 19. This will move forward and advance the adoption of the budget with the placeholder which reduces appropriations but will allow Staff time to develop that and then bring it back to Committee. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 11 of 11 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/20/25 The Finance Committee Unanimously agreed on the following recommendations to the City Council: Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 4:56 P.M.