# Council Budget & Finance Committee - February 23, 2010 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Council · February 23, 2010 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/1236 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/1236?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2010-02-23 - **Body**: Council - **Last revised**: June 18, 2026 - **Length**: 17,176 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Budget and Finance Committee convened on February 23, 2010, at 1:00 P.M., with Kevin Stinnett presiding. The meeting covered four agenda items, all of which were informational in nature, focusing on financial oversight and planning topics relevant to the committee's budgetary responsibilities. Key subjects addressed included debt and debt management policy recommendations, a review of FY 2010 financials for January 2010, a discussion of the Lexington Public Library's FY 2010 budget, and a discussion on Council Links for the FY 2011 budget process. The committee recorded 2 votes during the meeting and heard no public comments. ## Attendance All members were present at the February 23, 2010 Council meeting. The following ten members attended: - Kevin Stinnett - Ed Lane - Jim Gray - Linda Gorton - Chuek Ellinger - Andrea James - Tom Blues - Julian Beard - George Myers - Peggy Henson No members were recorded as absent or late. ## Votes and Decisions Two motions were brought before the Council during the February 23, 2010 meeting, both passing by voice vote. - **Create a Debt Management Policy Sub-Committee:** Kevin Stinnett moved to create a sub-committee tasked with working on a debt management policy document. The motion passed by voice vote. No individual vote counts or seconds were recorded. [timestamp: 40:59] - **Adjourn the Meeting:** Peggy Henson moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed by voice vote. No individual vote counts or seconds were recorded. [timestamp: 1:34:31] Both votes were conducted as voice votes, so no roll call tallies or individual member positions are available for either motion. ## Contested Items - **Lexington Public Library Budget Reduction Request** The primary contested item at this meeting centered on the Lexington Public Library's refusal to comply with the mayor's request for budget reductions. The library board declined to make the requested cuts, prompting discussion among council members regarding the board's financial management practices and its statutory obligations with respect to budgeting. The disagreement pitted the mayor's office, which had sought reductions as part of broader fiscal efforts, against the library board, which resisted those cuts. The discussion touched on the extent to which the library board is legally required to respond to municipal budget directives and whether its financial stewardship aligned with the city's expectations. No outcome from this discussion is recorded in the available meeting data. ## Debt and Debt Management Policy Recommendations [timestamp: 04:44] Dr. Merl Hackbart presented recommendations from the LFUCG Fiscal Policy Task Force Report focused on debt management policies. The presentation was informational in nature, with Dr. Hackbart serving as the key speaker on behalf of the task force. The agenda item covered the task force's findings and recommendations regarding how the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government should approach debt and debt management going forward. No vote or formal action was taken as a result of this presentation; it was brought before the Council for informational purposes only. ## Review and Discussion of FY 2010 Financials for January, 2010 [timestamp: 46:21] Rumpke presented the FY 2010 financial report for the month of January 2010. The presentation focused on current trends in both revenue and expenses for the fiscal year. No additional detail on specific figures, concerns raised, or further debate among Council members is available from the meeting record. The item was informational in nature, and no formal action or vote was taken as a result of the discussion. ## Discussion of the Lexington Public Library's FY 2010 Budget [timestamp: 1:14:01] The Council took up Agenda Item 3, a discussion of the Lexington Public Library's FY 2010 budget and the library's response to budget reduction requests. George Myers was the key speaker during this portion of the meeting. The discussion was informational in nature, focusing on how the library had responded to requests to reduce its budget. No final action or vote was taken as a result of this agenda item; it served as an opportunity for the Council to review and discuss the library's budgetary position and its approach to any required reductions. No additional details regarding specific dollar figures, proposed cuts, or particular concerns raised during the discussion are available in the provided record. ## Discussion on Council Links for FY 2011 Budget Process [timestamp: 1:21:36] The Council took up Agenda Item 4, a discussion focused on how to organize council links for the upcoming FY 2011 budget process, as well as the possibility of holding a council retreat in connection with that work. Andrea James was the key speaker during this portion of the meeting. The discussion centered on the organizational and procedural aspects of how the Council would structure its involvement and linkages as the FY 2011 budget process moved forward. The conversation also touched on whether a council retreat might be an appropriate mechanism for facilitating that work. No formal action was taken on this item, and it was treated as informational in nature. The discussion served as a preliminary conversation to help the Council consider its approach and coordination ahead of the budget process. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Create a sub-committee to work on a debt management policy document - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Adjourn the meeting --- ## Full transcript How you doing, sir? Yeah, same here. Month of February, so welcome everyone watching on TV and in the audience. We appreciate your attention to our meeting. Just a couple things to kinda, um, give us some housekeeping items before we get going here. We have a, a, a rather lengthy agenda today. Um, all the way down to the council links discussion. Um, so if, if council members could keep within our rules within five minutes of discussion time, uh, per item, that would help us kinda get through all the agenda items today, um, so we give a, due attention to each item. Uh, the first item up today is the debt and debt management policy recommendations. Just to kinda give some pretext on this, this came from our fiscal policy task force that presented to council last March. Um, due to e- the timing of that presentation, we obviously went into budget mode in April and May and June. So, this was not able to be taken back up until now, and giving our bond workshop that we had this past November, and with the understanding of how important that workshop was, this is why we're talking about this, uh, and reviewing this fiscal policy task force recommendation to create a debt management policy. Now, having said that, um, this is probably one of the most important things we can do as a council. I know former Council Member Brown used to say, "We only have two jobs. That's spend and raise taxes and pass laws. That's it." So, um, this, this goes a long way in both of those. So, eh, as we're talking today and going through this, I hope council members will keep in mind some of the ideas they'd like to see in this type of policy so that we can move something forward to the full council, uh, in the very near future. 'Cause as we enter budget discussions, how much debt we take on and how much debt we choose to, um, eh- ... issue in- in any budget. Obviously has a big fiscal impact, as we all know from our November discussion. Uh, and any debt we- we approve and ultimately do not actually bond has a big impact as well, as we just saw in November. So without further ado, we have Merle Hackbarth with us today, who is the chair of the fiscal, or was the chair, excuse me, of the Fiscal Policy Task Force. Right, right. But we're still glad to have- Yeah, I thought I had gotten rid of that, uh, a year or two ago. It has been abolished. For life. Yes, indeed. Okay. Um, pleased to be here this afternoon and, uh, to basically discuss some of the issues and background, uh, from the report. I need you to e- either use that microphone, or we, do we have a portable microphone for him? That's okay, I can- I can ... We gotta be able to hear you. We need a portable one. I- I'm a- I'm a pacer, so uh, I ... But I can control myself if necessary. So okay. All right. Uh, so it's a pleasure to be here and- and to discuss, uh, some of the recommendations and comments that came out of our discussions, which basically took about a year. And we talked about budgeting, we talked about a number of financial management issues and fiscal policy issues. And, uh, as indicated, uh, this afternoon, uh, discussion will focus specifically on debt policy, debt limits, and a variety of related issues. Some of the comments that I'll share with you really don't come directly from the report, but I thought it might be beneficial to have just some background concepts and issues and discussions, uh, which may, uh, lead into our discussions more specifically dealing with debt management policies, uh, debt limits, debt capacity, and some of the terms that are kind of used in the trade. Of course, I think we all understand that one of the major issues that we face when we're dealing with infrastructure and capital projects is the problem of lumpiness. In other words, the cost of those items, those projects basically are significantly large compared to the operating budget. Therefore, that creates some very special problems in terms of financing, infrastructure changes, capital projects, buildings, facilities, transportation fil- facilities, and a whole laundry list of different types of capital projects. As a consequence of the lumpiness problem, traditionally we tend to finance, uh, these projects in different ways, and certainly I think it also requires some special planning. And of course, most cities and state governments basically establish a capital improvement plan to provide long term guidance and planning about the projects that may be necessary and certainly are important for a community as well as for states. Capital improvement plan, of course, provides a lot of insights about future needs. And certainly that process tends to start with sort of an assessment of the current capital facilities and the current infrastructure. And after the assessment of the current facilities, uh, projections can be made about other future needs that may be nece- necessary to permit the city or county or state to meet its obligations and responsibilities relative to the public. Now, in addition to special planning activities, capital projects and infrastructure projects also require special and unique financing approaches, or financing strategies. As noted, we can basically divide the financing strategies into three types. The first being, as we refer to as pay as you go, which basically means that we're gonna try to finance capital projects out of current revenues. And of course, uh, that's oftentimes very difficult to do, again because of the lumpiness problem, that if we were to finance those projects with current revenues and the current budget, it may de- lead to the need to dispense it with other projects and other important services for the community, for the state, for the city, or for the county. Second option is sort of a prospective forward-looking approach, and that's simply to create a reserve fund and add funds to that reserve fund over time until there are sufficient revenues available, sufficient funds available to finance the project out of cr- out of the funds which are in the reserve fund. Again, that's difficult to do that because in effect there are always competition for dollars, and to set aside funds in a reserve fund, even though conceptionally sound, it's oftentimes difficult to do politically. The third option, and- and oftentimes becomes the preferred option, is the use of debt financing or bond financing, whichever term you might prefer. All of the funding mechanisms or funding approaches or funding strategies are appropriate. Pay as you go is certainly a sound financial approach to financing capital projects and in- infrastructure. But again, you have the problem of potentially displacing important current services in order to finance those projects because of the lumpiness problem. Again, the reserve fund is, uh, possible, it's appropriate, reasonable. But again, there are some certain challenges in trying to accumulate the sufficient dollars and sufficient funds to meet the cost of the project that's being proposed. Consequently, m- most governments, state and local governments, tend to use the third option, and that is bond financing or debt financing. Again, this is a sound approach to financing capital projects because it's based upon the principles received, or benefits received principle, which basically means future generations or future, uh, individuals living in that community will bear part of the cost for the project. And therefore, the benefits of the project are not going to all be received in the year the project is completed, but future generations will have the opportunity to benefit from those projects. But in addition to the fact that, uh, even though conceptually and theoretically it's sound, it does present some very important policy issues. And I think the policy issues are what I'd like to spend the rest of my conversation this afternoon regarding. What are some of the policy issues that debt financing or bond financing and capital projects, uh, provide? Well, first of all, we have the question of, what's the acceptable use of debt financing? For the most part, over the last several decades, state and local governments have tended to use debt financing or bond fund that... bond financing for the financing of capital projects and infrastructure. That is, until probably the last five years, and probably the most famous change in that policy was the State of California. For the State of California, on a basic state, uh, budget of approximately 110 to $120 billion, they were about $20 billion short, even with the number of cost-saving measures and so forth. So the State of California began to bond the cost of operating expenditures. That was a break with tradition, and the State of California suffered significantly in terms of its bond rating. The bond rating agencies typically assumed that bond financing at the state and local level is appropriate for p- projects such as infrastructure projects, but they are not terribly excited about state and local governments bonding operating costs, because future generations are paying for the services that we're receiving today. That's certainly in contrast to the benefits received principle, which t- traditionally has justified the use of bond financing for capital projects. In addition to the issue of, of defining which projects or which types of activities are appropriate for, uh, financing with bonds or debt financing, the question is, should we establish debt limits? In other words, actually limit the amount of debt issues that we're gonna authorize and the dollar value of bonds that we're gonna sell. Other questions include the management of the debt limits, acceptable debt limits. So, in some cases, uh, state and local governments may have multiple debt limits. For example, there could be a debt limit on general obligation bonds, there could be a separate, uh, debt limit for revenue bonds, or there could be a combination debt limit. The State of Kentucky basically has a general, sort of macro debt limit, which basically indicates that the state will not, uh, appropriate more funds for debt service than the, uh, debt capacity of the state, which has been defined to be, uh, a debt limit of 6% of aggregate total revenue received during that fiscal year. So it's sort of a 6% cap based upon, uh, debt service payments. And then they'll do an estimate every year, of course, some bonds roll off, they reach maturity, and then they identi- uh, identify the available debt capacity, and that would limit the new bonds that they could authorize during any one legislative session. And there are a number of issues, uh, that can be developed regarding debt financing as well. A couple of terms I think, which are used f- in, in sort of the popular, unpopular versions that may have, uh... may be useful just to spend a little time talking about these terms and their implications. For, a sort of a common term that's, uh, typically used in discussion in, in, by the public is debt affordability. Can we afford this project? Uh, and that's a useful concept, an appropriate concept, and it's very similar to another term which is important in this area, and that's the term debt capacity. Uh, I like to distinguish between those two terms. Debt affordability, uh, being a sort of a popular view, but debt capacity being more of a conceptual perspective in terms of the, the level of outstanding debt that a particular government can support. I think there are two parts of debt capacity. First is sort of the financial capacity, which looks at a number of financial factors, demographics, future growth paths and the like. And the second issue regarding, uh, debt capacity is something we might refer to as willingness to pay. In other words, a particular community may have, in terms of finance and economics, demographics, have a... could, could establish an understanding of debt capacity, but potentially, the taxpayers and the citizens of that community, basically, for one reason or another, simply do not like to incur debt. In fact, there are some states which basically do not use bond financing for capital projects for that particular reason. So I think there, there are two aspects, both capacity financially, as well as the, sort of the willingness of the legislative bodies or the citizens of a community to use that particular financing approach. Debt capacity is indicated basically as a function of the economy, the tax structure and financial capacity when we're dealing with general obligation bonds. Recall that when we talk about general obligation bonds, we're talking about bonds whose debt service is supported by the general revenues of a government. In contrast, of course, revenue bonds are bonds which receive the debt service support from the project itself. And it's quite possibly, when we talk about capacity, we principally tend to talk about debt capacity relative to GO bonds, because, uh, it's in some cases, when we're looking at individual projects, if they can stand alone on their own merit, and there's sufficient cash flow to meet the debt service on a particular project, it might be appropriate to take it outside of the analysis of debt capacity. Now, the State of Kentucky actually rolls them together. The State of Kentucky has a very low limit on general obligation bonds, something like $500,000. Consequently, the State of Kentucky does not issue general obligation bonds, they issue various forms of revenue bonds. ... and their debt capacity calculations and their debt limits are basically principally focused on revenue bonds, because that's basically all they issue. In reality, there's very little difference between a GO bond issued by the state of Kentucky and a revenue bond issued by the state of Kentucky, because the majority of the revenue bonds issued are supported by general fund appropriations. So effectively, they have the same backing as a normal, regular general obligation bond. In your case, if I understand correctly, you have about $150 million worth of general obligation bonds outs- outstanding, and about $120 million of revenue bonds outstanding at the current time, for, uh, tot- a total of about $270, $75 million plus or minus is your current outstanding, uh, debt issues. So in the lo- in the long term then, we can think about debt capacity as a term that focuses on the municipality's long-term ability to meet its debt service obligations. Or in some cases, it's the level of outstanding debt and the capacity to su- sustain outstanding debt which will be basically supported by the bond rating agencies. Debt capacity is becoming a very important part of the analysis of revenue, of rating agencies in their calculations of the debt rating for bonds issued by state and local governments. And of course, uh, that becomes a important part of the calculation, and it's important, I think, to be able to display to the rating agencies, uh, the analysis for that community in terms of its debt capacity, where it stands in terms of outstanding debt relative to debt capacity, or its ability to support long-sterm- long-term debt outstanding. So again, two terms, debt capacity, and then of course the term debt limits. Debt limits basically represents simply a policy decision. It's something that you may be considering here in the next several months or years, and that is, should we establish a debt limit. Again, as I mentioned, uh, debt limits tend to take a variety of forms. Debt limits can be stated in relative terms, such as debt outstanding per capita, debt service as a percent of general fund revenues, debt service as a percent of all, uh, local government revenues, and- and may take different forms and different approaches. I think the important thing is that the rating agencies like to observe debt limits and then to see the performance of that government relative to that established by policy debt limit, to see whether or not they're staying within those limits themselves involuntarily. Debt capacity is a somewhat more difficult concept in terms of actually being able to estimate. For example, as I indicated, debt capacity, uh, and available debt capacity, uh, basically tends to focus, if you're talking specifically about general obligation debt, on economic factors. What's the long-term growth path? Obviously, and if a community is, uh, re- realizing downsizing or declining populations, uh, based if the economy is not doing well, uh, and a number of other factors of that nature, that's going to affect its- its debt capacity. But generally, probably the rating agencies tend to look at communities relatively, that the relative outstanding debt for a community like Lexington compared to other communities of similar sizes with similar demographic characteristics, with similar economies would be one way that they would address the question that if your estimate of debt capacity seems reasonable and if your estimate of available debt capacity also seems reasonable. Mr. Hagbard- Yeah. ... I should explain to you be- before we get started, we have a 15-minute limit on presentations before the council. I know this topic is a very, very complex, so if- if you could, we got about eight more minutes left on it. Okay. So if you could keep it- I was only planning for an hour and a half. I know. I- I- I understand. Thank you, sir. You bet. Okay, no problem. Uh, so as- as I indicated, the rating agencies oftentimes tend to use industry standards or relative measures of- of communities compared to their peers. In fact, the NAS, which is the National Association of State Treasurers, reported that 27 states have various constitutional limitations and other approaches to setting debt limits. What we have here are a few charts just to give you some perspective of how Lexington compares to other communities. The first ch- chart, which could be used as a debt limit kind of background chart, indicates that for the Lexington community, the outstanding general obligation bond, debt outstanding per capita is about $550. You'll notice we're actually on the lower end of this, uh, chart compared to other communities, with Columbus, Ohio being at the- at the other highest end in terms of over $2,000 of outstanding general obligation debt per capita. Another measure could be debt service as a percent of general fund revenues. Again, Lexington is about in the same position compared to its peers. Finally, debt service as a percent of general fund expenditures, of which we find, we'd expect that to be relatively the same. I thought I might just provide a few insights in terms of the municipal bond market, um, as of this year. And I think there have been some interesting trends which are occurring in terms of the issuance of municipal debt, as well as some of the implications of those new issues. The municipal bond volume was up 5% from in 2009 compared to 2008. And of course, it went from $388 billion to $435 billion. ... to 410 billion dollars for that year. This is an aggregate in terms of all municipal debt issued in 2009. Taxable debt went up to 19% of all issues. Traditionally, uh, had an average of about 5%. And of course one of the major factors in the increase in the issuance of taxable debt was the Build America Bonds, which is part of the stimulus package, and basically rather than having communities issuing, uh, bonds at which are, um, municipal bonds in terms of being exempt from state and local taxes in income taxes, the, the, uh, Build America Bonds are taxable bonds, and there's a, in effect an incentive for the issuance of those bonds. For the holder of the bonds, there's a tax credit of 35%, and for the issuer, like the Lexington-Fayette County government, it would be a direct subsidy to that community for issuing those bonds. Other trends which you'll find is that a dramatic drop in the percent of all bonds issued which are insured. Traditionally and in the 1990s, insuring bonds, uh, as a percent of all community bonds issued was about 40%. This dropped dramatically, principally because the bond insurance companies lost their credibility when they began to, uh, move from being, in effect, single-issue bonds up a bond insurance companies to issuing insurance for different types of s- securities. For example, mortgage backed securities. As a result of that, their ratings dropped and their value as insurance also dropped accordingly. So those are some of the trends that, uh, have occurred in 2009, uh, across the country. Finally, recommendations, and then, uh, try to slip in within the eight-minute time zone. Um, these are some of the major recommendations that came out of our, out of the report, which was issued, uh, last spring. First of all, uh, certainly a strong recommendation, uh, that the Lexington-Fayette County Government should establish and maintain a strong capital improvement plan, which would include projects which may be appropriate for the future, uh, maybe include information about the current assessment of all capital facilities and infrastructure in the community that the Lexington-Fayette County Government is responsible for, and to prioritize those projects and also to identify ways and means to finance those projects on into the future. The second recommendation is that the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government should establish a debt mount- management policy, and I'll have a few more comments about that concept momentarily. And finally, the other recommendation which came out of our discussions was to establish a debt review committee. This would be kind of an independent body that could continue to monitor the debt situation and provide recommendations and suggestions back to the council and mayor about the management of outstanding debt. A debt management policy could include a number of items and suggestions. First of all, as we indicated, one thing that's important is to clearly define the purposes for which debt financing can be used, and normally we'd assume that the capital projects and infrastructure. There might be also guidelines for the use of general obligation bonds and revenue bonds, debt limit guidelines if you establish a debt limit policy, uh, policies regarding the use of credit enhancements, policies regarding the refinancing of outstanding debt, and certainly guidelines for the staff to use in managing outstanding debt issues as well as planning for future debt issues as well. And those are some of the major recommendations of the study that was con- that was performed over a year period, and I think many of these recommendations will be very useful for the community, and I hope I made it within the time limit. That's the end, and if there's time for a few questions, I'd be glad to answer those, and of course there, uh, members of that group are member of the council, and you might be able to have a conversation as well. So thank you for opportunity to be here. Thank you, Doctor. We, we definitely appreciate you being here. And Council Member Steele, while he was speaking, I passed out a sample LFUCG debt management policy outline that we could go by as a tool only. Um, it's nothing that has been written specifically for LFUCG, but it's taken from other various policies as well as, uh, the University of Kentucky's debt management policy as well. So, uh, there's a copy of that as well to reference. I also think it's important before we start our discussion maybe to have Commissioner Rempke explain what LFUCG's current debt management policy is in three minutes or less. Think you can do that. Just to kind of give the audience at home an understanding of we don't have a written policy now, correct? Just to reiterate, we don't have a written policy. Our guideline has been... Just before we start any discussion, I think it's important to under- Correct, we don't have a written policy, so we're very excited to be venturing into that arena. Um, essentially, we have tried to keep within a 5% range, which- 10%. Pardon me? I'm sorry, 10%. Um, but as we talked in, um, our workshops as we were looking at bonding for this year, if we continue along the same pace, we'll probably be around 15%. So it's gonna be really important to get these guidelines in place. But really overall, we have just been looking at it on a, on a year by year basis and trying to analyze the debt service implications around the debt that we're looking to bond. So beyond that, we really don't have a whole lot. Thank you. I got Council Member James up first. As mentioned, uh, I think most states, as I indicated, tend to stay in the range of 5 to 7%, but local governments tend to be above that across the nation, and probably tend to be in the 10 to 15% range, because the relative investment in infrastructure and capital projects is much higher for communities. ... than it is for state government, which tends to focus more on providing current services. So even though we might use a r- a ratio of 5 or 10% of current revenues as the maximum amount of debt service payment, uh, you can, in terms of national standards, uh, I, I wouldn't be terribly concerned about going above that because, again, communities are different than state governments. Thank you, sir. Council Member James. Thank you, Chair. Um, thank you, Dr. Hagbard. Appreciate the information. It's really, it helps to open your eyes a lot. Um, I'm, I wanna focus on the metric examples that you gave us on the three different charts. And, um, one thing I'm really interested in, we, we talk a lot about our debt and we don't talk a lot about how to generate additional revenue. And if you watch the Budget and Finance Committees, you hear me always talk about, what are we doing to increase the revenue potential? Certainly. So I'm, when I'm looking at those three charts, in specific, I want to see if you can help me or help us to understand the examples of Louisville and Lansing because what they're showing is they show their, their bond debt per capita and they're in the top half of that chart as some of the greatest bond debt per capita, but then when you look at the next charts where debt bo- debt service as percent of general fund revenue and the percent, percent of general fund expenditures, they're at the low end. Tell me how that dynamic happens. That's, it's a good question and, and I'd have to look at it in more detail to actually be accurate in answering the question, but it would have to assume probably that, in effect, their general fund revenue base is, is r- larger compared to, relative to their population would be one way that that might, uh, uh, be logically, uh- Would that be because it's based off property tax and not payroll tax maybe? Uh, no, we're talking about general fund revenues in this case. Right. So it would be a, you know, dif- these different communities have different combinations of local taxes. Absolutely. Okay. But that's an interesting observation. Uh, and, uh, in fact, we'll take a look at it and see if we can, uh, have a more detailed answer, but it looks, y- your point's well taken. It's sort of unusual because of their relatively high outstanding per capita. Okay. Uh, and it could be partly how they're financing it. Okay. You know, it could be, you know, a substantial portion of debt could have been issued when interest rates were very low. Okay. So their debt service would have been reduced accordingly. So a number of factors could actually lead to, uh, those particular statistics. A- and I think that's important. ... yeah. I look forward to hearing your response on that because we- Yeah, we'll look at it. Well, look at- ... that's the first thing that we, you know, when we hear people don't want us to acquire or to ensue more debt, and you have to look at, uh, is it because of our practices of what we're doing about not generating revenue? Are we, are we as a city investing in projects that aren't generating any revenue for us- Right. ... and are just, we're just spending our money out and not getting anything in return? So, yeah, I look forward to that. We'll look at that, certainly. Okay. And also, um, you talked very, I think you said towards the end of the presentation, a little bit of prioritizing, talking about that. And I'm interested in how do you prioritize when things are mandates or contractual obligations? And if you look at that separate from things that would be seen as kind of extravagances in a city, so things that are mandated like an EPA or a pension plan or a lyric theater, things that are ordered. Sure. Um, how do you, i- is that the same conversation as a streetscape project? Certainly. Uh, that's actually a good point. I- in certain cases if they're mandates, automatically they, they probably go to priority one. And for example, if you had fire and safety issues, that may a- almost automatically take it up to a very high priority. In other cases, in terms of prioritization, there may be two considerations. In effect, what's a probably a reasonable approach to this is to identify certain values. In other words- Yes. ... to, to i- term- terms that can be used for relative urgency and relative priority and then t- assign those terms to different projects. Okay. Uh, at the same time, your priorities may change sp- depending upon funding sources. Yes. For example, if there were federal funds available for project A and not for project C, even though project C might be more important to the community, that may tend to move project A into a higher priority because that funding may only be available for a short period of time. So it's a combination of funding options. Okay. And external forces such as mandates, uh, certainly they have to play a role in, in determining the ultimate prioritization of projects even though there may be other values that the community might, uh, in the absence of those requirements, might, uh, rank projects differently. Okay. So maybe that conversation needs to, that would be one of the first steps- Absolutely. ... in creating our plan- Absolutely. ... is just have that conversation. Definitely. In other words- I'm also interested in the, in the i- examples that you've given on the metrics. Um, the, whether they have like a local option for projects, because we've heard of some examples of where communities can vote in support of something, um, and a lot of those times those are bonds and bonded projects that are multi-millions, hundreds of millions of dollars taken into account. So I'm curious to know whether that's a practice that's being used, especially where the, where the, um- Yeah. ... debt service is a higher, um, is a higher amount or the, uh, the bond debt is a higher amount, such as Lansing, Columbus, Knoxville. It's conceivable. It is conceivable that that could be, in other words, a, a different revenue source being supporting those bonds - Yes. ... conceivably, right- Yeah. ... as opposed to general fund monies, even if they're sold as GO bonds. Right. Yeah. No, that's- So that makes the agreement easier. ... that's- So if we all agree- ... that's- ... to spend that much- ... sure. ... then it's easier. That's an interesting question. For example, if you look at, uh, for example, the state of Kentucky, you have bonds which basically are supported from the general fund corporations. There are also a series of special authorities, there are also universities, and the question is, if you apply the 6% rule, do you apply it only to general fund supported bonds? ... general fund plus transportation, general fund plus transportations, plus special sta- you know, uh, standalone authorities and our universities. So again, this all becomes part of the debt management plan and how you're going to approach those issues. Mm-hmm. And those ... And how you determine those and how you approach those issues will be important to the, to the rating agencies because eventually that's gonna determine how you manage your outstanding debt. Absolutely. And I don't know if I'm being timed or not. You are. Am I over? Yes, ma'am. Oh, shoot. Do you have one more? I did ha- We can come back to you. Okay. I'll just let someone else. Thank you. And just as a committee member or the task force member, that was an excellent point Council Member James brought up. It is. And I think we figured out that other cities don't have as many dedicated revenue streams that aren't supporting debt service because here we just use the general funds to support it from that 10%. But other cities don't have ... They have bigger general funds and that's exactly what we need to look at. Council Member Ellinger. And some of those cities might issue as revenue debt or geo debt and, and so forth. That makes a difference as well. And, and include school systems, where here we don't. That's the big difference. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Dr. Hackbarth, for being here. I felt like I was in, uh, one of my master's classes of public administration there for a while. Takes you, takes us back a few years, right? It does. I know. Very educational. I wa- I wanted to look at the, the matrix also, and I ... It looks tha- like it goes through fiscal year '05. And when I first got here, I guess in fiscal year '03, I know we've had some big changes in our, our indebtedness, and I guess I'd like to see if we can get the information. I know we, um, spend the money for the ICMA to be able to look at the matrix. I was wondering what would be the most up-to-date information. Maybe, um, the commissioner could get that for us that, because I'd like to see how this ... That was in '05, how we are doing now in, in fiscal year '10 and if that would be possible. Nathan, do you remember? Hold on. What's the latest? There's a time lag to get this- Right. I know there ... Yeah. But if, if we could get ... And I know we did this last year, so if we could get some, the most up-to-date information, I'd just be curious to see how that compares to where we are now, because I know we've had some big indebtedness here in the last couple years, so. But thank you for the information. Thank you, Jack. It's very helpful. Any other committee members have any comments or questions for Dr. Hackbarth? Council Member James, you want to continue on? Uh, I think I'll just follow up with him- Okay. ... offline. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Counci- Council Member Lane. Uh, Dr. Hackbarth, you're, um, provided the University of Kentucky debt policy and on the third page on there, they have an explanation of debt allocation matrix. Could you touch on that just for a second? I think that would be of interest to our committee. Uh. Uh, do you have ... Do you have that document? No, I don't. Okay. Okay. Well. Okay. I can put that on the board. Oh, this kind of gets back to, uh, what, uh ... This refers to, I think, is in terms of the questions we were talking about earlier and that is how to prioritize these bonds. And basically, uh, the point that's made in this particular preface is the fact that you may pri- priori- you may prioritize projects which are similar. If you have different debt service, uh, support systems, you may want to pr- prioritize those projects separately from those which are supported by the general fund and so forth. You may have multiple categories of priorities. And for example, uh, this has application, for example, the University of Kentucky, they have priorities of capital projects for research facilities because the state of Kentucky basically supports certain research facilities from different fund sources than for academic buildings. So the university would traditionally do a prioritization of potential academic buildings. They might also do a prioritization of research buildings, which might have a different, uh, source of debt service support, which becomes another complication in actually doing the prioritization process as we talked earlier. Thank you, Dr. Hackbarth. Anyone else? Any questions for Dr. Hackbarth? Do I have any motions coming out of this? I think that one next step would probably be to, uh, with a sub-committee of this Budget and Finance Committee, come back to this committee with a document to, uh, debate and go through. I gave a sample document and, um, that would be working with the administration and Dr. Hackbarth to come back with something we can start debating and look at, 'cause I think most of it'll be okay. I think there's a few, obviously percentages and things we'll have to debate, so. Second. Okay. So there, there's a motion to create a, a sub-committee. Uh, if anyone would like to be on that to work on a document to bring back to this council next, next month, um, please let me know because, um, more, the more the merrier. I think we can get it done by then and have something before us to debate. Any discussion? Council Member James. This is ... It's kind of related to the formation of that, and, because it gives us, um, gives us, uh, vision. Um, but Dr. Hackbarth, I'm wondering with the current economics, or at least the passing economic situation, if you're seeing ... I mean, it, it seems like what we're doing is based on what we know from history as far as what the rating agencies have looked for, um, what the bonding atmosphere has been. Do you see that something is happening differently based on what has happened with our economic situation and should we be adapting? Should what we bring forward be an ad- adaptation of what our current needs are or do ... Are we supposed to be going back and looking at what traditionally has been appropriate? I would say the rating agencies will tend to look at risk, and that's what they tend to focus on principally. I think one of the major changes in the process has been, is as I indicated, bond insurance had become very, very popular in the 1990s. And ba- basically what that provided was the diff- would basically enhance the creditworthiness of issues. The impact of that was to lead to basically produced bond issues which would go to market as triple A bonds. The reason for that was that changes in the federal tax laws in the 1980s basically made many bonds more attractive to individual investors. Individual investors tend to be risk-averse, and therefore there was a very strong tendency to, to attempt to make sure that your bonds sold as triple A bonds because that would create some significant cost savings and debt service for those bond issues, 'cause of the strong demand for that segment of the municipal bond market. But again, I think the rating agencies, again, tend to look principally at risk, uh, with the bond insurance company and basically sort of dropping off the map to some extent until they re-establish their credibility. Uh, I think, uh, they'll be looking more specifically at the characteristics of bonds, because when they were insured they could basically provide a triple A bond rating and not be too worried about the individual structure of the bond issues and other aspects of risk that those bond issues might contain. Okay. So, that might be appropriate. Okay. Thank you, Chair. All right. Thank you, Counselor Meyers. Okay. My questions aren't to the motion, so I can wait till- Okay. Thank you. Any other discussion on the motion? Okay. We'll take a vote. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. It passes. Counselor Meyers. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Dr. Hackbart, for coming in. Um, on the task force recommendations, you've got one on here to, uh, establish a debt review committee. Can you speak about what, what types of backgrounds and, and, uh, skill sets that we would be looking for? Sure. And where we would find the people to serve on that committee? Uh, I would think it would be useful to have someone who has legal background, in terms of municipal bonds. And, uh, basically you might have someone who's from an underwriting firm, who would be very familiar with the current market conditions. Uh, you might also have someone who basically understands and has a background in finance. I think some combination of legal background, particularly of, uh, a firm that basically has been involved in underwriting and is bond counsel, and I think they would be equipped and, and have the background to, to assess whether you're continuing and dynamic, uh, that, uh, bond management policy is appropriate given changes which might be occurring in federal laws, things of that nature. Okay. So a combination of that nature I think would be appropriate. Okay. Thank you. And what you're looking for them is for them to provide you with new ideas and new suggestions. Because, in effect, this process is dynamic. In other words, I think as, as suggested, you know, things do change over time, and, and what may be appropriate in terms of, uh, the types of structured bond issues you might use in time period one may change in time period two. Uh, for example, the, the new bonds which, uh, were authorized as part of the stimulus package provide a whole new opportunity in terms of issuing taxable bonds, which didn't exist before. In fact, they're very attractive. Any other questions for Dr. Hackbart? All right, county members, if anybody would like to serve on the subcommittee, just please let me know as soon as possible so we can have time to meet and get this back to the committee next month. Thank you, sir. We appreciate your time. I'm indebted to having the eligibility to be here this afternoon. And, and, and we still, we will still continue with your debt service to us. Okay. So, uh, thank you. Next on, next on the agenda, the revenue discussions for the month of January. Mr. Romke, welcome. Thank you. We're gonna keep it brief. I know we've got a big agenda today. Uh, since we last got together, uh, the Federal Reserve saw fit to raise the discount rate, which is the rate that banks pay at the, at the window by 25 basis points, but they followed that, uh, increase by saying modifications are not expected to lead to tighter financial conditions for households and businesses and do not signal any change in the outlook for the economy or for monetary policy. I found that interesting and, uh, Mike Assemblis, who is a, uh, a, uh, an economist for JP Morgan, uh, calls this that, he states that this was just the dress rehearsal. In other words, we're getting the markets ready for when rates do start to tick up. And I guess the silver lining in all of this is that two thirds of the US economy has been operating below s- 70% below capacity. And we've talked about this in, in previous, uh, meetings, but, uh, w- what we're s- what they're seeing on the horizon is no inflation to date, and they thought it would be bizarre to see any, uh, tightening of fiscal policy at this point in time. Uh, so lower utilization rates, rising manufacturing surveys, higher productivity has really been the formula for stronger cor- stronger corporate profits, and all of us have seen that in the first quarter reportings that w- or excuse me, end of year reportings that have been coming out. So, um, I think overall, uh, my comment just on the economy in general is we're still kind of in that status quo and we're wondering what's just over the horizon. And with that said, what's over the horizon for us, uh, from an unemployment standpoint, Fayette County is, a- as of December, and I apologize we don't have January numbers, they aren't issued till the 19th of March, um, but for December, uh, we were at 7.3% in Fayette County. That's a 200 basis points increase over, uh, uh- November, uh, the MSA was at 7.9%. That was also a 200 basis point increase. Kentucky overall was up, uh, uh, uh, yeah, 100 basis points at 10.7. And, uh, the, the national, uh, unemployment rate was 10%, which was flat month over month. Find it interesting that we're still running higher than the national economy. From an economic indicator standpoint, um, eh, again, we, we talked about unemployment and the fact that that w- or excuse me, employment numbers won't be available til, um, next month. But, uh, as far as permits issued, we, we've ticked up in January. That's a good trend, as have new business license. I guess, I do have some concerns on our home sales, uh, down to 384 in January. But, um, all that snow getting removed from all of our streets, and thank you, um, public works for that, I'm sure, uh, affected these numbers. Uh, the good news on this page is the fact that our foreclosure rates continued to go down, um, and we're at 25 for the month of January. So, I see that is a very good sign. I'm gonna turn it over to, uh, com- Director O'Mara, and he's gonna take you through the, um, the January preliminary results. Bill? Thank you, Commissioner. And, um, t- today it feels a little better because I get to show a glimmer of, uh, good news. Um, don't wanna oversell that, but at least I can say there's a glimmer. Uh, and that's a nice, uh, change from last, uh, couple times we've been before you. The, uh, occupational withholdings, uh, for the month of January came in at a little over seven million, and that, that is our glimmer of good news. Last year, it was in the five million dollar range. Um, uh, this year, it's at seven, which is getting close to where we usually are in a January. Um, January of '08 was 7.2 million. January of '07 was 7.2, and January '06 was, uh, 7.9 million. So, getting to the seven million mark in January is starting to approach normalcy. And I consider getting back to normal, uh, a, a wonderful sign if we can sustain that. Uh, one month does not a trend make, uh, but we will be watching this and hope that, uh, it can continue. One of the things we did notice is the, the, uh, prevalent slow pay of last year has improved. People, more people are paying on time. Fewer people are, uh, paying a month behind. And again, that is a good economic forecaster, we hope, of, uh, of the health of business. So, um, withholdings at seven million in January was, was, uh, our, our bit of good news. Not the case for, um, the remainder, unfortunately. Oct- uh, the January occupational ISO tax on net profit, a little over a million. That compares to 1.6, um, uh, budget. Uh, last year, it was, uh, 1.3 million. The year before, it was 2.3, 1.3 and 1.3. So, we're still behind what, uh, we have traditionally collected in January for net profits. Insurance at 2.2 million was slightly above, uh, uh, budget. But then franchise fees, uh, were below. And so, that gives us, uh, a net, uh, actual below budget of 700,000 for the month of January by itself. Year to date, uh, our employee withholdings come in at a little less than 80.5 million compared to a budget of 8.4. Net profit's 11.4 compared to a two- a 12.4. And that's, uh, an 8.4% decline. Um, insurance is slightly behind and the trend in franchise fees is showing that franchise fees are soft this year, and we may not be able to attain the same level as last year. Um, now, the good news, bad news is we had some really cold weather . We'll see if that shows up in the franchise fee, um, revenues, uh, that are reported for February. So, um, the, um, when the thermostats go up, whether it's in, uh, the winter or the summer, more utilities are used and that drives, um, usage drives that, as well as rate. And so, we are both a function of rate. Uh, gas prices are down this year materially over last year, but we are also down in usage, and we'll see if January, uh, helps address that. So, looking at, uh, January year to date, seven months into the year, we're, for the top four, we're at 112.2 million. Our budget was 118.4. Um, that's a shortage of, uh, 6.2 million. Just about where, unfortunately, thought we would be. Um, before I was showing you the month, 12 months comparison of this year over last year. 13 months is a little much to get your arms around. Uh, what I propose showing you is last October is when the economics started to become shaky, and we're trying to, to track this year over last year. So I, I thought I would, would track October to date through, for the same period last year. So, for withholdings- ... um, you can see for the four-month ending, it's up 3.7, but you also see that, that's all driven by January numbers. So that's why I'm saying one month we can't, uh, take it to the bank and project for the rest of the year. We'll cross our fingers and toes and see how February, March comes in. That same comparison for net profit, uh, gives us pause. Uh, for the year we were trending 13, 14% down. This four month, October through January is down 16%, and our projections for the year was... We're supposed to only be 7%. So, there's concern that we'll be able to obtain our projected net profit number for the year. Um, and so with that, I'll, I'll turn it back over to Commissioner Rumpke. This is where we're comparing to that adjusted, uh, uh, forecast where we took the 12.5 out w- and showing what we have to obtain to make it through the year. Thank you. As, as Bill said, this is the, uh, chart that we instituted, um, last month, I believe so that we could keep track of how do we look based on the $12.5 million shortfall projection that we've been talking about. So to lead you through that, as, as Bill pointed out, um, excuse me, um, withholdings were, uh, two million favorable to our adjusted numbers, but all that came from January. So we're hopeful that that is a positive trend for us, but, uh, we're gonna hold out and see what next month has to bring. Um, unfortunately, as Bill said, net profits are trending down and we're 300,000 worse than even what we had projected, uh, in that $12.5 million shortfall. Um, and it does, eh, that does stick out as, as one of our exposed areas. From an insurance standpoint, um, we're really trending flat versus being up 1%, but, uh, again, um, we're not that far off, so we're hopeful that that's gonna come, come back around. Um, from a franchise fee standpoint, as Bill pointed out, we, we may make it now due to a- all the weather-related issues we've been experiencing. So, uh, t- to get to flat, uh, would be a good thing. And then I guess finally, in the services and other, while we're up one million, that's primarily related to the EMS, um, services. So, so that's a good thing. Uh, we do have concerns, uh, because golf also plays into that and, and we're counting on a nice spring with some golf revenue, because if you recall in the fall, we didn't have very nice golf weather and it rained a lot. And so we didn't get some of the golf revenue that we thought we were gonna get. So, um, if I had to point out two areas that even with our projections we're still concerned about, it would be the net profit and services and other lines as far as our projection. Um, but overall, I'd like to go out on a limb and say I am very, uh, hopeful and leaning very positively towards the fact that we won't be worse than what we've projected. And I think that we're all breathing a sigh of relief that, in fact, um, we're trending towards not being worse than 12 and a half million shortfall and I think that's a good thing. And I think, um, we're starting to see us turn the corner and obviously the f- the February results are gonna be big on that. And then I think finally, so that we can get to questions and, and anything else the couns- or the committee would like to discuss, if you look at the highlights, um, for the January financials, um, revenues off as we h- had expected, but you're seeing in the personnel and operating expense line, as you did last month, where the expense management plans have been coming into play. We know that the... As we all start to work on our FY11 budget that we're gonna have tremendous challenges because a lot of those savings have come at, in the operating... Excuse me, in the personnel expense line and we know that part of that's been through vacancy management, eh, where we've, uh, decided not to bring certain positions, or hire for certain positions until, you know, April instead of hiring them in October. Well, now it's almost April and, and how are we going to, uh, hire those positions and make sure that we're doing the things we need to do as an urban county government from a risk management standpoint, but also operating the day-to-day. So I think that's the biggest challenge for this group as we look forward to, to building the, uh, FY11 budget. Um, and so with that, I'd just, uh, open it up for any questions, uh, Chair. Thank you. We have Council Member James up first. Thanks, Chair. Um, thanks, Commissioner, for the presentation. Sure. Um, a couple of times we've heard... Well, a couple of times today in, and I guess always, we use our budgeting based on previous years. That's all we have. And so when I hear things like, h- things are getting back to normal or comparing it to normal, is that... Is it really fair to talk about getting back to normal? Like, do we... Based on everything that's occurred, um, what is normal? That's a really good question. I think what, uh, Director O'Mara was referring to as far as normal goes, we're seeing some of the trends in the particular line items- Mm-hmm. ... come back to more of a level trending basis. So we've seen, um, for example, the, um, withholding, uh, tax. Mm-hmm. Has been running at $7 million in January for several years, and then it fell off the face of the Earth during this financial crisis. This is the first month we've even been in the range of seven million. So I think it's individual line items, but if we're look- thinking about it from a budget perspective, I'm like you, I think we need to be looking forward. We can't really... ... continue to look backwards because the economy has changed substantially. Mm-hmm. And as we look at the sources of our revenue, just like, um, we discussed the net profit line- Right. ... um, or even the franchise fees- Right. ... we know that we have business owners that are more challenged in accessing capital to expand or to even start new businesses, so we are gonna have to think differently about these individual line items. Right, and that- that's what I was gonna ask you is, is there... is there a clear connection between employee withholding and net profit? Because we've heard, you said earlier that basically companies are working with fewer employees with more efficiency. More capacity. Mm-hmm. Um, is it more efficiency from those individual employees or is it more efficiency of their businesses to be able to provide the products and services which people aren't even buying 'cause we're saving our money instead of spending it? I think it's a little of both. I think that there have been process efficiencies that businesses have been forced to come up with in order to survive, and then the other piece is, um, we're doing more with less just like the urban county government is and- and people are working harder, longer hours in order to produce the various, uh, widgets that- that they produce for their firms. So how will you, kind of a snapshot looking forward, um, how will you predict net- net profit for this next fiscal year? I'm gonna let Director O'Mara talk about that. Okay. I think we- we've just started that process yet, but- Well, and- ... he's really liking me about this. ... as he's coming forwards, 'cause I'll... my time will- Yeah. ... expend, but as he's coming forward, if kind of what I'm s- what I've heard already is that the- the recommendations for budgeting from the different divisions are already coming in, a- or being asked to be brought in with the reduction, basing it on the reduction, the 4%- Mm-hmm. ... reduction already. So should we then be thinking about a spend up plan? So if revenues then shoot back up, should we have some kind of reserve list of what are people wishing for as opposed to last year what we had was a reduction plan. How can we, how can we start already be thinking about if we have more revenues than we thought we would have, who and how we prioritize that next spending plan? It's a very good question. I think it's twofold. I think number one, um, the fact that we're gonna come in probably somewhere around that $12.5 million projection and we're not seeing huge leaps. We need to make sure that we're prepared for that scenario, that revenues... you know, we've kinda gotten back to flat, so here's what we're looking at. Then I think secondly, as we, um, as we look forward, we know that we're gonna incur significant, uh, increases in line items that we didn't have this year. So we have collecting bargaining contracts, we have all the things that we've talked about in here, so we've gotta factor that in. But I think it is also fiscally responsible to put together that list, because as things improve, and if we are gonna be looking through, um, the- the windshield and not the rearview mirror, that we have that set aside to, uh, the presentation we had today. What's your priority? Have it in place, but understand how that gets implemented as revenue picks up or as we are able to borrow at lower rates. Okay. All right, thank you. Um, yeah, just re- how- how are you gonna work with your nonpr- your net profit in, as we're predicting forward? A- and maybe that's not a question right now based on that we're looking at these actuals, um, and I'll yield to the chair to decide that, but I'm just curious how you're gonna predict it. 'Cause it seems like we were able to kind of play one off the other before, do it based on previous years, but I don't know how net profits are being predicted now. Well, to- to- to try to confine the subject, um, globally, I- I actually have an undergraduate degree in history so I value history, um, and- and I feel that it should be taken into consideration. It is- it is, um, a predictor and economic cycles have, even though they don't replicate themselves, they have certain characteristics that are the same. And so we can learn from history to try to help us predict, because prediction is a guess. Mm-hmm. It's just another word for a guess and we have to make an educated guess- Mm-hmm. ... of what revenues are going to be. So we're looking at all of the trends on the national, but then distilling, trying to see the uniquenesses of the local economy to try to come up with what's unique about the local economy that's different from the national that would go into play for what that guess or that prediction will be, so. Okay. I- I haven't, I haven't done it yet, but, uh, I'm- I'm absorbing all the information and- and hoping to get one more piece before we have to put the final number together and, um, it- it's- it's part art and part science, but a lot more art than science. Okay. Well, thank you, and, uh, just, um, to tag onto that, you- you talked about that history's important. I do agree with you, history's important, but we are seeing a trend towards more local economy because of the change in the global economy and our relationship with- Yeah. And I don't know that that's happened before, so that's gonna be creating an entirely new history that we haven't foreseen and we've gotta figure out a way to factor that into our estimates. Actually, in the 1500s it was very prominent. 1500s. Okay. Thank you. Councilman Myers. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I guess I have a little different take on what happens if the revenue starts to, um, uptick- So first, now that we're starting to make some cuts, we know obviously that the quality of service level and programming is still important. Are we doing anything to kind of monitor that to hear, y- you know, do we get pushback or feedback from the taxpayers that we kind of went too far in this area, so we need to... W- what I'm kind of thinking about is code enforcement. Last year it was a big issue, we had some people retire. We didn't replace them because of, of deposits we have in place, but we heard from the citizens, "We need more code enforcement people out there." And so then we added those back in. Are, are we doing any kind of monitoring so at the end of this, uh, budget cycle, we'll be able to look and say, "Okay, we cut back in these areas, but we still managed to keep our service and our quality levels up to where we like them, and that maybe we can kind of hold the line for that line item, if you will, next year"? Th- the individual commissioners, along with their directors, Council Member Meyers, h- h- h- have those conversations on almost a weekly basis. And I, I can't state that they're being compiled somewhere, but I think part of this discussion process, and I know it's an agenda item f- for, to discuss council links today, but I think it's a critical aspect- Absolutely. ... of the budget process is understanding, okay, how did we gain our efficiencies like some of these companies have- Right. ... where we've done more with less and it actually worked and made sense and the service level remained the same, and where are we on life support? What are, what are the key areas, whether it would be, you know... And, and again, you know, the, the finance team isn't the sexy part of the, of the urban county government, we're behind the scenes, but, you know, are there audit-related issues? Are, are there things that we need to talk about? Right. Um, and so whether it's in front of the citizen where they actually see it or behind the scenes where we're being fiscally responsible, I think that that is an integral part of the budget process, and I would hope via just bringing the budget forward as well as the, the council links process or whatever is decided that process will be today, that that conversation will happen. So to answer your question, there's not a specific collection point, but we certainly are collecting the feedback in a... as part of the budget process, if that makes sense. It does make sense. Okay. And maybe if I could give it a name, if we, if we looked at sort of right-sizing government, that as we move through the process, if we learn that, like you said, we scaled back in an area, but service and quality levels still maintain what we wanted them to be, how can we just keep it at that level and then capture that efficiency moving forward? So can you, um, kind of help coordinate that into the plan? I absolutely will. Then also, the second part, um, i- is it okay for the government to pay down debt early without being penalized? And if there is a penalty for paying down debt early, does that cost savings outweigh the penalty? Well , that, that's a big question. I'll try to do it in your minute and 40 seconds, or I see the ch- chair, did you have something you wanted to say before I... That, that's my time instead of yours, so you can talk forever, it's just my understanding. Oh, okay. Okay. No, I was gonna say, that's gonna be one of the key things we look at in a debt management policy- Yes. ... as to what, what point spread we need to obtain in order to refund debt, 'cause there's a certain spread, 3% to 5%- Right. ... that you gotta hit or it's not worth it, so. That, that's right. So for example, we're looking at, at... We just did a refunding, you know, that we all av- that you all voted on and we put together, and, um, the overall savings of debt service was substantial, and obviously it was a great, uh, interest rate environment. So to answer that piece of the question, um, I, I, I agree with the chair, I think putting this debt management plan together is, is absolutely critical. And it's not to say that there isn't one sitting out there. I, I, I shouldn't have probably stated it the way I did, but a living, breathing process and document for all of us to be able to use, um, is, is critical. Um, the other part of your question just went out of my head, I'm sorry. Is there a penalty for it? So I realize that, that- It, it, it's dependent. ... just like if you refinance your home, there's a certain point that you have to get to where it's feasible- Right. ... and it makes sense. Yeah. But, um, beyond that, you could also have a mortgage that won't let you refinance- Right. No prepayment, right. ... the first... Right. So it depends on the individual issue as to whether there is a penalty or there isn't, whether we can repay early or not. And so again, back to this plan, part of the plan would be, let's list everything that we have, let's understand from a matrix standpoint where we have opportunities, and that's what we do. That's what Bill, myself, and the team do. We are looking for those opportunities. We have, you know, the big spreadsheets out and we're working with the underwriters to see where we have those opportunities in this low interest rate environment and where it makes sense, because obviously there are costs, right? You know, you have underwriting costs and legal costs, et cetera. But I think that that needs to become more formalized within the plan that you're talking about. Right, and then available for us to see and understand, and as we issue bonds, then we can, can have an idea of which type of bond we're issuing and whether- Exactly. ... whether there'll be a, a repay penalty or not. And, and the sources of revenue to repay that bond, so it'll- Right. ... it'll make it easier for council to understand. Right. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Anyone else on the revenue discussion? Any other council members? Okay. I have one request, I guess, or, or question. On the final page of your highlights, the actual budget and variance categories- Yes. ... is that budget number the adjusted number you're comparing it to, or the council's adopted budget? That's the adopted budget, and, and we'll label that adopted budget so that it won't- If you do that, that would- There won't be a miscan- And also, can you give us a total expense year to date, how much our total expenses are? Sure. As compared to budget. Because I def- I see personal and operating, but we have other expenses out there besides those two, to get ou- another net number. I think if we add the th- yeah, we can add it at the bottom. That's not a problem. But if they add those three together, that's more or less without the transfers. W- yeah, the- the key here is we have transfers in, transfers out and we're gonna have to pull those out in order to give you total, that category- Yeah. ... of total expense. But it can be done. Yeah, it's not a problem to do that. Yeah, because- because that would also include any debt service savings that we realize too, right? Mm-hmm. And so that- that's important. Yeah, well, the debt service savings actually come in other category. When it says other categories, there are debt service savings in there. So it'll be important to monitor that. In fact, we may even wanna pull out debt service as a separate line item so that we can track it as a- a committee. I think that that would be a good idea. Very good, thank you. Thank you. Okay, next on our agenda item is the discussion of the Lexington Public Libraries 2000- or Libraries 2010 Budget. Councilman Meyers had placed this into committee a couple months ago. Uh, coun- uh, committee members, we did receive copies of the library budget, which were available on the council floor. It's over a hundred something pages t- of- of reading. Uh, I know a couple of us have taken time to read through it. I'm gonna turn it over to Councilman Meyers as to how we- he would like to proceed on this issue. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I- I think that, I- I've been putting some things together, um, to pass out to the committee. We didn't invite the library here today, and I think that probably that's- we need to do that. And so maybe if today we could take some time to see if there are other committee members that have some questions that they'd like to have answered or some areas of discussion that they want to get into, then we can compile that and then invite them here and then give them, uh, an opportunity to prepare for that discussion. So with this being in- in this committee, I assume you just wanna focus on the revenues and expenses and budget reports because we also, Councilmember Lane, also obtained the audit report as well, the audited budget from last year. So that's also important to have other than a projected budget. I think it'd be great to add both of those in. So you just want to have them here to answer questions in regards to their numbers and... That and I think- I just wanna know what to explain to them what they're gonna be answering. I think if you could give me maybe another day to, um, maybe add to that. But definitely wanna give them enough time to- to be ready and prepared. Okay. Councilmember James. Thank you, Chair. Sorry, trying to stuff a chip down my throat. Sorry. Um, Councilmember Meyers, I just wonder if- if you could, once again, I know you've explained it before, um, but I've had a couple constituents ask, just for clarification of what's the- what's the reasoning and intent of hearing about the library's budget specifically in this format? What is- what is your reasoning and intent for wanting to hear about it? Sure, that's a great question. And really it goes down to what we just got to discuss in here today. And that is that we have limited opportunities to bring revenue into the government. We have obligations that we have to take care of. And most things in our government, um, the council has had a say in what funding goes to that different category. The library is one that we haven't had that opportunity. And so at a time when the administration has asked all the outside agencies to give back or in a case of if it's a dedicated fund like this, not receive everything that the legislature has provided for them, um, they've opted not to do that. And so there are a lot of things that go along with that. And so I would like to know from them, um, why that is. But I also want to look at, you know, if we look at, um, browning out fire stations one day a week, I've not talked to anybody that would rather brown out a- a fire station one day a week than a library one day a week. And so I think there are a lot of things that- that can be discussed and also bring some clarity to exactly what the law does say and require because there's been some discussion that although the law requires that they get that five cents, that it's not that set in stone and that there are some other things that surround that and there's also some other- other details in how they have to receive that or how they can receive that. So... And there's also provisions in there that if the library decided that, I think there's two different boards, that if they decided that they could give back some of that money or not receive all of that funding, that they can do that well within that statute. And I think that's something that's been kind of misreported that we have to go back to the state to change that, and it's not- it's not necessarily that way. So what I could do is bring everything out on the table and take a look at that, and as we look at our limited am- ability to bring funding into the government, um, maybe this is something that we need to look at changing the way we bring that money in and- and distribute that money out. In response, is there a place online where citizens can go and access all the same information in one group, um, as we will have available to us in- in various formats? So is there one pl- i- do you know if it, like if on the library's website, if they have their state statute that, um, that guides them, i- is all of that in a one-stop shop for our citizens or is that something that we could compile- I have no idea. ... for our citizens? Okay. I mean, they may have that on their- on their website. I don't know why they would, but- But it may be on there. So you just, you have it because you've gath- you've taken the time to gather all of this knowledge. Yeah. But it's not in one place where you can just refer back. The state statutes, you can go to the state website and get that information. I mean, there's a lot of places you can get that information. Okay. I was just getting, you know, just for citizens that are wanting to know, um, because I, I mean I can share with them everything that I get, but on a more comprehensive level if it was something just, you know, to put out there and maybe that's something that ... I don't know if we'd be willing to do that, as this committee, to put it on our website, everything that we're using for reference to make our decisions about, um, what's coming forward. One thing I will do for next meeting is put the l- the statute in our agenda packet which will be on the website. So, um, can I see Logan Askew here, our Commissioner of Law. I think you've done the research on the statutes governing the revenues with me. You have all that information that- I do- ... you can, uh- ... and I have forwarded that information to Council Member Meyers and Council Member Beard, and I'll be happy to forward it to everybody else. If you would. There's a chronology with lawsuits and statutes and things like that, that will be helpful. If you can g- give the cou- uh, Jerry Suthers, he can get it- Sure. ... to all of us. Absolutely. That'd be great. Any other questions for Council Member Meyers on this issue? I d- I did have one question for the administration, maybe Commissioner Rumpkey can answer this. Did we make a request to the library through budget reductions, um, through our budget reduction plan, um, to withhold some of the money to help us offset our, our 12 and a half million dollar deficit? Yes. And they did receive that request? Yes. Did they agree to that request? No. Okay. And do you know how much that request was for? Off the top of your head. I know I'm putting you on the spot. I'm just trying to prepare for next meeting. 250, but I can get that, um, back to you. I've got it back in my files. 250,000? I think so. Okay. If you could- But don't hold me to that. I'll, I'll go back and verify that. Okay. Council Member James. Did they respond at all, Commissioner? They told us no. Yes. With no explanation? Um, you know, did, did they respond to you? There is a letter, there is a letter to the mayor from the chairman of the board. The mayor actually made a presentation at a board meeting, and then there was a written response back from the library and I'll be happy to share that with you as well. I'll send that, the materials down to Jerry. Please, for our packet. Thank you so much. Anything else on those, the library board issues? So we'll have this on next month's agenda for full discussion. Anything else? Okay. The last item on our agenda, uh, as we approach budgeting times, um, we've set the budget, uh, the mayor's budget schedule was sent out today. All council members should have a copy of, uh, his hearings that he'll be conducting with his in- uh, various departments. Uh, this discussion is centered around how the council, uh, links will be established for the 2010 budget process. And I'll simply open the floor up to Council Member James. If you have some comments before we talk about that discussion or lead us in this discussion. I was trying to think back what was on my mind when I- ... when I put it in committee. Um- Well, I- But I can say overall, just in general, um, that, um, we, our, the links tend, the links tend to respond, um, to the mayor's budget, um, as we're meeting with the different divisions of government. And what w- what we ended up seeing at least on, I was the chair of, of my link and what I ended up seeing is when the council, or when the budget management reduction, I forgot what the terminology is that's being used, hold on. Expense management plan was brought forward. Um, many of the things that council had added in after our discussions with the divisions in our council links were the, were the things eliminated or proposed to eliminate. I don't know how we get around that. I mean, how do we make the things that we are as a link proposing just as important as what the administration is proposing? Um, and I'm not sure how to do that, um, but I'd like ... We need some kind of consistency and what I thought is maybe a shared agreement. You know, we heard Dr. Hackbart talk about there's gotta be agreement and vision and mission as you're moving forward and I ... I was thinking something like a council retreat, um, where we could talk about what are our priorities as a group and that way when we go into our links, we at least know that we are looking to have employment at a certain level or have computer software as our priority or have, um, a- anything as our priority. We don't seem to have a consistent priority within our council links. So- Yeah. ... that's kind of my suggestion. So, uh, would the committee be, uh, uh, want to make a recommendation for the full council to have a retreat in the next couple weeks to sit down and formulate some of these ideas as we've, so we can form our links? And, because y- you know, the links may want to attend these hearings, it may or may not be advantageous to do that, uh, sooner rather than later because, uh, we're 30 days out, well, six weeks out from the mayor actually presenting his budget to us. So, um, you know, time is ... I know we got a lot going on, but we may want to plan that, Vice Mayor, if you can set up a retreat sometime in the next two to three weeks on a Friday or Monday afternoon. Right. Thank you. Like date and- Uh, if you could have Maureen send out some date- dates. ... very soon. Th- there's nothing on our calendar. And then in the meantime, the council links normally have been set up four d- uh, five different links of three council members. Do we want to make adjustments to any of the categories of the links? Do we feel the categories are pretty evenly distributed and the workload's distributed evenly? I mean, a- as Commissioner Rumpkin and I were talking yesterday, um, I'm not sure how much we're gonna be able to alter any type of budget. I think the discussion will come in as what doesn't get funded moreso than what we'll be able to, given the state of our economy. So, uh- ... mm, w-we'll have a pretty tough time this year looking at every line item. I think, hopefully, the administration will propose some type of zero-based budgeting process going forward, and we'll be able to look a little closer to individual budgets that way. It can be very helpful. Oh. Councilman Meyers and Councilman James. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. I- I guess, Councilman James, my question would be what the purpose of this retreat would be because, to me, this goes back to the same discussion we had during the budget process last year, which was, that I brought up, you know, what reasonable expectation does the council have that once we pass a budget, that what we put in the budget is followed? And the answer is that the administration doesn't have to follow that, and so I- I'm not sure, and- and that's not a- a negative against this particular mayor or anybody in the administration. Um, I guess my question is if we have this retreat, that doesn't change. And so- Uh- ... I'm not sure that the value of having a retreat to discuss w- I guess, at the end of the day, what is it that you're looking for after the retreat's over? Sure. Um, actually I think the retreat is probably more of what I'm looking for than- than the link process itself, because what I think can happen is similar to what happens in other communities. Most other communities, the council and the executive branch work together on a budget, and by the time that budget is presented, it is pretty much a shared, um, agreement, um, between both, um, entities, um, because we should be on one accord. So the thought process from the retreat would be for us to come up with almost a consent agenda of what are our priorities. Um, we could even hand a document of our brainstorming, and I'm sure if we have a retreat, the executive branch will be there, um, but we could even have a document that we can forward to the administration to say, "These are some things that we would like to see included in the- in the proposed budget, um, that would make our work a little bit more streamlined with one another." And it- it's kind of getting us to that, so that when we're looking at the budget that we see that there's something in there about the things that we as a council, um, have agreed upon. And it kind of, I mean, it takes away some of the nitpicking that we have to do during the links. We can get focused on one particular thing during that links process and totally be, I mean, like all those weeks are gone that quickly when you're focusing on that one particular issue, whether it's employee numbers or, um, or outside consultants or whatever. So I think this is a step towards agreement of council, dispersing that to the links to make sure that those things are covered through the links, but also to be able to hand that over to the administration to sh- to say, "We'd like to work on this budget together, um, because we know that it is a tough time, and we represent each particular district, and we know the priorities of our particular districts, and we can kind of come together, um, and share interests together, um, in a document." Sounds dreamy, maybe it won't work. For my- Councilman Meyers. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So- so then the- the retreat is for basically the council to put together sort of a budgetary legislative agenda. Is that... Because the charter outlines the fact that the mayor puts together a budget and then brings that to the council, so I like the spirit of being able to work together with them, but the charter gives them the purview of putting together the budget and then bringing it to us, so I don't see that changing. But I guess what you're saying is then that the council will put together a legislative agenda around the budget and then I guess give that to the mayor and the administration in hopes that they'll take that into consideration as they form the budget, or... Can I respond, Chair, or do you have others to speak? Can I respond to him? We have, uh, one more beside yourself, so... Okay. Councilman Blues. I gather what the- the idea really would be here is that the council would, by this, uh, by having a retreat, would- would be able to possibly form some kind of global perspective on the budget, just as the administration does, whereas our link mechanism, uh, almost by its very nature causes us to approach the- the- the budget in fragments, and, uh, and- and really look at, you know, just, you know, one part of the elephant. So that if- if, uh, if- if the idea here is to- is to give each individual link some sense of the context in which that small committee is working, I think it, uh, I think it's worth a try. Councilman James. Um, just to respond. Thank you, Councilman Blues, for the support on that. I think that's exactly the intention that I'm thinking of, is to see that holistic view because you do see it in the part, and we almost own our little part of the link as we go through that. In response to the Councilmember Meyers, you're absolutely right. The charter outlines that the administration's responsible for handing down the budget, and that's particular to dollar amounts, and what I'm not talking about that we as a link decide that we want to spend a million dollars on trails, or we want to spend this much... But just to talk about holistically what's going on in our districts, what- what parallels up to one another, what kind of comprehensive things can we do. We had a- we had a partner agency meeting today about development. That's a key conversation that needs to happen between all districts to figure out where, what's going on as far as pl-planning, development, commercial, um, that kind of thing in our districts. We need to have that in- Conversation outside of the context of being absorbed into the funding or PSAs and contracts, but as a representative government, um, just becoming one unit, which I think we have power in our unit of being council that through the links process, as Council Member Blues has pointed out, gets fragmented, um, as soon as we start to divide. Yeah, and if I, I'll add to that, Council Member James, one other goal of the retreat or workshop, whatever you wanna call it, could be to maybe get on the same page in terms of what lengths we'll be asking the administration during the process, how we're gonna report out so it's all a little more uniform.' Because some lakes in the past, um, it's been very hard to understand. We tried to do it a little bit last year and I think we made some progress about how we're reporting now in terms of the format, so we all kind of stay in the same frame. So that might be a good discussion to have, too. Um, and, again, what we're going to be looking for in each link could be helpful, you know, if there's an issue in a district, that link can help address some of that. Is anyone, is anyone opposed to that idea? Setting up a workshop or retreat? You -- we can call it what you want. Or CAL, it can be a CAL meeting. Right, that needs to be a topic in the next three weeks. Maybe we can do it at the next CAL on March ninth? We've already done. There's a lot to do today. But we've got a lot to do yet. Well, the ideas out there- Something else. .... we need to work on. May be. I just sent Rebecca an Email saying coordinate with you only if you want. If, if it's a retreat, I mean, it's .... Okay. yeah. What's your perception of the difference between what you're talking about with the retreat and a committee of the whole or a meaning to do this? Do we need to go away and have food? I don't think so. Not that I know food- Not that I know food today. ... a meeting setting. W- is that why- Yeah. Council Member James? I'm just thinking out loud. Look, I guess the reason I said "retreat" is because it's usually four hours. When we do a retreat, we usually have a half a day and I really think that this is something that it doesn't need to be, "okay, we gotta hurry up and finish 'cause we have another meeting in 15 minutes." And because I think this is something that deserves, um, as, as many of the things that we hear, it deserves some time. And we don't have, we don't have that kind of relaxed, long period of time to get together as council members except for a retreat. Very good. Anything else on this topic? W- well, as we've done in the past, I'll try to keep one council member at least on each link so there is some continuity from last year's budget link. If any council members have any desires one way or another about what link that they'd like to volunteer to serve on, please let me know. Uh, and I'll ask the whole council the same thing next Tuesday and we'll get these formed, so you can get to these hearings as well. Anything else on our agenda today that needs to be addressed? Council Member Gordon? I was just gonna move to adjourn. Let me make sure- If there isn't anything else. Well, next meeting, we already have obviously our revenue discussions. We'll also have the business occupational licensing fee discussion. Um, this item has been in committee for, for some time now. We'll, we'll need to make decision one way or another and, and move forward on that. We'll do the library discussion as well as bring back a sample debt management policy to starting chewing on. So those are the four items that'll be on next months agenda. And I had some, the calendar for the, uh- And then the last is the calendar for the budget meetings that we'll need to adopt, uh, the meeting schedules for the CALs and the links. Anything else for next meeting? Okay, Counselor Gordon? I move we adjourn. All in favor say "aye." All: Aye. We're adjourned. Thank you all. Got to get you into my life. Got to get you into my life. Got to get you in, got to get you into my life. My life. Got to get you into my life. Got to get you into my life. Got to get you into my life. Got to get you in, got to get you in, got to get you in, got to get you in, into my life. Got to get you into my life. Got to get you in, got to get you in, got to get you in, got to get you in, into my life. Hmm-mm. What goes up must come down. Spinnin' wheel got to go round. Talking 'bout your troubles, it's a crying sin. Ride a painted pony, let the spinnin' wheel spin. You got no money, you, you got no home. Spinning wheels all alone. Talkin' 'about your troubles and you, you never learn. Ride a painted pony, let the spinning wheel turn. Did your father ever live you wrong? Sittin' around cryin', tellin' lies. Look what you've become. He went to jail, she lost her job. Now you feel bad 'cause you ain't leaving until he gets his payday. Some old fish stuck in a bottle that won't flop. Lucky for you, lucky for me, lucky for everybody. In case you're feeling lonely. Ooh-ooh-ooh. Don't forget to drink your medicine. Put a smile upon your faces. See somebody every day. Keep yourself alive. Ain't nothing making sense. Nobody cares. Everybody wants a friend. Somebody lend a hand. Come along buddy dig in sand. Hey hey hey. Feel alright. Gotta catch you in- Gotta catch you in- Gotta get you in- Gotta get you in- Gotta get you in- Gotta get you in- Getting outta line. Two steps ahead, keeping pace. Three days later running late. Four hours sleep didn't waste. Five years learning everyday. Six friends turning grey. Seven rights aren't always right. Eight times when love hasn't died. Nine lives left to recapture. Ten friend showing up dead. Eleven dollars owing money. Twelve miles to your funerals bed. Thirteen, thirteen is often sad. Find a reflecting sign. Just let it shine within your mind. And show you the colors that are reeeeaaaalll. Someone is waiting just for you. Spinning wheel, spinning true. Drop all your troubles by the riverside. Catch a painted pony on the spinning wheel ride. Ha! Someone's waiting just for you. Spinning wheel, spinning true. Drop all your troubles by the riverside. Ride a painted pony, let the spinning wheel fly. Oooooh, yeeeeah. You are my love and my life. And you are my inspiration. Just you and me. Simple and free. Baby, you're everything I've ever dreamed of. Yeeeeeaaah. Give me your own special smile. Promise you'll never leave me. Just you and me. Simple and free. Life is so easy when you're beside me. Oooh, girl. Come hold me close. Yeah, never release me. Oooh, baby, don't release me. Open your arms, let my love in. Let me in, let me in. Love me tonight. Yeah. Love me forever. And ever. No, I can't forget you. Just you and me to carry on. Simple and free, my lovely. Two flow as one as loves be born. Loving you girl is so damned easy. Yeah, yeah. You are my love and my life. You are my inspiration. Just you and me. Simple and free. Ooooh, baby, you're everything I've ever dreamed of. Yeah, yeah. Ooooo, yeah. Ooooo. Got a call from an old friend, we used to be real close. Said he couldn't go on the American way. Closed the shop, sold the house, bought a ticket to the west coast. Now he gives them a stand-up routine in LA. I don't want you to tell me it's time to come home. I don't care what you say anymore, this is my life. Go ahead with your own life, leave me alone. I never said you had to offer me a second chance. I never said you had to. I never said I was a victim of circumstance. I still belong, don't get me wrong. And you can speak your mind, but not on my time. They will tell you you can't sleep alone in a strange place. Then they'll tell you you can't sleep with somebody else. Ah, but sooner or later you sleep in your own space. Either way it's okay, you wake up with yourself. I don't need you to worry for me 'cause I'm all right. I don't want you to tell me it's time to come home. I don't care what you say anymore, this is my life. Go ahead with your own life, leave me alone. I never said you had to offer me a second chance. I never said you had to. I never said I was a victim of circumstance. I still belong, don't get me wrong. And you can speak your mind, but not on my time. I don't care what you say anymore, this is my life. Go ahead with your own life, leave me alone. Keep it to yourself, it's my life. Keep it to yourself, it's my life. Keep it to yourself, it's my life. She saw the look in his eyes. And she knew better, he wanted her tonight. And it was now or never. He made her feel so sad. Oh, oh, oh. Jamie's crying. Oh, oh, oh. Jamie's crying. Now Jamie wouldn't say all right. She knew he'd forget her. And so they said goodnight. Oh, and now he's gone forever. She wants to send him a letter. Ah, yeah, yeah. Ah, just to try to make herself feel better. He said, "Gimme, gimme a call sometime." But she knows what that'll get her. Oh, oh, oh. Jamie's crying. Oh, oh, oh. Jamie's crying. Now Jamie's been in love before. And she knows what love is for. It should mean, a little, a little more. Than one night stands. Whoo! She wants to send him a letter. Ah, yeah, yeah. Just to try to make herself feel better. He said, "Gimme, gimme a call sometime." But she knows what that'll get her. Oh, oh, oh. Jamie's crying. Oh, oh, oh. Jamie's crying. Oh, oh, oh. Jamie's crying. Oh, oh, oh. Jamie's crying. Oh, oh, oh. Jamie's crying. Saturday night is the loneliest night of the week. Cause that's the night that my sweetie and I used to dance cheek to cheek. I don't mind Sunday night at all. Cause that's the night friends come to call. And Monday to Friday go fast, and another week is past. But Saturday night is the loneliest night of the week. I sing the song that I sang for the memories I usually seek. Until I hear you at the door, until you're in my arms once more. Saturday night is the loneliest night of the week. Hmm, Saturday night is the loneliest night of the week. I sing the song that I sang for the memories I usually seek. Until I hear you at that door, until you're in my arms once more. Saturday night is the loneliest night of the week. Until I hear you at the door, until you're in my arms once more. Saturday night is the loneliest night of the week. This is a song about a couple of adult people who have spent, oh, quite a long time together, till one day one of them gets restless and decides to leave. Whether it's the man or woman who left is unimportant, it's a breakup. And it's a lovely marriage of words and music written by Stephen Sondheim. Isn't it rich? Are we a pair? Me here at last on the ground. And you in mid-air. Send in the clowns. Isn't it bliss? Don't you approve? One who keeps tearing around. And one who can't move. But where are the clowns? Send in the clowns. Just when I stopped opening doors, finally finding the one that I wanted was yours. Making my entrance again with my usual flair, sure of my lines. Nobody's there. Don't you love the farce? My fault, I fear. I thought that you'd want what I want. Sorry, my dear. But where are the clowns? Send in the clowns. Don't bother to close your eyes.