One one distinction to keep in mind throughout, the number of positions identified for elimination does not establish the number of employees who will ultimately leave city employment.

the difference is that when we did the initial recommended budget, we put in um to create a balanced budget kind of placeholders in the individual positions, which align with the total amount that was reduced to the department. So, in the proposed budget kind of the binding proposal is the recommended reduced amount in dollars to that department. And so, after going through the exercise with business justifications, looking at positions, coming up with this final list, this is now to manage within budget the final number of FTEs that will be reduced.

very specifically, when you do an early retirement program, first of all, it doesn't usually save money in the short term. It also um it we have no ability to discuss with the employees, and so you can lose a lot of knowledge out of the organization very quickly, knowledge and experience. And that is uh can be a risk to to the organization as well, that you might you know, you might have in one department uh 30% eligible employees for retirement, and in another department, you have hardly any, and you end up having a disparate effect on a department and the knowledge base of the city, and really can't have any um ability to control for that.

increasingly our revenues are not matching up with our costs even as we look to the long-term forecast the next 3 to 5 years. And so I guess it's kind of a little bit the elephant in the room is we're really focused on the 2027 budget and adjacently of the 2028, um but there's real concern for me as a council member as I look forward to the upcoming years and see that the savings if we continue in this trajectory will be um significantly um below our savings. And so you know, with revenue driving at 3.5% and our costs conservatively estimated um as levy increases over the next you know, the levy increase and the cost estimates I think are both conservative. So I guess we haven't had a presentation about the long-term forecast for the next 2 to 5 years, 3 to 5 years and I'm really focused on 2027. We all are, but I guess I'm raising the question when I I think that's an appropriate educational piece that we're missing in light of these discussions.