these years. >> Sitting in my basement. >> You're good. >> Just give one more minute. 6:00 open up the meeting. Today is August 24th, 2026. Please join me for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Mr. Counc, please. >> Mayor D, >> here. >> Council member Brian >> here. >> Council member Glazer >> here. Council member Maro >> here, Councilman Swenson >> here, >> financial consultant Jerger >> here, >> Chief Miller >> here, >> and Isaac Schultz from public works along with myself. >> That's complete. >> Thank you. Um, so for the agenda, we have two items that were set on the tables next to us. One was for the fire department and one was for uh the public works side. Um, so I'd like to add those two in as like 4.2 and 4.3 if the council is good with that. So before we get in um and we can make sure there are questions to these two gentlemen that are that be okay make a motion to approve the agenda as amended. >> Second any further discussion hearing none move to vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. All right. So, next thing is we'll have public forum. Anybody sign up for the public forum tonight? >> [clears throat] >> No. [laughter] >> So the public forum is an opportunity for anybody in the audience or public that would like to take three minutes and speak to the council. >> Okay. [laughter] All right. So no no public forum tonight. We will move on. All right. So the first one is the uh number three the approval of resolution adopting a data practices. Um Miss Johnson I'll turn it over to you to fill in the details of what we were missing last time. >> Yes. So last time we had a question as to what ID we would need. Um and actually I did not have the answer. So there are two policies. One is for if just someone in the public is looking for information they don't have to provide an ID. But if a past employee or somebody is asking for personal information that could contain their social security number, their phone number, something like that, they do have to provide ID and it could be a driver's license. It could be their passport. Could be something like that. So, Attorney Ruthie just said, "Nope, it's required by law. We have to have both of these. We are actually supposed to have it done by August 1st." So, um, as of today, I've not ever seen anybody or I've not had anybody ever asked for their own personal file. >> So, for clarification, page eight is the one that you don't need any ID. Is that correct? >> Yeah. The for public data, it's you don't need ID. It's the one that is I'm sorry the one that is asking for >> themselves from um >> page 15. >> Page 15 is is for residents or business or anyone that wants to request information from the city. They do not need an ID for that. If they don't provide an ID and the staff has questions on the information they're asking for and can't get back to them, then that's difficult to respond to the second document that the other one >> page [clears throat] was 89. >> Yeah, that's on page 15. The other is the data subjects. And so if myself as an employee want to receive the information that the city has in on file for me during my employment and this is the form I would send and I have to provide documentation identification that says it's me and both of these are required by the state really don't have option to reject I dealt with this in my employment. >> Sorry, any council members got any questions? Just for clarification, Mr. Mayor. So, data practice um policy for data subjects is pages 4 through nine which includes requesting IDA and um data access policy for the general public is 10 through 15. Right. Any further questions? Would like to make a motion on this one? >> Mr. Mayor, I move approval of the resolution adopting the data practices policies as required statute. I'll >> second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, we move to vote. All those in favor say I. >> I oppose. Motion carries. All right. the memo from uh the city clerk. So, Miss Johnson, it's back to you again. >> So, pretty much the memo answered the questions from the meeting I wasn't at. >> Um I didn't have anybody respond back to me with more information needed. Um so, I guess I'll just if there are any questions on it. >> Any questions at all? >> Mr. Mayor, council member. >> Um I'm just curious. Did we ask Ina County how Rams what Ramsay did to get the park equipment? >> I do not know that Dia did that, but he pretty much said that they're looking for a bunch because much much of their equipment has is at end of life. So, I don't know when Ramsay got it, but it didn't sound like they got it from him. >> He said they don't give it away. They >> they bought it from the county. I know that much because I talked to council members over there. So, I don't know if Mr. Moroski knows or >> I just you know Anders or Mr. Orson right >> told Dia that they don't sell it. >> Okay. So I'm just curious about how they got it. So >> I Yeah, I can call Ramsay and ask them. >> Yeah, because I'm just going they got it from the county somehow. Whether they had to get it and refurbish it or they just did a got it for a steal or you know I be curious. And if the county is buying stuff, do you do we is there a possibility if we do have to replace it to get a deal by buying it with the county? >> That's a good question. >> I'm going to Can I let um Isaac speak to this because he did a bunch of research on those parts. >> I Mr. Mayor, I don't know that specific answer that council member Bryan asked, uh, but I can certainly find out, it would seem logical that there may be a, >> you know, group >> rate, >> hopefully a volume discount, >> the in conversations with the Minnesota supplier for the game time playgrounds that [clears throat] we have at both of our parks, um, replacement parts are available. um the range in that,000 to $3,000 range. And then there's obviously the accessory components that go with installing in those. Um couple of the people that that called on our area were out this past week. So I finally got some answers today um regarding regarding that. They were going to look at they were going to look at what options we have because of the age of our playground. both are in that 20 year plus. Um, so they're going to get back to us with with what we can. We have two broken components currently, a rock climbing wall and a slide that just failed last week. It's a small slide on the Memorial Park playground. So, they were going to get us some options in regards to what that would be. >> Can you also ask when we touch base with them, what is what is the normal equipment like for a playground? I did ask that today, Mr. Mayor. Um, and he said it it they don't have a specific lifespan in their equipment from a from a policy standpoint because of the use variables and uh the regions because they're sold globally. Um so they they don't have a specific amount of time because there are so many variables but both of ours playgrounds are certainly I would think nearing end of life based on their installation date. >> Go ahead. any any equipment we would have purchased would go through the state contract and I >> there's no volume discont there anything else on >> not unless there were any other questions Um in regards to so I have question ask >> proceed to uh holding pond maintenance is >> can either Eric or Isaac elaborate on the holding ponds that were required to maintain where they are how many we have >> question yeah I don't have an exact number on the funds We are supposed to be maintaining our right away around the ponds. Um, as far as tree brush removal and things, um, that has never really been done much since I've been here. So, the issue that the city is going to run into now is some of the trees are going to be 50 ft tall and people like trees. So who who who regulates this as far as our our requirement to do the maintenance? >> As far as I was aware, it is a a state requirement, but I I can't answer that for 100%. I know Shane Nelson from Hawinson Anderson has stressed about it over the years um periodically. Um, and is there a reason that this this is being brought up now? Does somebody Is there complaints or >> um because I just became aware of it with Shane in talking with Shane? I didn't know that we are supposed to be 100% maintaining those and keeping them clear so they don't dry up and get too water get into them. >> M Mr. Mayor. [clears throat] Well, I I think there's a little bit more discussion because the question that I would have is um in order for the council to be fully aware, I think it would be beneficial to know what we have as far as the ponds and where they're located and what the extent and the potential cost to the taxpayers is to get this caught up if it has if that has to be done. >> And we have not done any kind of investigation on that at all. I just put it in here as to let you guys know that there's something else out there that we haven't been doing that we need to. We can certainly get into that. Um but I would guess it'll be something that a project they can do over the winter time with Shane. >> Yes, sir. Uh, Council Member Closer, the pretty to to try to answer your question regarding the amount of ponds. Anytime that that a property is subdivided and and improved through that through that development process, there's runoff ponds that are put in. And it's my understanding after conversations this year that that those all become city responsibility. Part of that conversation happened with the um ponds that are going in on Boss Street. Those those ponds that are >> that are being put in for for water runoff and and silk control uh will now be a city responsibility to to maintain. The main place that that we learned about this was the initial uh MS4 participation that we aren't a part of, but the runoff requirements for maintenance of those of those retention ponds is still there regardless of our our participation in MS4. >> We were in it was for when the plans got dropped up, right? Yeah. >> So, yeah, there there is a significant amount of retention ponds in in our community. So typically in plan developments, >> correct? >> Planned development. And then in addition to some of our roadways, even though it's a county road, those ponds are now they are not a county maintained runoff. Those will be from a city maintained runoff. >> You learned in Boston Street project that we were going to own the and there's two ponds that come out of that. >> Three just on the Boston Street project. But your take it seems like we're going like even a step further. So I agree with council member Blazer. We got to find out what what is the requirement? How many do we have? But the second piece is what is a requirement? What are we supposed to do? Because if it's on private property from a water retention standpoint, I can't imagine from a development standpoint if it ties to roads, it would make sense like the Boston project. >> So I think we definitely got some digging in to do to find out what what we're responsible for. Okay, I will be back. >> That's the first item was in Boston last year when they said, "Hey, we're going to own these even though it's a county project." So, we knew we had some responsibility, but to the greater part, I don't know what that requirement is. Any other questions on No Street? >> Yes. >> Go ahead. Did Did we I know in the past we've gotten signs like this printed by the county. Are they still able to print county or where did these quotes come from? >> Uh no, they don't do that for us anymore and we get them from fast. >> Not normally, but we were getting was getting a few quotes from a couple different places. One was fast. >> Yeah. And then I >> we have personally with the city for basically since I've been employed have fur at Anderson Roseville maybe here in Minnesota. Um, when we did a a sign comparison pricing this spring between a couple of them, Earl Anderson was still price for what signs would be proposed for [clears throat] the season purchasing. I don't know if it was stated already, but wasn't there some conversation about this a while back where the county was having a hard enough time keeping up on all the things that all the signs that they need to do? >> Yeah. When we had called last year or the year before, I don't recall. >> They said they didn't. >> Yeah. They only like they did the population signs and I know they did our zoning signs in years past. I know they still do. We even paid for them to do it cheaper. Just a >> thought to Mr. Manson. So are they >> are they also able to do speed limit signs or are they >> they can do about anything. Okay. Um, obviously some of the more common things are already kind of in their system, but otherwise like for any of our word name signs, street sign names, [clears throat] they have to design it and then they email it to you for your approval on spelling correctly or oh, you want something abbreviated or whatnot. And then you sign off on it and then send it back to them before they will even print them or make them design them and make them >> right >> to the council member Brian's [clears throat] discussion on the city of Ramsey um for county. We also tried it once I had shard company [clears throat] thought we could get their assistance. So that's and it was a previous staff that you have a question on street signs because we got two different cost. for just reviewing this. Uh talks about $55 signs. Speed limit signs. You have them on here for at the bottom of of road signs. You have $43 if you purchase 20 or more. Um but it doesn't include shipping from North Dakota. Is that where Earl has his signs made? >> No, that's the that's the fast signs. So they charge shipping. Earl Anderson, I don't know how to explain it exactly, but like this shipment or this purchase that we did earlier this spring, we actually had to go down and pick them up because we had such a large quantity of them. And we also had ordered 25 posts and they don't ship those. So, we just picked everything up and there was no shipping charge. And I I don't believe they proposed a shipping fee. Um at least this spring they didn't because of the posts we decided to go down. >> Would make sense makes sense to pick them up with a limited shipping cost. [clears throat] Go >> ahead. A little bit more about street signs, specifically speed limit signs. I could be very wrong about this, but we've had conversations where we've asked about setting our own our own speed limits on city own city-owned streets and I was under the impression until this memo that we couldn't do that. >> Um so was I sir we were all under even um >> I was too. Eric, we were talking to um today actually I got an email from the county wanting us to verify what our speed limits are. And uh quite frankly, I was a little surprised to see what I saw because there's only two roads that are 55 miles an hour. Otherwise, everything should be 30, 35 or 40. And we don't have sign or we have a few signs up from the but the deputies have asked us to get signs up and there's supposed to be one on each end of a road >> because if it's not posted it's automatically >> correct >> and you know I'm not advocating for going on to every city home road and dropping the speed limits but is there some type has Anderson ever ever done any type of study that involved lowering speed limits on minimum maintain roads to have the pest control >> according to the map that we have there that's already been done. We just don't have them posted. >> So there's only two roads. Old Viking, the west side and Tiger [clears throat] were the only ones that were at 55. Everything else was at 30, 35 or 40. So, we we need to be putting out some type of report as to what roads in the city are supposed to be and do we need to is the city obligated? Should we be having some type of hearing or something like that to notify residents that roads are going to now be posted? >> Well, yeah. And Deputy U Jacobson is going to go around on Wednesday on this shift and check the roads for us to tell us which ones have signs and which ones don't. the plan residents reach out and say that they would love for people to slow down. Um, >> Mr. Mayor, >> but I've not seen a study on this. So, I would So, if we could share it with the council, I think it' be super helpful. I >> I just want to make a a clarification that I am not aware of any minimum maintenance roads that now owns. We have gravel roads. >> Gravel road. I stand correct, >> Mr. [clears throat] Go ahead, please. >> One of the things I remember from previous conversations is and Shane always work um cautioned us is that we could do a study on the road and MDOT could increase the speed limit on that road. Just doing a study doesn't equate to reducing the speed limit. That's just typically the reason you're doing a study is you [clears throat] want the speed limit to go down. But doctor determined that it should go on. So there was always a progressive >> first of all we have to share the data or information we have on what study was done so we can review it. Um, and then I think it's a discussion form we can put on on a council meeting coming up. >> And I don't believe we actually did a study. I I don't remember if we did or not, but how did they with how do they select speed limits if there's no >> Well, the street limits that are there now are from township days. >> We've not in the count since I've been on the council, we've not changed the speed limit on any street. There's been many requests to do it and that's where the conversation with Shane the engineer saying you can request a speed limit study but you take the risk of a 40 going to 55 or whatever that's just that was always a risk. So we just move forward. >> So at some point somebody selected what the speed limit should be >> in the township case. >> Okay. We have a map with this recorded on >> that. If I could clarify my comment. My comment was is there any type of study available that shows that reducing speeds on gravel roads helps reduce maintenance and >> and keep and keep dust down, you know, to lower levels. So that I'm not I'm not advocating to reinvent, you know, to go out and restudy this and potentially, like you said, have the state say, "Nope, you got to raise this back up." Is there anything that that that shows that it that it will reduce maintenance and reduce dust so that when we're talking to the residents, you know, people that are because there's going to be people that are going to push back probably and say, you know, don't reduce the speed on our road. But >> Mr. Mayor, go ahead. >> Um, the city's never done a study like that. I would think that would be a local item to find and m something else. The city has never done any type of study on the speed limit versus what damage it does or doesn't do to >> Mr. Mayor. >> I think we did what we did something because we lowered down to 155. >> That's all I could >> when we reached I remember we did it, but that was about it. Nothing else is talked about because this whole study stuff may >> I just looked up studies. There are plenty of studies. There's just one here off the top Alaska DOT and it says starting from 40 mph dropping to 20 mph for speed limit that cuts dust emissions by about 65%. dropping to 15 miles hour, which we're not going to do that. Cuts them about 80%. >> Okay. >> And then it goes on to say a bunch of other stuff that I haven't got to yet, but it seems like there's quite a bit of steady state lower speed. Um, makes it less dusty and lower maintenance on it. >> I may be the only one in town. [laughter] >> I drove 15 or 20 on Reddit Street for the sake of my kidneys. I think I've done five miles on the grass. >> Mr. Mayor, >> could I add I believe a couple of the studies that we have maybe have done haven't been like a professional study, but we've actually had enough county sheriff sit on a few different roads because we've had complaints like Zite for instance on the north end of the city. We get people that call and complain that, oh, they're driving 75 miles an hour. So, we've had sheriffs sit out there periodically in different spots on the north end and just kind of radar people. And the only study or the only thing that they've ever came up with is a few of the kids that like to go sideways around corners and things. they stop and and give them certificates for driving record, [clears throat] but they have never um you know, nobody's exceeded the 50 or 55 mph speed like some residents say that they're driving sadly. So, I don't know if we've and as far as I have always been told that all the studies are from the state of Minnesota. So, this one to me this afternoon at 4:00 brought up to me that Anoka County has a map with all of our speed limits on it. I This is the first I heard about it at 4:00 this afternoon. And the the weird part was like Old Viking for instance, they have the west side here up to Jasper at 55 and then from Jasper out to 47 at 40 or 45. To me, that was absolutely backwards because all the S-curves around the first quarter, 3/4, half, whatever you want to call it, they have that 55 and then the the straighter stuff at a reduced speed was absolutely insane to me. Just by peeking at the map before I walked out the door was so that was the first I had ever heard of an NOA County having any sort of a speed limit, signs, map, anything. And that was 22 years that I've been here. Mr. Mayor, council, >> one more little tidbit from my reading here. Um, it says uh washboarding starts happening at speeds as low as 5 mph. It's pretty much unavoidable, but 35 versus 55 mph changes the severity and rate coordination. Um, so it sounds like there's multiple benefits, both the dust, the washboarding, and I'm not an expert on railroads, so I don't know what other aspects are. Sure. I'm sure there's plenty of justification 35 versus 51. >> Is there any other questions on M's? [clears throat] >> Uh, M. Go ahead. >> M. Johnson, are you in need of contractors that are um have the capability of working with steel frame commercial doors as far as installation goes? >> Um, I have two that have gone out. I just haven't gotten the numbers from them yet. Would you like to have one if I can? >> I just Yeah, because I got one from the mayor. >> You got one? Yes, absolutely. >> I'll send you tomorrow. >> Seem to be a more difficult one than normal. Yes, I think you should help. Anything else? Move on. Mr. Mayor, go ahead. For the security cameras, I just remembered this that it seemed to be listed in two separate funds. One was security cameras, one was like security camera system or something. Are those different things or is it misadvently double? >> No. So, the security camera system, the cameras were messing up and I had the license plate reader kept going out and of course that's the one that I needed at the recycle center. And so, um, IPS told me it had to be replaced and it was significant to me anyway. And um Craig said he could actually replace the whole system for the same cost as one camera, but he went in and reconfigured the camera instead and I haven't had any issues with it since. So until um we want to add security systems to or security cameras more to the parks in the Twin Lakes, um we can just stay with what we have. So >> this does not have to be 27. >> Sorry. Is this the same IT guy that saved us money on the server, too? >> It absolutely is. >> Guys, sounds awesome. >> He's amazing. >> Thank you. [laughter] >> So, we're complete with number four. >> All right, good. Moving on. Uh, so first one up is Chief, you're up with your fire department budget comparison and discussion. >> Mr. Mayor, council members, thank you. Um, hopefully this won't be as confusing as license plates and uh and speed limits. Um, so what we have here is, um, I know that I was not at the last budget, uh, meeting and able to, um, talk about our fire department budget, but I thought important to bring some comparisons to the to the city council cuz one of the things that we talk about all the time is what are our neighbors paying? Are we paying significantly more, significantly less? Um, kind of what's out there. So, I I quick did a a comparison of our surrounding communities. Um, Nland, Lynwoodland, Oakrove, Rum River Fire District, which is St. Francis and Bethl, um, Ham Lake, East Bethl, Ramsey, and they, they seem to be the ones that that are closest to us, the ones that we probably mutually the most with. Um and you can see in the comparison table now then it's sitting for fire budget um at 327,700 which is the lowest uh fire budget in out of the comparisons which is pretty much out of uh Anoka County outside of um highly developed areas like Blaine Spring Lake Park and Rapids. And so um all the way up to um 2,622,000 for the city of Andover. Um and I think we you I wanted to look at several different comparisons here per capita land area and budget per per square mile. >> Um and so looking at our our per capita, we're spending about $724 per capita. um all the way up to uh Rome River Fire Protection District being the highest at 100 um per capita for their population. Um and I this is in no uh means a uh u a how we would how would we or how we would compare to um or or question how they're doing their fire protection. It's just stripping numbers. And so um I think the the the important part to this to look at this is the geographic comparison because when we look at rural fire protection, it doesn't matter what the population is. It doesn't matter what the the um uh uh how many people you have in or the buildings that you have. really looking at um the apparatus, stations, water supply, communications, all the things that go into staffing a fire department and maintaining a fire department. Um when you look at at uh comparing the especially for the rule setting um looking at that um square mileage um um is fairly significant for that. And if you look at our our budget for Storm Mile, we're still u much less than than our comparison fire departments. Um and I just bring this up as a comparison because we always wonder who's doing what, what are our neighbors doing. Um and so you'll see several graphs in here um for the for the budget comparison. Um again now them being at uh her total budget is very is significantly less than all fire departments um in our surrounding communities. Um interesting that per capita um when you look at per capita uh Ham Lake actually has the lowest per capita. Um but that's because they have a large population. They have 16,000 people that they're dividing their budget out by. So when you look at per capita um it's much lower um what they're spending. Um and you have to understand too that all of the fire department surrounding us are established departments. They've been um at least 20 to 40 years in existence. Um they've been able to to cultivate their departments, their personnel, their culture, their equipment. Um now then is new in comparison. We're new as a city in comparison to our surrounding um communities um and as a fire department. We are 5 years um 5 years old basically at this point. And so um even though we were served um by the the uh city of Ramsey and we purchased our own equipment, um I wasn't here at the time, but from what I'm what I'm finding out with inventory is is our our equipment is much older than probably what we thought it was. Um and so um when we're looking at trying to set budgets and priorities, you might see some things where we have to replace some equipment. We're um trying to go through and update some of our equipment. And so um now that is in it in is in in its infancy as a fire department, but we're making strides um very quickly to to gain ground. And I think one of the things that we've done very well in the past two years is we've developed and mended relationships with with our our surrounding communities. I think there was a uh um I think there was a a stigma out there that when we broke away from Ramsey and became our own fire department that we probably weren't going to be able to respond to emergencies um as we have in the past because we're so small. Um what we're finding out is that um our surrounding departments um are are finding out that our training, our dedication of our personnel, the fact that we're getting um you know putting trucks in service down the road um to respond to help them with their emergencies. Um there's a lot of respect for what we have going on in this community in this fire department. Um and our culture is is um only getting better with with every day that we we have a department. So um so in conclusion just really from this taking together the the comparison show that Nan operates at the low end of the fire service funding among the communities reviewed our per capita spending is below most peers while spending relative to geographic area is substantially lower. Uh now Lynwood Oak Grove comparison is particularly useful because all three protect nearly the same land area their annual fire budgets differ considerably. Um budgeting for fire service model requires broad specific categories. Uh expensive and frequent purchases are easily identifiable and very specific. That would be turnout gear, hose, things like that, trucks. Um other categories are not as easily identifiable and are not specific because they capture the expendable supplies. Um equipment that has wear life, items that simply need replacement because of breakage and destruction caused by the nature of the work that is being performed. Um I believe the fire department's budget is as lean and closely to represent the needs of the department and community as we can get. Um the department has five years experience still growing. We are building the department's equipment and staff to fulfill the needs of the community at the lowest cost possible and I will stand for any questions on this document. >> Mr. Mayor, go ahead. Are these all paid on calls >> for the most part? Uh Mr. Mayor, council members, council members. Umson um just taking a look at these all of these are paid on call um fire departments there are some full-time staffing within these organizations Ramsey and over Rome River fire protection district ham I believe as full-time chief so there are some combination thereof um now then for sure is is probably the the largest standalone organization that is paid on call and part time >> out of mis comparison is the largest >> I would say the largest as far as um almost 100% of our staff is paid on call versus um a different combinations there. >> Yeah. Sorry, not the largest. >> That leads me to my next question. I don't know that this statistic is super relevant, but I'm sort of curious. Do you know happen to know like amount of firefighters we have as a ratio to our residents that sort of statistic? Are we are we in the sweet spot? Are we you think way lower than these people or so? Uh >> or is a better statistic square miles of population? >> Mr. Mayor, council members, council member Swanson, the the the way to answer that question is is NFPA did a study on on paid on call fire departments and and in that study, what you say is a sweet spot for per station. Um they look at 600 calls per year, 25 firefighters per station. Allows for a robust response for um all hazards. Um right now we're at one fire station. We're at 17 18 firefighters myself. We would like to get to 25 because I'm looking at that 25 uh personnel model. It wasn't the goal that I just picked out of the sky. It's actually an NFPA model. Um if we can get to that 25 um per station and we stay within that 600 calls per year, which we're we're just below 300 now, that's really kind of our sweet spot for where we're at per personnel. And quite frankly, we don't have the capacity to build another fire station at this point, even if we wanted to or needed to. And so, um, when I look at that, when I talk about building this department, incremental growth, getting to that, uh, 25 number, that's what we're looking at at getting to. And I think that the difference what sets now then apart from other fire departments out there is other fire departments are looking to create cultures where they're trying to drive their response based on on percentages of callbacks or or people attending calls. And you'll see these departments that can't reach that minimum that it's usually a 30 or 40% call backs that people need to make. They start to add duty crews. What's completely um unique about now then is we drop our percentages and we we have talked to our people about what's important to them and and we know that people have to make their training because we we need good trained firefighters. We have to maintain that and we're building a culture where um we need to allow our firefighters the opportunity to pick and choose the calls that they come to. And what we're finding out is when we we don't have these set hard numbers for them to to to respond to. Um we are seeing our call back numbers, the amount of personnel that will come back to a fire call or a medical call actually rise without having to put major restrictions on. And it's it's it's about building the culture um around that. And so um I think we're doing something amazingly unique. Um there are other departments that you know when we explain what we're doing, they can't believe that that we're getting the numbers that we get and not requiring um uh percentages and not having to really hammer home um that that number to people where we're always, you know, they're always being um judged against that. Um, and so again, I think this is an absolutely unique situation we have going in in in now. And I think the the the citizens are um extremely fortunate to have the firefighters that they have here. Um, you know, a good percentage of our firefighters are citizens in Mel um and their taxpayers and so they understand um the the importance of what we're trying to to to um do with the fire department and respond. And so they're just as as cautious about where we're at with budgets um also because it it personally affects them. >> Yeah. Well, I think you deserve a lot of credit, too. So, I want to thank you guys. You guys are awesome. It sounds like there's even numbers supporting it. So, >> there you go. >> I I appreciate that. And I again, Mr. Counsel, um I always defer to the personnel. Um they're the ones that really make um this department happen. Um, I'm just there to help facilitate that for them. >> Thank you. >> Chief, you're pretty humble. >> Yeah. >> Got a great job. >> We appreciate it. Go ahead. >> I would also like to thank Chief for this. This is very interesting information. And um I would ask Natalie is will this be in the final package that goes on the website so residents can see this and see that they are getting value for their dollar? So, thank you, >> Chief. There was a question that came out on turnover last time we were here. Um I think we had 10,000 in the budget and we asked why there wasn't more. >> And how much does each cost? That was question here. It's about $5,000 per set. >> Mr. Council members, it is about $5,000 per set. Um so we've discussed before about about this incremental growth, right? Um, I I think I talked earlier this spring about we do have some thrown up here that depending on who we hire, um, we may be able to fit them within 4 in and modify some of that. And so what I'm trying to do is not overspend and not overbudget for turnup here, but be modest um, and conservative in that. Um, we're going to, you know, our hopes is to hire um, probably four to five people this fall. that's about the max we can hire at any one time and and train them and and support them. Um so we're again we're trying to do this incremental growth thing. Um and so um depending on on uh when they're hired, when they finish their training, when we have to outfit them um with fitted turnout here, um that really depends on when we purchase that. And so I feel comfortable with where we're at with that that budget number. Um uh I think uh staying conservative is is the the best way to do this. Um we we definitely can't hire based on size. So we can't bring somebody in for an interview and say here try [laughter] this on fit you hired. >> So so we have to uh you know we so we have to uh we have to look at at um you know budgeting enough uh uh money for turnout here um for that hiring process. So $10,000 is that enough 45 people >> and does that get you through 2027? >> Mr. Mayor, I did um add another 5,000 to that process. >> Yeah, Miss Yeah, Mr. Mayor, council members, I think that um that when we look at that three to five, it really depends on um if we get if we get those people through the door. So if we get if we get four people through the door, um depending on when they finish their training, um we may outfit them at the end of the year. So we might be able to fudge into 28 a little bit to to help um if we need to buy four sets. So if we budget for three, we can kind of um figure out if we have to budget or we have to push into 28 for those other two sets or if we can get them modified. Most firefighters are average size. Um um and so most of our turnup here probably can be modified towards them, but I wouldn't know that until we actually did a fitting of them. >> So small amount small amount of risk if we just budget 15,000. You think you can do it? >> Correct. >> Mr. Mayor, >> one of the questions we had was and I don't know the lifespan is as I recall turn got like it's like 10 years of useful life on it. >> Yep. Mr. Mayor, council members, council member Ryan, it's 10 years a lifespan on it that we have to replace, >> right? Where are we are we getting close where we're getting close to that 10-year period where we're going to have to start replacing fire um turnout gear. >> U Mr. Council member Bryant um we're about halfway through there because most of our turnout gear was purchased in um 2020 um 2019 2020 right around that era or that time frame. um obviously when we became a fire department. So um we've been replacing sets here and there. So So again, we're trying to we're trying to make this so it's not one large purchase at once. So we're trying to space this out. Um and so >> um I believe I think in the the the capital improvement um plan, I have sets that are lined out there in that plan that allows us to do that in in small increments where it's not one big large purchase. Um, so again, I'm trying to do my best to space this out so it's not a huge hit on the budget and taxpayers wallets. >> So three sets a year in theory, if you three sets a year, you would cycle through all of them and be ready to go. >> Correct. >> So I don't think you should we should we should try to just think about that in our budgeting is you dump it down to two or there's not going to be enough. So think at least three years. >> Correct. >> Any other questions for Chief? Mr. Mayor, members of council, did you want to address his general fund budget as long as he's still here? >> Yes. [clears throat] >> So, are there any questions regarding >> the page 33? >> You only got one set of page numbers this time. Yeah, I did not >> page. [laughter] >> 35. >> The one that's on the website says 33. >> Management 35. >> 35. >> Okay. >> How's that how that works? Anyway, the online one is >> 32 every time. [laughter] [clears throat] >> So, the [snorts] only thing I put in the memo, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, was regarding the additional 5,000 that we we were able to come up with um to transfer to for the turnout here. Otherwise, uh nothing else has changed. But >> does yours say 14,250? Is that what you put in? >> That's not recess up here. >> Where? I'm sorry. Where? >> Right there at the bottom under capital outlay here. >> That's for 25 actual. >> Oh, yeah. That's right. >> 25. >> So, it's somewhere else where we're >> It's in the turnoff year fund. We have a fund now that >> That's right. >> is a capital improvement fund and that's what we're putting all the money in there so that there'll be money in the future. The right discussion the discussion last week was because we didn't have it up there any potential tweaks to get up to one more set. >> Yep. And I did >> we got it taken care of >> the 15,000 >> for transfer. Is there any question on chief's budget here? >> Mr. Mayor, >> Mr. Chair, I'm just curious. We've got 2022 3 4 5 actual >> Mhm. >> and six budget. >> I took out the projected because I felt like it was my numbers I was projecting and it's uh you know it can be inaccurate and so I didn't want to confuse everyone with what I was seeing through June and July could be totally wrong. I mean things can be purchased in in August and September and I have no idea you know based on each department what their intentions are for the rest of the year. So I think it's um advantageous to look at the uh just the actuals in the in historically and what we've been spending and for projection purposes. I do do projections for totals so that we know where the fund balance will be because but in total I'm pretty good at the projections but line item by line item that can [clears throat] vary um a lot. Is it is it would it still be helpful to have a column form say for instance we had this meeting today and to come to the meeting with what our actual numbers are at >> know through the end of July that that's beneficial because it could be it could be so low and they're they're going to be purchasing more >> right but but at at even though even though doesn't paint maybe doesn't paint the entire picture based on where we're at actually for instance right now we're talking about the fire department I we could ask specific questions of chief you know where do you it looks like you know we're quite low on this this particular um account line item what what are you expecting as far as the rest of the year is concerned >> well I can pull up that information for you I just I hope that was rather confusing especially when when staff wasn't here to address any of the questions we had a lot of questions regarding um detail. >> Go Mr. fire cost members. Um when we look at at fire department budgets and how how things are spent, um a lot of things might get spent at the beginning of the year because we identify equipment that we need that we we've um you know put in place that that um we wanted to take care of right away in the budget. There are other items um and especially when we look at medical supplies and expendables and things like that that we typically will wait till towards the end of the year and usually we do a lot of our those kind of supply purchasing. Um one they start to have kind of year-end sales if you will and some of that stuff and so we try and capture as best price as we can. Plus, by the time we we hit that that November time frame, um we have kind of used up those supplies for the year. So, we do a replenishing um at the end of the year versus at the beginning of the year because obviously we the year prior we did replenishing in that time frame. And so by doing that and trying to capture on some of the the um pricing that may discounted pricing that may occur um helps us stretch our budget dollars. >> Mr. Mayor, go ahead. >> Right. That's the exact point of why it's beneficial to have done that >> so that we can and this I mean this has been a problem going back ever since I started working on budgets. It's like so you you have an idea how much you're going to spend for the rest of the year at least a rough ballpark and then we can use that add that to projected and go are we about right or we need more but we can't it's hard to do that what we're looking at now Mr. council members. You know, one of the struggles that I've had um is is I started this this position in 2025. That was an adopted budget that I had no control over. Um 2026 is was a for me at best kind of ballpark guess um at what we think we are going to need for this year. Um the other thing that we found out going through all of our equipment in the fire department is, you know, we're starting to find things that probably need to get replaced. um things that we didn't have that we should have had. Um we didn't have a really good inventory. And so um for this year for me was was really just a another learning era of of trying to figure out the history of the department and what what was left in purchase prior to me getting here. So, um, and so, uh, it's it's it's difficult for me to necessarily project till the end of the year exactly what we're going to buy because we're just getting through all the stuff that we need to. >> Um, and so, um, we're doing our best and and we're going to we're going to do our best to stay under that budget number, >> right? But you I mean, like you said, you're probably going to you're going to have to do a bunch of replenishing at the end of the year and you have a rough idea of what you need >> possibly. Yeah. >> Yeah. So that's that's >> just as a point of clarification, this wasn't an this I just used fire department as an example because we happen to be talking about so this wasn't an opportunity to to take a shot at budget. This is this was this was a comment made in general about our our budgeting process and the conversations that we have that e even though yes it's going to change between now and December 31st >> having >> the projections >> either projections or what the actuals are at [clears throat] on this given day so we just so we can have more in depth conversations >> you know council member Brian alluded to the fact maybe we're not budgeting enough in this category but maybe we're budgeting too much in others And so it with that information I think we can >> better address those questions. >> We mentioned that in the previous council meeting that it would take yourself to go through with each part. >> We're using that as an example >> and and you go through and you would have your list of items what still need to be purchased. So when you come to your third council meeting for budgeting we would have all that information. >> So we mentioned that either in meeting one or meeting two. >> That's the the level of detail. >> Yep. if we had the line items that are all filled in. Now, I'll say that this year's budgeting, you guys have done an amazing job of going dig in and say this is what we need and here's the estimates. >> We did it in 2025. It was we were swiping a lot of the things because we didn't have estimates. So, you guys have done a great job as a staff, but that is a key tie in that where's the projection coming in because it does it's a very valid point. >> How can we do better on that point, >> right, Mr. Mr. Mayor, members of the council, um I I still have the projections and I've got them up on the screen right now. Um I did talk with staff uh before this meeting and got better projections. The difficulty is is that, you know, the the staff looks at their budgets in total and they say, "Well, if I'm going to be over, maybe I can't buy these things at this year at this time, but I still need them next year. So, I'm my supplies are going to be, you know, under where I budgeted this year, but my salaries are over. And so, I need to cut back in certain areas. And so, I'm reflecting those cuts. And but next year, that's not going to be the case. And so, you know, staff is saying, you know, we want to stay on budget and we can't we can't purchase these items. We have to say we have to wait until next year. So that that it's a difficult thing to you know project. Yeah, we should be spending everything we have and some. But if you're going to be over budget then you don't want to. So >> what it would do is it would fill in the projections in the right category. So saying yeah we're we're going to take less of this. Yes, we'd like to add more but we're going to use less of it this year to come over here but at least puts the projection in the right elco >> and that's where we're at right now. And so if if anyone has any questions per line item that we can address, the projections aren't here um online. So if we do you have the fire department up there right now? >> Yep. >> So chief, just as you look at this year, you know what you got budgeted for 26. >> You're at $327,700 and that's what the the statement is. But for next year, you're going up looks like $50,000, $60,000. >> And Mr. house members. Um so, uh probably two of the biggest chunks in that is salaries um and training. >> Um and and for us, um training is is absolutely paramount. Um again, like I I've explained before, we're a young department. We're trying to get people up to a training standard that they haven't been to in the past. Um, we are building our officer CP so that we have future leaders within the department and all of that takes time and money and effort um by our staff. Um, and so um, you know, we're like this year all of our firefighters are going to go through emergency vehicle operations course training. Um, it's called EVOC. um that gives them a C certificate from the state of Minnesota that allows them to drive safely certified in emergency vehicles. What that does for us is not only trains them, but then helps us in case of an accident. So, we actually have um records that our people are trained to that standard. Now, we do train inhouse to to that standard, but we can't certify it in house. And so, it's not that we're putting untrained people out on the streets. We just need a certification for that. Um, same goes with our officer training. Um, in 2027, um, we're going to start to look at, um, inspecting our businesses. Um, I'm a part-time employee. I can do some of that. I can't do all of that and run the fire department. So, we may look to some of our part-time staff to become a uh, inspector for us and and um, and do some parttime inspecting. we'll have to send someone to class for that. We'll have to get them trained up to that. We'll have to get them certified at a level that allows them to do that kind of that kind of work. And so, um, so when we're looking at at the 27 budget, salaries and and training are probably our rates increases. And that's why salaries, pair of uniforms, and training. I mean, you group that together. This is all part of the growth cycle to get you where correct, >> Mr. Mayor. and and typically personnel costs are the highest costs for each division within a municipality or private business, but for municipalities that is typically the highest percentage budget and we expect a lot of our firefighters and when I look at where the increases are, it's it's training, it's general supplies, um the small tools and minor equipment. Well, I I'm not comfortable asking our firefighters to go into the to to respond to the incidents that that they do um without having adequate training, without having adequate equipment, without having adequate vehicles to to be able to respond to our residents. And I think if any of us had a firefighter, a relative and a firefighter in Melvin or Oak Grove or St. Paul or Biji, you'd also want them to have the training and the equipment that they need to be able to adequately adequately and safely respond to the calls that they're asked to respond. >> What? Um I'm just curious. So, we're at 17 firefighters right now >> and sir, >> 25 is the target. >> So, an increase of like 50%. I'm curious if like let's say we magically added that today for the um the part-time earnings, you know, our firefighter account would increase by 50%. But would that necessarily translate to 50% increase in wages because we're not necessarily going to have 50% more firefighters responding to each call? >> Mr. Council members, council member Swansson. Um, correct. We wouldn't have 50% more firefighters responding, but we would have 50% more firefighters that we would need to train. And when we train them, we have to pay them >> and that initial training is expensive. >> And the respon for the name. >> Yeah, the response seems to be the the cheaper end of this when you look at it because once we have them trained and we have them outfitted, um, now we're just talking about, you know, most of our calls are are last an hour to two hours. Occasionally we get some that last longer than that. The firefighters are paid hourly. Um our training is our training that's pretty much set for the year. Um and so um once we get to that that sweet spot of having firefighters who are trained and um we're not doing all this initial training um now uh we just start to do some we could start to reduce um some of the training budget that we have. Um because now that once we get officer people, our officer staff in place, we've trained them, we've gotten inspector staff in place and trained. Um now we don't have to send them to recurring training. We do that locally in house um on our on our drill nights. And so that what you're seeing right now is just this initial buildup of getting this department to stand on its own that wasn't occurring to the years prior I was that I wasn't here. Well, it sounds like then uh retaining employees is probably super important in the budget. A lot of the cost is upfront. How do we I know we only have five years of data for that, but how do we do on employee firefighter turnover compared to normal department? >> So, uh Mr. Mayor, council counc um I would say that um in uh I would say we're doing fairly well on our retent our retention of our employees. We had a number of firefighters who came over from from Ramsey when when we made the switch and they those those that stayed and had since retired were staying to get us up and running. They they were at the end of their careers. >> Um they were staying to just kind of get us off the ground. And so what you're seeing is is firefighters who who were hiring that are going to carry this into the future. And so I think the biggest there there's probably two of the two of the biggest things that that further for retention of the fire service is um the pension that we have um and the culture. And so we're strong in culture. We're increasing our pension right now. And so those two things are going to drive our our um our retention. Um, what's nice about the pension is it the pension is primarily funded through state 2% sales tax on insurance. And so that doesn't necessarily come straight from the taxpayers pockets through the city. That comes through their insurance policies that purchase. So whether that be a homeowner or a business or who whomever has insurance in the community, they're the ones that 2% of that policy gets paid into the firefighter pension. um we don't even see that money. It's just a pass through. And so and so right now we have a a a fairly reasonable pension at $3,500 a year per year of service, which is roughly $60,000 or so for 20 years of service. Um obviously I think the firefighters like to say see that increased um as as I would too for them. Um but right now I think that the culture is probably the main driver for for our retention. Um and then secondly would be the the retention. So >> you mentioned earlier having quite a few firefighters from within town. Is that a my gut tells me that helps with retention but is that like a known thing having firefighters from the city in which they serve? >> Yeah, Mr. Mr. Mr. Mayor, council members, council member Johnson, um having citizens that are firefighters within our own community, um you know, lends to the civic duty that that firefighters have always had. And so when we can recruit from within the community, we do. Um we've had to reach a little bit outside the community. Like I said, a good portion of our firefighters are live within the community. Um and we're trying to maintain that as as best we can. um you know, but again, it's a small community um and getting people that turn out to be a firefighter um with all the training and requirements um it's can be a little difficult. What we're what we're really doing to try and capture people within the community is one solid civic spirit that we have and really the culture that we have with the the the fire department. This is a this is a I'd say a big family. Um, and we really try and sell it that way. Um, because it truly is. Um, our firefighters are very tight-knit. They're very close. Um, they, uh, you know, you eat dinners together. Um, respond to calls together. They're a big support group. And so, um, what you're finding is that we're building the community within the the community, if you will, um, for the fire department. Well, it sounds like the most helpful thing you can do to our budget is keep that culture and and keep those retention numbers up. So, keep doing your good work. You too, Isaac. And same to Mike. You guys enjoy this. >> So, last thing on the for budget, was there any other questions? M. >> I just have a question of the chief. Um, and not that I'm a proponent of this, but there are people of the mindset that um 327,000 or $387,000 is too much public safety. >> [clears throat] >> What would you envision the residents of Nelvin looking at as if we don't have a fire department? Is it going to another um consortium? What are the costs associated there? What controls do we lose? If they choose not to do anything, what happens when the resident has a heart attack or goss? >> Yeah, Mr. Mayor, council members, council member Rainville, I think that's a great question. like we've been down this road before. We have we have had um Ramsey um provide fire protection for us. We had a a agreement with them. Um you see there are fire departments throughout the state that um like Rome River Fire District where where they're um joining together. Um, and where you see those, the West Metro Fire is another one, South Lake, couple different ones out there. And where you're seeing is when you can't recruit and you don't have culture and you're you're short on personnel and leadership is is struggling. Um, you know, finding leaders within the department where they're struggling to do that. um a a good uh you know a good uh alternative is to try and merge together. Um one of the issues I have personally with with fire protection districts is it takes the local control away from the city. And so when you have a fire protection district, the citizens do not get a say in how that um how that tax occurs at the level you currently have. Yes, they have representation on those on those fire protection district boards, but not at the level that we have sitting around this table today. And so, um, right now we are strong, we are healthy. Um, if the fire department goes away, you're you're going to have to shop for that that service. Um, and that comes with the cost. Um, and and you know, if I'm shooting from the hip, that cost is going to be much much more than what we are currently paying for our fire burner. um because you still have to maintain the station, you still have to maintain the personnel, you have to try and get more personnel in there. Um what you save maybe some administrative costs um which you know last time that that when when Ramsey split or I'm sorry now then split from Ramsey, Ramsey gave a a price of somewhere around 165,000 just for administration cost. And so that wasn't the payroll, that wasn't the station, that wasn't the equipment, that was just administration. So, right now, I think we're getting the best bang for a book that we possibly can. Um, and I think we're going to, you know, it's our intention is to keep providing the service at the lowest cost we possibly can. And we're going to try and drive down those costs and try and tighten that up as much as we possibly can. We are not out here, I don't think there's anybody in this fire department that's out here to make money or buying frivolous things. providing things that we absolutely have to have that serves the community that we, you know, that we are are here to serve. >> Thank you. >> So, one of the things on on the budget here, we got 387,765 for the fire department. >> So, what I would like to if there any other comments on that, if not, we don't have to vote on it because we're going to vote on the budget, but I would like to say that's one of the non-negotiables is we need for public safety is that 387765. >> [clears throat] >> You may not agree with me, but that's that's the comment. Um, but I'd like to if there's any other conversations about that dollar amount, I would like to chiefs here. Any other questions for chief at all? All right, everybody's good. I'd like to move into uh what Isaac I believe it's Isaac proposed in house fertilizer. That was the other document, but was it I don't know. Oh, this works. >> Yep. >> So, let's go to that one. >> We have to talk [clears throat] general fund and then go to deeper. >> So, Mr. So, one of the discussions was if there would be any any economies of of uh bringing our fertilizer and herbicide applications in house um for what we're what we're currently maintaining on our green spaces and ball fields. And as you'll see from initial cost and the year-over-year cost, it it really does not appear that that there is a that there is a savings to to do that. the I believe I have put copies of the current invoice for the first application that that uh was contracted out and agreed upon already for 2026 in the packet and that's just over $2,000. Oh, >> I'm sorry. I forgot to pass that one up. So, will apply to some of this stuff when we were talking about Oh, okay. the cost of material uh alone is is over what uh we're currently paying to have it contracted out. So the the exercise is pointing that that bringing it in house would not be economical for public works to do. >> Okay. So not no good return on investment at all. Not that I am seeing >> that that was the question is that did it make sense if you're saying so just buying material cost would cost more than having them bring it in and apply >> correct >> okay that's the end of that exercise >> does anyone have any questions any more questions how long did it take you to put this all together >> uh it was it was of course of of several hours over the course of a couple of days. There was multiple contractors talked to regarding several different brands of sprayers and applicators. Uh there were different suppliers talk to regarding uh product uh conversations with our current vendor who's who's applying the product. Um he actually one of the nice things about using a local vendor, he um has actually held off on a second application even though the council had agreed upon two and three applications for the four different parcels uh because of the weather that we've had this summer and that that it you're not going to see the benefit from putting that material down. So, I think uh everything that it that it points to is that that we would benefit from just continuing to have it outsourced because of the volume that that these uh applicators are doing. >> We're only talking about just shy of 11 acres. We just don't have the green space to to justify and house to to cover it. >> So, I think customer will bring it good. Yes, it does take sometimes hours to put these together, but if you don't ever stop and look at it and look at what your opportunities for cost savings are, there's many that I'll do for work and it's the same concept, it doesn't cost justify, but the ones you do find and say, "Hey, this totally makes sense." Uh, they end up paying for themselves very quickly. I think there's a good return on investment. >> So, thank you for putting it together. Um, definitely we don't want to proceed with that. Okay. Thank you for that. All right. Are we um that covers that? We're on our work session this year and you're going to take us through the general fund first. Mr. Mayor, >> go ahead. >> Since these guys are here, can we go through public works and >> Yes. >> Okay. Do those first? >> Yes. >> Yes. We had some questions. So, I'd like to at least go back to my memo and um [clears throat] talk about um the changes that were made in public works and parks um to overall um in their department so that um when we get there we can we can also recognize that that changes. So, um I did increase their part. >> Does anybody mind if we wait for the mayor to come? >> Oh, sure. I'm sorry. Thank you. >> Now, do you want the two pages that are added to the paper packet work? >> Can we budget for cushions on seats? [laughter] In regards to the chairs, there was I tried to find on Facebook that somebody had posted some nice like the ones you buy at Costco and I was going to a certain number of them and I can't get a response back. So, I mean, I said she was in Rapids and she looked legit, but I've not gotten any response back. I keep looking for them. If I can find some quantity, donate them to the city. [clears throat] >> So, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I'm back on page 21 and [clears throat] um at B23 of your paper packet. And so, um, talking about the memo that I did and just to, uh, maybe talk about a little bit, you know, what, uh, we we talked about doing the projections and doing better analysis and things like that. So, I did that. I went back and did better analysis. I had more numbers. I used the numbers through August and and actually um you know so the so I could see more of the part-time earnings and more what was going on. And so with that being said um I determined that it was beneficial for you to increase the part-time in the public works department um by 2290 and that included the benefits that went went along with that increase. So, that's the only change that I made in um in public works. Um and then in parks, I also increased the the part-time by $140 including benefits after I did that analysis. And then, um speaking to the landscaping supplies, um when we were at our meeting last time, it was noticed that the landscaping supplies stayed the same, but yet I increased the fertilizer budget. And so um now I reduced the landscaping supplies and the fertilizers separately and that maintained um the same amount. So why don't I increase it by $500. So let's go to the public works. They are on page 35. Yes, it be 37 in your paper packet. So, I've highlighted in yellowing any numbers that I changed and mentioned it in the memo. Um, otherwise I haven't changed anything other than that's that's been highlighted in yellow in public works. Um we talked about um reducing the crack filling at the first meeting. So that was done before and also um what was it increase in the increase? Was it the ground from the first meeting? Um anyway, this is where their budget is today the $518,50. And if you want to look on the screen, I can put up the actual um projected for them for this year and then where where they're going to be at um compared to the budget project. Budget projected is the far right column over here on the screen. And then the budget Actually, we do have online and here's the projected column in the middle. That's why we're hitting projections. So, um, is there a specific line item you'd like to address? So, this would be another example. Mr. here. Are we So, we we budgeted $7,000 for lubricant that I saw on there, but we only spent $317 of it. Are we planning on restocking something or >> Mr. Mson? >> Yeah, but that's just an example of what we were talking about earlier. >> If I can add, we discussed that at the other meeting. Um, most of that is going to be expense in either hydraulic oil or engine oil. Right now, I have a barrel of each on the floor. >> So, therefore, I have not purchased any yet. Um, and those numbers were like, I don't remember exactly, 1,700 for one and 2,000 for the other if I um purchase them before the end of the season with what you have here for budget. It's when we we don't do any oil changes or anything until fall usually unless we have a hydraulic hose or something on that line and obviously you're going to go with more hydraulic oil attach but so come fall Octoberish end of September October depending on weather situations is when we start with that and we will go through probably 65 to 70 gallons of engine oil to replace every piece of equipment for the Yeah. >> So, Mr. Mayor, members of council, I obviously missed that. I should have added the 1700 and what did you say? >> I have it in my phone. I think it was 2,000 for >> Yeah. >> uh hydraulic and 1,700 for engine or it could be opposite. I >> So, we're going to use the rest of it. We're going to use the rest that's in it. >> You might not You might not get to the 7,000, but it was 1,800 um for a barrel of 1540. And then $2,000 for a barrel of hydraulic. So we might use another 4,000 of the >> $4,000 if we've already spent two. We're at six. >> Nope. It's $4,000 total. >> Oh, I'm okay. We're doing it again. >> Yeah, we're at the highlighted $320. >> But that also stated >> I have over a case and a like a case and a quarter, case and a half of like grease and stuff like that. So that does not necessarily have to be purchased in 2026 if if we are getting close for some hydraulic hose issue or something like that where we would need to purchase more than a barrel of hydraulic oil for instance >> there as a bumper at the moment. >> So this this we got about 3,000 left. will be close to getting to we're going to use we're going to use it all. >> Well, and we reduced it to 4,900 next year. That pretty much matches 4,000. Then I expect that we're probably going to replace it this year at least one. >> Can we talk about the gravel rock? We got we had 35,000 26 and 50,000. That's the largest increase I see on here. $15,000. Is that the buying out? >> Yes. Right. >> So, we were you want we were talking about increasing the gravel in order to um apply to more roads. Um the only downfall is there. We still don't know on on fuel prices. So, we did increase that. I don't remember where that went. I think we went >> five or 7,000 um for next season. >> Yeah. So hopefully we're pretty close on those two numbers there. Again, >> they're going to be some of these are estimates. Uh train training we we're taking 4,000 away from training. Um for the public courts, the budget side, have we identified what training needs to be done? And does that make sense for you guys? >> I'll speak to that. Yeah, I can. >> Yeah, we've looked at several of them. Um, trying to decide which classes are most feasible for them to go to and getting certified on. Right now, we just haven't had time to get it going. So, we'll look again in 27 and only just use whatever we have here. >> Perfect. That's what it's about. Making assessment, making a decision and say this is what we think we can we can shift, reduce down. Well, the good thing is some of these went down. Obviously, the global expense 15,000 is absorbing all of that. >> What is the percentage of increase from 484 to 580 from the 26th budget to the 27th proposal? match up. [snorts] [laughter] >> Budget to the to the actual >> no 26 budget to 27 budget. >> Okay, Mr. Mayor, >> 28. >> Go ahead. >> I have a question for Natalie on training. I know last year as budget we realized that we weren't doing the training we were supposed to do and the staff is has attended training. Are the training sessions that we're going to are they or they do they expire in two years or across the country? >> Well, the the one that we hadn't been doing was the snow plowing um and Isaac and Phil took that >> um And after that, um, I believe you guys thought you should do that every three years. It's just kind of a reminder. >> Yeah. >> So that was one >> same course that the Ebuck school taught in St. Cl. >> So that would be anybody. So, so existing staff every three years, but any new staff that's going to allow whether it be a seasonal or a full-time. Um otherwise we still do the safe assure which is all the stuff that oer requires but we are looking at some other ones um you know some leadership and some finance that kind of stuff. Is there a list of required trainings and frequencies? Because that's exactly what we customer is leading to is say, "Hey, these are my rolling claws from a training standpoint here. These are the mandatory ones and then here's the ones that we would like to add on." That would be great level of detail if we had that. >> So I think when we go into next year's concept, that's what we would like to be able to have. So using the trainings and then so it's very clear every three years do this. Here's the cost. Mr. Mayor. Council member, go ahead. >> Um, I'm curious if like say for uh this department if it's similar to the fire department where new employees require specific trainings that's just sort of a a set cost with new employees. Um, do we see training costs theoretically go down with [snorts] more experienced staff or is there enough training out there where it's a pretty solid cost year to year? you know, if we're not doing sort of beginner training for a brand new guy who's never driven a plow as opposed to like these guys who don't need that training. Is there other training where that again the training cost is solid or does it spike with new employees at all? >> I think it would depend upon the experience of the person comes in with someone's got experience like we um but we did hire. No, not so much. But if you're going to get somebody green then what they need skid steer forklift welding some of the other certifications and not I mean training to public works is something brand new it's not something that has been done other than the safe assured so getting the certificates um for the liability purposes is something that we need to work on. You talked about like chainsaws for cutting. You guys, you're doing a lot of different things. It's not like you're doing the same thing every day, but that was one that we look at to say, "Hey, this probably makes sense for our organization." Now, it's not to say these guys haven't cut trees, but you're certified, you're certified. If you prevent an injury, it' be fantastic. >> And I think that that was one that I couldn't find. >> A lot of that is offered uh at county level. It is something um when I worked at steel incorporated the chainsaw company that is something that they will come out and offer. Um so that was something that I went through working for that company. Um there's beneficial information out there that that is accessible. I would argue that that the free public work staff have that experience and training already. >> Okay. Any questions on public works budgets or any other questions for these guys while we have >> part? >> Yes. [clears throat] >> We did and there might have been a question [clears throat] but I don't remember what that question was. >> It had to do with the uh the landscaping supplies which I explained I I increased that to 5,000. Now it's back on the tree and I I had moved the fertilizer to its own line item for $4,000. >> Our version of 38 38. >> Is there a question on page 38? or look at the detail and it has the project in here. Sorry. Sorry, Mr. Mayor. >> Is it in there? >> It should be. >> Yeah. For the fishing pier, um has it in the capital. >> Oh, yes. >> For next year. >> Yep. >> So, if you look at proposed or fraction 2026 budget, we had 62,000. We're going to 82. >> That's okay. So if you do percentage increase this is more than 7% on this one [clears throat] >> 33% 33 >> but you can see where in 24 and 25 they did well 24 has but they spent 62 and 24 73 and 25 so I think there's more money being spent in parks than historically. Does that mean we're just the way we're approaching things? >> Yeah, you're shifting your time and your not necessary supplies, but >> yeah, personal times >> part of it is the tracking. Mr. Mayor, if I add replaced all the lumber on the boat dock and replaced all the floats. So that was in the last two off seasons, winters, whatever you want to word it. Um, so that's where you got a lot of that expense was like almost all the floats um didn't fork anymore. So we're proposing for possibly starting 2027 of trying to get the fishing gear out of the pond. And that needs basically only wood on that whole thing, which is going to be probably two and a half to three times more lumber than the actual boat dock has. and I cannot get underneath it to estimate how many floats are on that. So, I'm going by roughly the size of the boat dock. So, I I think I only propose like 20 floats um versus I use 19 on the boat dock. So, there again, it's settled down basically by the ground at the moment. So, they have to try and get that pulled all the way across to the boat landing and take it out of the lake in order to uh [snorts] resurrect or fix it. Do you have that number? Was it on email? >> Oh, you can't. Okay. >> I apologize. I don't I forgot my word for that. So, is that line item in here that we're talking about or it needs to be added? >> No, it's in the park. It's the fishing pure improvements. I have $15,000 for that. >> It's on page. >> Okay. >> There we go. That's I didn't see >> And that way maybe just the materials and your time is going to be >> correct. So, >> all right. >> One other thing that came up was the doors from the bathroom. We were trying to get an estimate. Did you get one estimate at this point? >> Um, I think one came through today, but I didn't have time to look at it. >> That was her concern. Customer glaze brought up. It seemed like a lot for replacing doors. Mr. Mayor, >> uh, I did take both contractors to the parks to look at the doors. The good news is is that doors at Twin Lake uh bathroom pavilion are all in very good repair. And the the estimation there from both contractors is that um the full the full hinge will rectify it. It becomes an external hinge. They they put plates in in place of the internal hinges uh and cover those holes that are then left in the door and they they put a full length hinge to better support the weight and take the wind load because of the orientation of those doors. Um and the the it's basically hardware that would be replaced then in the form of the hinges and the doors and the frames down there are all are all very good repair. >> That's a memorial part. No, that is a twin leg. >> Twin leg. >> Yep. >> All right. Couple other ones out real quick. >> Uh those are much poor condition. It just the they're basically rotting, you know, just just the >> the steel is rusting away. They're they're at the base [clears throat] and in the center near near the uh latches. they're they're just deteriorating from from the elements and also the the frames are on the block wall themselves. The other thing that the contractor said was that uh those doors are installed flush with the outside of the block and there is very little overhang on that building so they have much more weather exposure. Uh and they are all inward opening doors. So the weather seal is a little bit different than all of the doors at Twin Lake Park. There's a significant awning on all four sides of that roof uh that that keep that away. They're recessed in the block and they are all outward opening doors. So, just the elements themselves. There's a different but they did also say that if we're if we're over that 20 year lifespan of those doors that well, we're getting our life out of them. that that their impression was yep they're they're not failing early per se but that they are in need of of replacement. Do >> you have any idea how old they are there? >> I believe they are original from when that pavilion was built and I believe that was constructed in the late 90s. >> So pushing 30 years, >> right? So that's one line item we can update. I know that we put a placeholder with 30,000 in. >> We'll see what the estimates come back. >> But the positive note is that the repair at Twin Lake will be significantly less uh because it it won't be a replacement. >> It'll be interesting to see what what the additional contractor that that council member Cleer knows if if he has the same opinion. >> Any questions for parks, public works? on the whole fire. >> Hearing none, ma'am. I'm going to take some general fun, >> but I do have one. >> Um, I'm I met with the two contractors that inspected the roof here. Is that a good time to give any update? I don't know if they got quotes to Natalie. >> Um, yes, but not enough that I haven't compared them yet. >> Okay. Um, can I talk to that for a moment of just their initial impression? The the both contractors said that there was less insulation above the this this has two builds to it and uh there's less insulation here. There was concern that insulation wasn't necessarily in the right spot with fiberglass being shoved into the set so that the roof can't breathe with the with the sophets and the the ridge vents. Um the other concern was that the bathrooms are not vented through the required uh code bathroom roof vent. They are currently going uh up to the the existing vents and and just kind of terminating there and and out and it's it's not was not installed correctly was their response. They said the insulation was a little bit better on the newer portion which would be the west side of the building. Um but that that there is uh definitely some need for for addressing some issues facing facing the road. >> Good. Thank you. >> We had money in the budget what 10,000 or something. >> Yeah. And one of the bids came back at 93.95 and the other one I believe was just over 10,000 >> but I have not compared them or looked at them yet. There might be additional bids on that portion, but so we're fairly close to 10,000. >> Yeah. >> The other building uh conversation that I was a part of with contractors this week was the apron at the fire station. Is that something that's worth talking about at the moment as well? >> Yeah. >> Currently the asphalt the currently the apron in front of all four bays, it's about a 90 foot building, 90 foot apron. It's 6 ft wide. Um, it's starting to tip in towards the building. The water is is running towards our slab of the building and so we're getting intrusion there that needs to be addressed. It does not appear that the that the apron is any thicker than 4 in and it is not pinned to the existing slab of the floor. Um, so that's partially why there's probably some stabil stability issues. The other issue facing it is that uh to get the proper fall, they'll probably have to extend that that apron out uh somewhere in that 24 foot range, ranging from uh 700 720 ft to 900 ft if you go 8 or 10t apron width. And uh the the bids were in that $15 to $20 per square foot range, right around that that 13 to $14,000 range for for uh replacement of that with expanding it to get the proper fall so that the water pinning it into the floor and getting the water away from the building. So it's it's actually running towards the gutter. And Isaac, they did they said just lifting it wasn't an option. Correct. >> Uh the main thought was that in conversations with dedicated lifting companies and the guys that do the flat work [clears throat] that you run into issues with um the the the pylons that we have out there that that it doesn't lift around that. So you can cut it, but you'll be cutting and then patching [clears throat] around those. So it is it is an option, but there is not guaranteed success with it. >> Any idea how old the concrete is? >> I believe that the apron is uh original build. I don't believe that's ever been replaced. I know that bays two and three have a a replacement repair inside the building, probably probably 6 ft. And bay 4 was cold storage and a dirt floor um into the 2010 2015 range somewhere in that 5year window. Um, originally bay four was public works cold storage and then um that wall was pushed out and the fire department utilized all four bays of the building. So that concrete is is newer, but the apron itself should be original apron to the to the structure that would have been built around 1996. So in that that 30-year range. And this is something that we didn't have an estimate for. So I can add here, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. Um there is enough fund balance in there to add $15,000. That's what it's going to be >> approximately. >> Thoughts from the council. Is it possible that we can do it this year or is that take outside? >> No, you could you could do it this year. >> Currently, we have let's see, I'm projecting you'll have over 200 slightly over $200,000 available at the end of this year. So, you could definitely do another. >> Is there unbalance. >> This Mr. Schultz just talking about it. This was your building and does it make sense to move forward with something like that this year or is this something we could delay another year or keep? >> The the issue that I see is the longer that you prolong it, the more potential for deterioration that you're going to have um >> the building itself. >> Correct. because I don't know if there's any any u what's the word that I'm looking for undermining thank you of of the building slab >> being that the water is right at >> um so to to answer that question I I think the longer you wait the more potential you have for other damage but anything that we're talking about that we can push off we just have to decide how long we kick that can down the road. Mr. Mayor, council members, um this is a problem that was identified um later in the in the summer um with all the rains that we're having. All of a sudden, the firefighters discovered that the the water was just running underneath the wrong direction. >> Yeah. Going the wrong direction, like where is this going? And so that's when uh we contacted um Pope Works to take a look at this and see what was going on here. So >> I'm assuming you don't have very much for an overhang on front side of that either. >> Standard >> it's probably a 24 inch awning 24 30 inch awning. >> So if this is correct the goal is if it rains or rains in the garage doors it will all out. Now what about in the winter time? Um [sighs] I suppose you're not going to get a ton. You're going to get melting right there. Does that cause a a slippery condition or an unsafe condition? [clears throat] >> We do uh salt quite a bit to try to try to prevent slips and falls. >> Mr. Mayor, >> that water running back towards the building, is it draining through the crack where it hits the slab or is it going into the building? >> No, it's it's it's exterior, but it's at it's at that seam. It's >> draining into there. >> Correct. Were they able to tell if there was a void in there? Can you see in there? >> We could probably look uh with a camera, but that was not something that was addressed by any of the contractors. >> And these are the doors through which your super heavy fire truck. >> That seemed like it' be a good thing to prioritize perhaps to prevent the building slab from deteriorating. This is not my area of expertise. That's just me as a homeowner. my garage is that >> considering that we have to continue using that building. I would think that that maintaining it and and stabilizing it would be crucial for our department. But >> we're going to have to do it eventually if it's fun or >> Yeah, there's $200,000 available on the building. >> I think that sounds like a logical priority. Mr. >> Go ahead. >> I I agree that we should tell parents who know um spent many years the working for contract contractor the longer you wait the more damage is done to the existing property um and the more expensive it is. So I I don't know what the logistics are as far as where you're going to put the trucks for the time that you can't drive over. That's >> you guys should decide my house. >> I'll take a little commercial. [laughter] >> Well, if I if I could add two things, getting the water in there is is never good, especially coming into fall, winter, freezing. It's going to expand. It'll probably end up breaking or exploding the concrete. If if it doesn't do it in the fall, it'll definitely do it in the spring. Um, the only thing I would suggest is possibly seeing if it is possible of said doing, you know, two bays or something at a time where we can store a couple of the pieces of equipment, trucks, what have you at at the maintenance facility for I don't know how long a cure time is. I mean, is it a week, two weeks, 3 weeks, a month? I have no idea. I'm not the kind of guy by any means. But I if if it's possible, maybe if you're going to go with it, I'm looking into >> [clears throat] >> um doing two bays at a time or whatever. >> Yeah, Mr. Council members, we'll come over. >> Mr. there. If you do like a fiber mesh that that cures faster, there's higher I can't remember the terminology, but there's faster curing concrete and and actually the longer your apron is, the less pressure there is as that vehicle goes out because it's distributed over uh instead of six foot, you know, another two to four feet. It extends that pressure out so there's less damage to it and eventually it'll you know, if you do the um the mudjacking that I mean, people will say it'll last forever, but you're also bringing fire trucks in and out and you're not addressing the issue that the apron and the garage floor are connected with rebar and so it'll just it will whatever they put in their mud jacket will continue to deteriorate. >> Mr. Johnson, can you add this to September's? >> Yes, sir. and then we can discuss. You [clears throat] already got one full estimate. Can you receive >> three estimates? >> You already got three? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Mr. Mayor, go ahead. >> Do you have a Would you like me to ask these contractors what their fall schedule is? >> That may We're coming into crunch time for concrete guys. [clears throat] >> Is there a noninvasive way you can look for a void? There is a crack big enough >> with a with a camera. say that through the big old boy there makes the decision. Any other questions on this one? Well, I was hoping not to add stuff to this, but Okay. [laughter] Right. Are we [clears throat] general fund now? >> Uh yeah, that public is in the general fund. Um, >> making just put you on call if you need another question. >> 100%. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. So, >> thank you guys for coming. Thanks, guys. Thank you. >> Direct line to your house. [clears throat] >> For the record, I'm always on. >> Thank you, guys. Okay. >> Page 22 paper. >> I figured out the page. >> Okay. >> There's a single blank page and one of them [clears throat] is >> okay. >> So nothing's missing. [laughter] >> Thank you. >> Okay. So let's just uh talk quickly about the the current preliminary level total is 2 2,563,197 which is an increase of $230,410 and then I explained in the memo exactly what that represented. The original general fund levy that was proposed has been reduced by $4,220. Um, and what the current levy is is doing is replacing the fund balance that we're using currently for our operating costs of $84,000. >> We're also paying for our the increase in the general fund of $75,000. And we're using $20,000 um to transfer out for turnout gear and 5,000 15,000 for turnout gear and 5,000 for equipment. Um we're losing we did a transfer in this year of $30,000 from the capital fund for um planning uh code enforcement uh to help pay for that those expenses this year. And then we're reducing revenues by $30,000. And there's several categories of revenues that are being reduced. Charges for services, fines, and interest earnings. And so that's where the increase is coming from. It has nothing to do with debt service. I' I've maintained the debt service levy at the same level. Um we're utilizing current funds in those debt services uh to offset any increase in levy in those debt service funds this year for next year. Um and so this is all general fund increase the $230,000 then going on to explain the changes in in each department. But if we go to the actual department, we can talk about it. I I'm not sure where you want to go. Um I think that we have looked at each of these departments pretty pretty intently. Um, we can talk about maybe the the the the bigger um item was the um the wages that we we came up with a wage analysis for um the changes that the the steps have, you know, how they've changed salaries over the the last two years or this year and next year. Um, >> so if you're on page 23, you just got transfer uh increase transfer turn by 5,000 that in it's up to 15. >> Yeah. So if we go to page 25, I can mention what I mentioned here in the memo too is that the one thing that we could do to reduce the levy by $5,000 is to not [clears throat] transfer any funds to the equipment fund. that that we could do this year because we're going to issue bonds and so we will have money available next year in the equipment fund to pay for the equipment that we need to purchase. Um the purpose of transferring money is to just get it to start doing it on an annual basis because we do want to eventually transfer money into the equipment fund every year so you can avoid having to issue debt every year to pay new equipment or to replace. >> This would be the first year that we're actually doing it. >> No, we've done it in all other years where we've had excess fund balance. This is uh just a a year where I thought we'd have enough money in the in the in the general fund or in the levy to transfer something else, but we could reduce the levy by 5,000 this year to do that. >> Um I I like the idea of funding the equipment fund every year, even if it is a smallest amount like 5,000. I guess I have a question. I recall you mentioning at one of our prior meetings that by a certain year it we do your budgeting or whatever that eventually we're making equipment purchases with savings rather than bonds. When does that occur? >> So according to my pull >> yeah I think it was 20312. >> Is it that soon? >> Yeah. you're on page 49. >> I'm actually pulling up. It's the last time the mortgage will issue debt will be 2032 and that would be for a large large equipment purchases. We're purchasing quite a bit in like a fire truck and a whole bunch of other equipment with that 2 million two and a half million dollars. If we can get there, then if you look out to 20 240, you'll have $870,000 in there and you'll be able to cover any purchases in the future without issuing any debt at all. >> And theoretically then we bond and 32. So, I've got 27, 29, a small one, and then the large one of 32, which pays for just the equipment that you're going to be purchasing, and 32 and 33. >> So, the 2030s are going to be the unfortunate decade where we're both still paying off bonds and saving for future cash equipment purchases. >> Yep. >> I mean, that's unavoidable, right? That crossover. Well, and then if you look at the analysis, I we do an analysis. If you look at the future analysis, the total levies when what we eventually once we get the tax rate up to a certain level, then the tax increases are minimal. And and because you're not issuing any debt past 2032, you won't have changes. You know, it won't still be off your old bed, but you won't have a new one. >> What year do you have by line? So, you can see what what year are you on? >> I'm on 2037 here. So, 2032 is when you're you're you come in and you're going to start 2033 is when you start paying for that $2.5 million debt. And that so your debt jumps from 600,000 to 859 860,000. But then it it pretty much stays level here. It jumps because I I believe uh for a street improvement project, but I believe that's the last time you have to issue from the street improvement project. If we can follow the the plan of of transferring money out of the general fund into um these other funds in the future. So starting in 2029, you can see I've got larger transfers going out. We're transferring a lot more money out in the future here in 236. We're transferring out large amounts and that's when your levy goes up small percentages because we're not having to issue bonds in the future. >> Have we ever transferred money? >> Yes. >> Up from our general fund. >> Yep. >> Yes. Yes, historically you had a very lovely fund balance um as a result of you know we got some some levy um or we got some intergovernmental revenue back in the in the day and then also in um in 2020 was it 2021 2022 2023 we had huge increases of >> intergovernmental because open. Yeah. And so, but if I look here, um, there was a large transfer to street improvement in 2018 and then also in 2019. Um, because you had a very large fund balance, your your operating costs were very low and um, we were able to transfer our money out because we had very large fund balances. So, you went from having 110,000 or 110% um down to 50%. And then you went back up to 80 in 2021 because co and so you've been you've added and then now you've been using fund balance in 2023 2025 and then a large fund balance in 2026. saying a large fund balance in 2026 [clears throat] utilizing fund balance. So >> if we were to hit 5,000 population surrogate state road improvement funds, how would that factor into our long-term budget? Would that just be free ketchup money or would you factor that in? >> Yeah, it would be it would be um additional revenue from the state. So, because you'd have state aid state, >> do you think it would allow us to lower future road bonds? >> Yes, but I'm trying to get you there without it because I don't know how long that's going to take. Um, so what I've got where I've got you with the future vote bonds is that 2031 you won't have to issue bonds again until 2034 if we can do some transfers in. >> And is there ever a point where we >> theoretically can stop for? >> Yeah, that is. >> It's 2043 is the last finance I have and then you're good. But but you get down to where you're only issuing bonds once every three years, once every four years, once every five years. So it makes it a and you're still doing a million dollars a year in so which that's what Shane is recommending that you do. >> So that's what I doing every year. Absolutely. >> So, Mr. Mayor, >> Mer, so if we um did not reduce the levy by $5,000, um what's what difference does that make? And >> it doesn't make a lot of different. That's a very small. >> Yeah. I mean, >> so reducing it by $5,000 [clears throat] changes the the current levy. Right now I have at an increase of 9.88% and if I reduce it by five grand that gets down to 9.66. Um the rate went went from 23.764 to sorry keep that track off. >> [snorts] >> down to 23.7. So, so the effect on on the taxpayers of not putting that $5,000 into the capital is minimal, >> right? So, what it is, let's see, right now I'm So, the average home is is valued at about $488,000. And so, this would change to seven months. So it go from it would go down to $88 a year from $91. So be $3 a year. That's it. So right now we're showing about a $7.7 $760 per month increase on the average home, >> right? >> Yeah. That's average. That's just to be clear. >> Yeah. That's just the city. the other if you have a property that's valued higher obviously it's a different value I would recommend that we do the transfer start to build that for the three cents >> $3 >> what I our comp plan to see what equipment that's needing to be purchased in 2032. That's pretty significant. >> Yes. Yes. If you can go to the capital improvement plan. Yes. >> Yes. 2032. So, the last one we did was for 27 through um 31. We did not include 32, but I have 32 out here. I've gone much further than that just just to see where the debt ends up as far as issuing debt. So, um in 2032 it is um replacing one of the dump trucks, the 2006 dump truck [clears throat] >> 2032. >> But we're not we're doing that now. It was the 2000 one. >> It just did. >> That one's going to be scrapped out or sold. We're replacing the 2006. >> Okay. So, we can eliminate that. You're not going to have three dump trucks. My understanding then we'll sell in 2000 and then we'll in 2007 might carry on for a couple years part time. >> Right. That's why I'm having it replaced in 2032. So no >> that can be in discussion at that time and when we do the the capital. >> Yeah. >> So that's what the public works recommend would recommend. So a grader needs to be replaced on the I don't know what we're going here but 2012 graater. Um, and then there's some other smaller equipment, some bolts, some mowers, and then the largest equipment is the um the engine. It's a 2012 higher engine and it's 30 year or 20 year life. And so I have it on the schedule for 2022. These all can change. These numbers can change. >> This is just the planning documents [snorts] just so I can have a a handle on what I think is going to happen and what your changes in your debt service levy are going to be in the future or projections. Any more questions on that? going to go back to general funds, cover that completely and we'll talk about the non-negotiables from a public safety standpoint and then we'll talk about what we can do and what we can't do. Okay. >> All right. So, I don't know if we want to address the wage analysis at this point. >> Yeah, you have to. >> Yeah. So that you know I did a a quick analysis as far as what uh what the changes are and I'm I'm comparing the percent change the 27 here on the very top part >> um 27. So, um, everybody's going up about 7.3% except for the public works one, the public works maintenance guys is already at the top of this code. So, it would only be a 3% increase, but it was asked as far as the change over 2026. Um, and that's what the the next section is. Um, as you can see, the the changes vary depending and where they were and at the beginning of or at the end of 25 and what they got in 26 as far as merit far as far as steps go the change over 26 is reflected there on the right hand side >> what's the total change >> that was 50 something that was on the last number I gave to just not >> right. [clears throat] Uh it was 56,45 for general fund salary increases and $10,270 for general fund benefit increases. That's based on the 26 to 27. This is on your last the second meeting. That's it was in that packet. I think we need it. >> One more time with those tools. It was 56,405 increases in salary. It was a 8 and a half% increase and total general fund benefits are 10,276,000 66 any conversation on wage analysis co discussion. Uh, I got um, you know, I would just like to point out for anyone who's watching this or looking at this, the the sort of bottom percentages about jump from 26 budget to 27 budget. That's a one time catchup. >> And then looking up at our current staff, we have one, two, three hitting step five this year. And so they're going to top out at step six >> following year. Meaning just like with step six public m works maintenance. I mean pretty soon we're going to see you know maybe half of these >> Yeah. half these bumps being just the 3% >> or whatever the coal is. >> Yeah. >> Recommendation council members on what the coal should be for 2027. >> Question. Go ahead. >> I think 3% number. Miss Johnson, you sent something out and showed us some averages or something. It's probably not in here, but you sent something out comparison to other cities. >> Yeah, most of the cities are between three and four. I think I got two more again today. One was three, one was four. That's just out on the LMC question where they respond to all administrators of finance. Any other discussion recommendations? [clears throat] Mr. Mayor, what >> I I'm comfortable with with what's been presented. I think we've taken great strides to try to um compensate our employees fairly. We have [clears throat] a good quality staff and I think that to retain them that this is something that's needed. The memo that Natalie sends out prior to the last meeting shows what happens when we have employee turnover >> and um that's very costly and we have been able to to not have that in in recent times and I think that's beneficial with our seasoned staff and I think it fairly compensates them for the work that they're Yeah, Mr. Mayor, >> I would uh agree with [clears throat] Councilwoman Randville that uh this is a fairness issue. We did bring staff up, I think, to a reasonable and fair pay, but it's it's also an economical issue for the city where I believe we've actually saved more money from, you know, putting our pay into um competitive steps that are actually competitive with surrounding cities. We heard the chief talk about the turnover cost of new firefighters. This pays bill doesn't apply to firefighters, but it's the same concept for any staff people. And I mean, there's numerous countless studies out there about the the cost of of not retaining employees. And I think the success that we're having in our office just hitting all the sort of basic goals of what a city should be doing. Um, you know, I I it seems like we have a very excellent staff and I just I desperately want to keep them and I think uh I'm hopeful that with with these pay staff that it goes towards retaining these excellent staff people. So, I just wanted to point out that there's, you know, both an economic benefit to the city um on top of just situation. [clears throat] I would I would like to touch on the fact that, you know, we were supposed to we had it slated to talk about steps for the 2027 budget. And it was because an employee approached [clears throat] the clerk about needing to make more money and considering going getting a job with another um in this case it happened to be a fire department. administrate the system that well I was disappointed that we didn't wait on the steps until until 2027 um it involves spending about $35,000 in unbudgeted funds um that m where did that money have to come from >> so I'm projecting that you're going to be under budget in 202 um six so far. Um, part of it is because there was some staff that was not here during the year. Um, we met some some people that were out and so it it it covered that. Um, >> but that essentially should have been a cost savings, you know, and it was unfortunate that that person had to be out. I I don't want the city to be in the habit of anytime an employee comes to us and says I need to make more money or I'm going to leave that, you know, open up our wallets and and do what we did this year. It's it's not uh it's not duplicatable. Um and it's I've never seen it happen in in my career where uh But I just want that to make that point. Mr. Mayor, go ahead. >> Yeah, I mean I I can see your point, Councilman Glazer, that wouldn't be feasible to do anytime someone threatens to leave. But, you know, now we have defensible wages and so that you know, you're right. We were to throw some money on top to keep an employee that would be paying premium above the market rate. Right now, it's at the market rate. You know, the problem with this summer was that we didn't have defensible wages. And so sometimes you are just going to lose staff to the private sector, to other jobs and other opportunities. There's no preventing that, but um you know, losing staff due to undermarket pay is preventable. And again, there's a cost savings to that. Um I know there's a hit right up front figuring out how to cover the wages, but over the long term, I don't even think it's a super long term, there's a payoff on that. And so that's why we made an effort. We had, you know, indepensibly low wages compared to other cities. And um we rectified that. And as a result, we kept that employed. And you know, we're on our way to I mean, look at where all these people are on the steps. I mean, the lowest step aside from the front desk is looks like uh public works step two to step three. Um, you know, I I hope to see those numbers keep keep rising. And so, again, I can see your point. It would not be feasible to do that anytime someone threat. But now, again, now our wages are defensible. And so, there's there's no preventing someone from leaving in that [clears throat] scenario. I guess there's nothing you can usually do. But in this circumstance, there was. That's why I advocated for action. This was a onetime correction because all the cities around us had this program and we did not. So definitely it's not something that would be normal is to um throw money at a problem. But when you're underpaying all of your staff and you don't take action, you could have lost an employee and that's another $30,000 to replace that employee. Well then on boarding training and lost efficiency and all this that doesn't make sense when you have the right staff. So this corrective action And it's it's not just a matter of employee retention and loss employees. It's also hiring skilled employees. I I don't know for certain, but I think a large part of why we were able to do that at Culver work in house was because of our recent public works hire. And that public works hire was only possible because that was the first um pay scale that we increased in fall of 25. And so I mean that [clears throat] guy was hired at a higher rate than we would have hired in 24. We didn't have those steps. Um and as a result I mean we're already reaping savings for them. I mean the measurable one with caul and the immeasurable ones with just increased skill with the the grater and all sorts of other work. So [clears throat] skilled employees they save us money. I mean, Isaac is a good example, too, of his work of constantly researching these issues and finding cost savings, just like the chief said about his firefighters. I mean, the more experience your employees have, more opportunity they have to spot inefficiencies and propose corrections. I think every person on this list um up top has made some sort of contribution in the past year or two that wouldn't have otherwise been possible if they were green employees with no experience. And so there's just there's multiple benefits to read from employee retention. That's all. Any other questions on that? Any other comments? Thanks. >> I don't know where you want me to council. Um, is there specific departments that you want to look at again? >> First first big ones. Let's go back to the budget change. What page would that be? We can just talk from a high level. Okay. >> The police department we know is there's no negotiation. We don't have a choice. So you take So if we can start knocking these out and say this is Yes. page 26. Thank you, >> Mr. Mayor. Go ahead. >> I we do have options for law enforcement, but I think the research that now has done and um other historical information tells us it will cost us a lot more if we didn't use if we didn't obtain our law enforcement services from Ana County. So, we have an option, but to make that change is going to cost us more in the long run. Just I mean, people think we can just get rid of it and and that we've saved that money and that's not. >> So, it's $25,000 increase, but it's 552,000. I believe that is the the highest line item on here is not. >> Yeah. And then a couple. >> So, that's number one. >> And this just a comment in theory. the number of calls in 27 should drop more dramatically based on closing businesses that had high volumes of calls. So hopefully that would be reflected in the 28 cost. >> So we asked that question M. >> Yeah. The response I got is that our rate is not based upon numbers of calls. It's based upon our hours and [clears throat] we have 12 hours a day. >> Okay. There was some factor in there at one time and it got rid of that. So that's >> and and it's not to say that there's not some small factor, but that was the overwhelming thing because you're paying for the hours, >> right? But there was also a large volume of call volumes and if I recall being told that was part of the reason that the fees were increasing than what they were. But anyway, moving on. >> Mr. Council member Brian, we we were told that at one time, but at some point they just said it's going to cost per hour. So, you're correct that that was part of the equation >> and there was no ability to reduce from >> No, they moved it. They moved it up from eight from their minimum 8 to 12. >> Then we should contract for future use. So, >> that's what they're scheduling. They schedule 12 hours. So, >> yeah, they used to schedule eight and they used to schedule 10 and now they're talking. >> So, if you look at our next biggest one, public works. Now, we went through this, but we're talking 518,000 an increase of 33,000. They're discussion on public works. Just trying to hit the big couple here so we can make sure that we're in alignment. So if there's any discussion needs to happen the next biggest increase $60,000 you >> well that's the one we talked about earlier. Make sure everybody's hearing that because that's it's a major expense. It's 387,000. >> She talked about the options alternatives. There's not good alternatives out there. I think we run a pretty cost-effective program. Um, chief's doing a great job for us and it is a major influence, but we're trying to grow fire department get the right we're trying to right size and that's the majority of this >> administration primarily changes. So, the biggest thing I would just like to talk about the office staff is my whole goal was to stabilize the staff in the city so we're not losing people. Natalie, we've done a fantastic job. I'm glad we hired you because the staff is doing great. Public works is going great. So, when we stabilize, uh, we are no longer paying recruitment fees, training fees, loss, productivity, all these things. Yep, there's a cost increase and it's there, but we've got the stability and the efficiency that goes along with it. >> What's the next one we should talk about? parks would be the increase there is is the 21,000 >> a lot more as you know like I said it appears that you're doing a lot more with Indian park system >> as far as taking care of >> parks I can address that a little bit >> the the guys are we're trying to identify things that have been pushed down the road or just never looked at and as you could see from what Isaac was describing, there are many things that were pushed down or maintenance wasn't done. So, they are probably spending more time in the parks. Um, another difference would be last year we had Phil longer into the season. So, this year they'll be in the in the parks longer, too. Um, just because the season for the parks is still through September and the kids are all done at the end of the week. We've got some nice reductions out here. Government building down 49 >> 49,000. Planning and zoning 36,000. >> Mhm. >> Engineering cost down 18. Is that just because we're getting less developments? Is that what we're predicting? >> So what's happening with planning and zoning and engineering? We previously used to code the um activity that went out to actual um individuals. We used to expense it and revenue it. And now all we do is we run it through a a deposit or escro account. So it's not showing up as an expenditure or as a revenue. So that's why your revenue makes sense. >> So that's that's cleaned up and it's not So your proposed budget that you have on here on page 26 is 2.6 million >> for 20. And then with that that all ties out, you have it all tied out into how much of an increase? >> 9.88. Is that what you said? >> Uh yes, for the total levy and that's over on the right side of that that page. You can see the total levy is going up by 2 $30,410 which is all in the general fund. And it's basically replacing like I said earlier, >> paying for the increase in expenditures. >> I don't see 230,000. Is it 236,000? >> 23. >> Oh, on the bottom right. Dollar change. That's what you >> Is there any other things that you discussed? Mr. Mayor, >> there's a $90 increase for mayor and council. I don't remember an increase that we held or >> that we don't tax you're paying that you're not dealing to take advantage of >> as a city. Um, Mr. Mayor, I'm just looking at this thing and I went, it's totally up to the next next council. Um but um I have I will offer to be I'm on online page 37. So that's your page 39. If you want to do it for tracking if you want me to stay on the wershed for next year I would certainly volunteer but that would shift some theoretically shift some money from the mayor and council getting paid per meeting down to the water. [laughter] One more time. >> Council member Glazer and I are the two representatives on the water. >> Right. >> But are getting paid per the per to go to those meetings would come out with the mayor and council extra stipen money. Right. >> Yes. >> I would no longer be on council. >> Uhhuh. >> If I stayed on the board. So technically my pay would shift probably shift down to there if the council wants me to continue to represent. It would be coming out of a different fund. >> Can you Can you still represent? >> Yeah, we just need one council or mayor on >> on the um >> to represent >> to represent. >> You got my vote. They 100% got my vote. >> So just from a budgeting perspective, if it matters there theoretically would be in other land for >> 40 bucks for six meetings or whatever it is. If it matters, you decide. I don't know what it is. Figured it out. Okay. [laughter] >> I just thought of it and I went, let's if if it matters if it matters to us, we can tweak it. So, but anyway, whatever. So then when both of you go to >> they both turn the window >> they both go but since he's going to come off >> right >> we come in as a citizen res >> and he would represent he's just it's just going to kill >> all right is there any other question on budgeting two and a half hours go ahead >> I have one thing um farmers market um oh the coordinator um advised me today that we need some new tents and some new flags. Um, so I'm asking if we could increase the budget by $500 to $1,000. The goal would be that um the vendor booth fees would cover that. I mean, right now, um, we have expend what should be through year end expenditures are, um, $1,378. The revenues for booth fee, which could possibly go up by the end of September, is $1,475. So, we have about a $100 profit. Um, but we may need to purchase some good quality uh tents next year and some foot. We would work at finding the best available. >> How many tents would we have to purchase? Just >> two. >> Two. So then the other thought is we would maybe do one and 27 one and two. >> So $500 should cover at least one >> at least one and then flags. Um Mary was estimating at about three $300 >> very close. You can increase the budget and still make it all work. [laughter] >> Sorry. Yeah. Try to figure something out here. I don't know. [laughter] So, we created a new a new department. It's called now community >> and I do have $4,000 in there. It's it's not only for the farmers market. It's also for heritage festival and >> so I don't I don't know if $4,000 will be enough for >> everything that we just have. >> Well, because 3,000 was donated. We just need to I can't 100% count on that. I did meet with Comcast today um to compare our our invoice with um Harvey and while I was talking with them I said well if we're become your customer we continue to sponsor. So the answer was not no. So there's a possibility there too. >> You have any objection if she has $500 onto the $4,000? >> I prefer if I didn't have to change. So I'm going to try to find some bucks somewhere. >> Mr. Mayor, these are these are tents [clears throat] that actually the the city uses >> the city uses. Yes. >> So it's like the community vendors supply all their own equipment. Um this is for community corner and then if we have special guests um sometimes they use it. >> So you're going to go figure that out. >> There's contingency $10,000. I I don't want to use that. >> Any other any other questions? >> No, I do have one good thing. We did get an increase from the county. I didn't know >> um in recycling for the additional labor on tracking staff done in 26. So 27 we'll get some additional money. >> Any any idea? I I'm trying to it was like 15 what was it 15 975 and it's um >> it's 32% of 50,515 so >> it's almost $16,000 which will be additional we in 27 we'll be getting $16,5 where in 26 we got >> 15,9 90 something back. >> It's not much, but it's something. >> 200 bucks. >> 15,9272. Okay. So, it's it's something. It's a little Yeah. I mean, it's Yeah, it's based on households. >> That's awesome. >> Anything else for this meeting, guys? >> So, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I will bring back the uh preliminary levy for adoption then on the in this in September. You want me to say motion to adjurnn? >> Okay. [clears throat] >> Second. >> Second. >> Thank you. >> Couldn't get a second out fast enough.