[Music] This is [Music] live. >> Yeah, you're all good to go. All right, we're going to open the meeting September 14th at 6 o'clock and we'll start with the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance 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. [Music] Miss Johnson, you take all >> here. >> Council member Brian >> here. >> Council member Glazer >> here. >> Council member Rainbow >> present. >> Council member Swenson >> here. >> City Planner Nash >> here. Chief Deputy Jacobson. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Fire Chief Miller here. >> And myself, Natalie Johnson. Roll call is complete. Okay. Thank you much. We're going to approve the agenda. Mr. Mayor, >> if there are no changes, I move that we accept the agenda as presented. Go ahead. Go ahead. >> Mr. Mayor, I'd like to pull um consent item agenda H and move it to new business H. >> I would like to move consent item B and then that would be new business. Please Any more discussion on it? Could I get a second on it? >> Mr. Mayor, is that a amendment to the original motion? >> Did you shouldn't have had conversation? Do I have a second? >> Correct. You're correct. So, would you like to amend your motion to do so? I would amend it to moving consent agendas H and I to new business HN >> H and excuse me. >> I'll second that. >> Okay, got a second. So, we have to do we have one online. So, we have to roll call vote. So, uh, we'll start, uh, we'll start with you. Uh, >> Brian, >> I >> I >> council member Swansson >> I >> Okay, so agenda is passed. Motion carried. We move on to the public forum. We have two people signed up to speak tonight for the public forum. Uh, when you come up, please state your your name and your address. Uh, Paul, you've signed up on the public form. >> Yes. >> All right. You're first up, Paul. >> Good evening. My name is Paul Anger. I live at 6263 203rd Avenue Northwest. I'm a strong believer in praising public and punishing private. So, the first thing I want to say is to our amazing staff at city hall. I think we hit a home run with the staff that we have now. Without their guidance, their patience, and their professionalism to where I'm at right now, I don't think I would have been feasible. I don't think we would have got here. And for you, Sydney Nash, thank you kindly for your support and guidance throughout this whole thing. Now, real quick, I know I only have a couple minutes, so real quick, I just wanted to say I know that we're going to be looking at revamping on how we go about giving permits and everything else out in the future. My biggest I guess I would say complaint is about how we have to have a survey. I got I moved from Dayton to come out here so I could get away from the big city bureaucracy of all the you know dealing with all the surveys and this and that. My pole barn hasn't even been built yet and I know I have a unique circumstance but I've got $10,497 between surveys between um escros and admin fees. The survey for the build of Polebar or any type of building is between $2 and $3,000. But my circumstance was a little bit different. I had 2,600 into it and another $1,200 just in finishing the survey because of I had to do a wetland delineation. So after everything was said and done, just for that portion of it was 3,800 just for the survey. And then when you take a look at the wetland delineation survey, that was another $1,200. And then by the time I finished everything was another $1,100. So it came out to four $10,497. So, I think there's a way that we can eliminate a lot of these fees that we should look at in the future because if somebody wants just to build a pull barn or a garage on their property and like I said, I understand mine was a unique situation, but I think we should take a look at the overall cost because now I have to pay for the permits too if this move. With that being said, thank you kindly for everything, the guidance that everybody's given. and Mary, thanks for coming in all the time on your time off on >> and doing what you do. You're >> welcome. >> All right. Have a great night. Thank you. >> Uh Sila. >> Hello. Hi, I'm Sue Pil. I live at 18959 now Boulevard in Naven and I am the chair for this year's now Heritage Festival. And on behalf of our entire festival volunteer committee, I want to formally thank you the city council, I want to formally thank the city staff for all of your support and help for this year's heritage festival which was held on Saturday, September 27th in the Nelen Park. And this year's festival was a a huge success. Um, we want to thank the council and our now then businesses and other community businesses which gave so generously to help fund this event because of all of the donations that we were able to get. Um, we were able to keep the festival a free event, which is one of our goals. We wanted to be a free event and that helped pay for all of the activities and all of the music that we had throughout the entire day. We especially also want to thank the Melbourne Fire Department who hosted their fire station openhouse at the festival which was a great success. Um the maintenance department um especially in particular Eric and Phil who worked so hard to make the park look amazing and great and the whole parking field look great. um the city staff which also helped us plus sells our now festival merch all year long to help support the festival. The NOA County Sheriff's Office uh which provided our security and the K9 demos um throughout the day. Our now churches which provided the volunteers for the breakfast and our kids activity tent. um the owners of A&B Welding who sponsor the fireworks and the volunteers on our festival committee. We have a small committee, but we're all volunteers and we work and put in long hours all year to help make the festival happen. I wanted to just give you a quick update. Most of you know, but we had record crowds this year um throughout the entire day and we are very very thankful for that. Uh we served record amote people at the pancake breakfast and all of the activities throughout the day really did extremely well. We had a huge number. If you were there, you saw the huge number of giant pumpkins that we had um at the big pumpkin way off. And this year's pumpkin winner, which was over 1,900 lb, uh was grown right here. And now then, um as the sun was setting, we still had long lines of people who were waiting for the wagon rides, waiting for the balloon, uh animals, and for the inflatables, too. And at sunset, even more people and families were streaming in to sit and watch the amazing fireworks show. Um, most of the vendors that we use at the festival are all from now. So, it really is an amazing way of showc showcasing our community and our city um at every single level. we were able to promote Now then and our businesses, our heritage um and the things that make Now so unique like our farming community um and truly um the heritage festival, one of our goals um truly was accomplished this year. One of our goals is that it's a special time to celebrate community, family, and friends. So again, on behalf of the Now volunteer committee, we want to thank you so much for your support. any comments back for for Miss Pan. Um I I'll start with uh I think it was a very successful heritage festival. Um I went to the Rogers neighborhood and spoke um to that community that that also a small community right there. Uh they just they spoke athletically saying it was very uh a very good festival. It's one of the things they really look forward to. So thank you for that. Um overall I agree. I think it was record numbers. I don't know if we take a count, but I think that's the most people that I've seen there. So, it was really a positive experience. So, we appreciate all the work. >> At one point, we did count the cars in the parking lot. There was over 550 cars and that was just at one point during the day. So, let >> Very good. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Rainbow. >> I would want to thank the committee fest. It's my first time in 18 years I wasn't participating. I got the chance to visit the festival which was nice. But the committee members do work hard all year long um to try to put the festival together to raise funds so that it is free for the our residents and other visitors and you did a great job. Thank you. >> Any other comments for the open forum or public court? All right. So, we're going to close the public for polling and then we're going to move on to the public hearing for vacation vacation of easement on 6263. So, Miss Nash, >> thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, this evening we have this vacation of the drainage and a portion of the drainage and utility easement for Mr. Hingabson at 6263 23rd Avenue Northwest. Back when this neighborhood was platted in 1996, the area that was encompassed on his parcel with the drainage and utility easement matched up with the wetland delineation that had occurred at that time, so 30 years ago. Those can change over time. Um, and today in the present time, he wanted to construct an accessory building on the parcel, but it was within that drainage and utility easement and also within the setback to the wetland. um because they over overlapped by the old data that we had. So he um as alluded to earlier had gone out and done a a new wetland delineation to see if that line is different today and it it was. Um so he then also is proposing a vacation of just the portion of the drainage and utility easement that no longer is encompassing um the wetland area. So that's what is in your packet for vacation is just that little sliver basically where he'd like to construct the building. We're recommending approval, but this does require a public hearing. Um and then in your packet after the public hearing is the resolution um to vacate that portion of that drainage and utilities. Happy to answer any questions. So I guess if there's no council questions then we have to open another another public hearing. So we'll do council questions first on it and we'll go and do another public hearing. >> Any questions for the council? All right. So let's open this up for a public hearing. Public hearing is open for the vacation of easement 6263. Is there anybody that would like to speak? I know Paul, you've already stated your piece, but if there's anything else you'd like to have, >> I throw myself a lot of mercy of the council. >> Okay. Anybody else for the public hearing? All right, we're going to close the public hearing. >> Mr. Mayor, >> that was a quick public hearing, sir. Fantastic. >> I'll make a motion to approve the vacation of the drainage utility easement located at 663rd Avenue Northwest. I think we got two seconds at the same time there, but >> you would like to go with council member Glazer second. All right. So, who's going to get the second on that one? All right. We'll do a roll call vote on this one. Starting with council member Rainbow. >> I >> I council member Swinson >> I. >> For myself, I'm an I. Council member Glazer. >> I. >> Council member Ryan. >> I. >> Okay. So, motion is a pass. Motion's approved. >> You're good to go. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Quick and easy. Okay, moving on to consent agenda. >> Mr. Mayor, >> we pulled two items out. Go ahead, council. >> Make a motion to approve the consent agenda as amended. >> As amended, >> second from council member Rainville. Let's do a roll call vote again. Council start with you. Council member Bry. >> Hi. >> Council member Glazer. >> I. >> I'm also an I. Council member Rainville. >> Hi. Council member Swans. >> Okay, >> Mr. Mayor. >> Um, any chance we can move the purchase of the software to the forefront so that Miss D? >> Yes. >> Software for whatever questions Dan has. I would prefer that she she's the vendor that's working with the vendor. >> Would everybody be okay with that? It does make an adjustment on the agenda if everybody's okay. >> All right. So, talking about consent agenda H right now, council member Brian, >> I just I understand the need for it. I'm I'm just curious why we since we've already put together a budget for next year and it appears it's already going through officially till 2027 from the information that I was looking up on the internet. I'm just curious as to why we need to put this in right now and um in and and and and spend the money. We're already trying to find other ways for this fiscal year anyway to reduce the cost of or this financial year to reduce cost for for other things that I'm just unless there's an immediate demand or immediate need for this to get done. Have we had any complaints about this? If not, can we put this off until next year? >> It's a reasonable question. Do you want a page that's on try 76ish? >> 76. >> So can we just talk the total cost of what what it was? It's like 25 or $2,600 that we're talking about cost 39.50. Yeah. So that is going to be for two different softwares. So um in working with Civic Plus, the reason we bring it up now is just from um our communications group, our newest communications group that we meet monthly. Everyone's kind of in the same boat with this. Um it's going to take a significant amount of time to go through. You pretty much have to do an entire website audit. Um because we have to get to the point of being completely compliant by that 2027 date. Um but it is going to take a long time. we have to go through all of our documents and make every single document accessible. Um, and I obviously just one person I can do it in my free time. So over the next year I was hoping to try and get each of those done. Um, I would be maybe comfortable trying to push it to 2026. Um, for like the audio isn't necessary. That will be implemented in the website right away. Um, and that's not super necessary in terms of what I have to do over the next year. Um, but that Commonlook Alliance, that PDF moderator, that is what I would be using to go I have to take every PDF on our website, um, that's going to be usable and accessible to any resident that would be looking at it. I have to go in, take that software, upload that PDF, make all of the changes to make it accessible, and put it back on the website. And just doing that will take some time. Um, just wanted to put that out there right away. So, the the alliance probably could could hold off on. Um but that's something that we probably would have to bring back in um mid to early 2026. But that um all that common PDF moderator I would like to have probably a minimum of 6 to8 months to work on that for the PDF conversion before that. >> So the alliance is the $1,450 cost. That's what you're recommending to move forward with now. >> Yes. And I believe they would um they're kind of in a package so I think the cost might rise if we purchase them separately. Um, I would have to get back to you on that. Um, but it was a bundled with our website contract, >> Mr. Mayor. Council Blazer, so 6 6 to 8 months from April 26, 2027 would be August 26, 2026. >> Yeah. So, I would have to I guess preferably that would be the working time, but then I would have to go through and that um uh not alliance, the audio is what would be uploaded to make sure that all of it is compliant. So that on the back end would tell us everything through through the website like it would check the documents or check everything. So just in case I missed anything, anything that needs to be changed. So I guess including that um that audio I would like probably a year. So if um you're going to wait push it back as far as we can. I would say probably April of next year just to ensure that I have everything by that deadline. I don't want to push it and wait um until the point where then I have to absolutely rush in April to make sure it's all done. >> This is subscription prorated if we wait until April 2026. >> I'm not sure. I can ask. >> So I'm assuming it's a yearly subscription. >> Yes. So whenever we just paid for our renewal um I believe last week for the website. So what it would do is we would just send a check for this specifically and then next year it would just be added to our website that we pay in October. >> Mr. Max, go ahead. >> Looking at our budget that was presented to us back in um August um we were projected to be at $13,875 which is over our projected budget for 2025. Is this software included in that budget projection or not? >> It is not. >> So we'll be So we're already over budget. So we planning on being even more over budgeted. >> We are over budget on that line item. Excuse me. We are over budget on that line item, but we won't be over budget all in all for that department. >> Right. That's where we were taking a look in general at where things would be to potentially move some of the projects that we're planning for 2026 related to um sirens etc into other doing some of that spending in 2025. So that's also why I'm looking at is the urgency that this has to be done right now or can we actually use our 2026 budget that we increased already to to include this software? Um, so Council Member Bryant, we can do whatever the council wants us to do. Um, I can just tell you that it was staff's recommendation that they're able to get started on it because they have to do it in their spare time and be able to get to it. And I believe, and I'm going to say I believe when you brought it to me, it was a bundle pack and you had called on it to see if it could be separated at that time, but I don't recall the answer. Um, I just know that is staff's recommendation that they have it because it's time to get it done to be compliant, but we will do and make it work with whatever council would like. >> This comes from Brian. What would be your recommendation? You just saying wait till 2026 to do the purchase because it falls in line with the budget. >> Well, I'm going for saying that it's we're using dues and subscriptions and dues and subscriptions is over. Why don't we start out using some of our 2026 budget and dues and subscriptions? this is where we want that money to come from since we're already over since we're already over budget um on at least that particular item. that's and if that especially knowing if that's where it's going to be coming out of then and if there are changes going forward then that can be planned into future budgets that >> would you like to make a motion or is there any other discussion you have anything else may >> um I would prefer that that staff is able to look at their budget to see where this can come um looking at the overall budget, maybe not so much line items because we know that we can move from one line to another. Um we had a small staff and I I don't understand it. I work for the first but I can't imagine that this is an easy task and to be able to find time to do it without pressure um on staff and your other additional responsibility and responsibilities and the need to have it done on time. Um, I I think it's be best that we provide staff with as much time to do. Um, we never know what tomorrow's going to bring and um, if they can get started on it, that's great. Um, and maybe I would I would move that we postpone it so we defer it to next month and ask staff to go back to see if there's a price difference. split the two items out um if there's going to be any increase in in costs if we delay it. Um and I know that it's hard for businesses to to say yes or no on price increases, but um and then bring that back to us for a second on that. >> I'll give you a second on on that. Delay until next month and we can find out. And then the other thing is even if there's not an increased cost, we can look at delaying until January because it's still getting at that point 14 15 months >> because it doesn't have to be done now. >> But we need to know if there's cost change if that's going to be the case. >> And I guess if we're going to deliver postponed a month is this is Civic PL. It's my understanding this is Civic Plus's software. Is there a third party software that can be plugged into the website? >> That's what it is. So CI Plus has partnered with audio and common. So those are different companies that they're just partnering with to plug into C. But are we but are we restricted to having to use software? >> Yes, that's who they partner with. They don't >> No. Did is there another company that does the exact same thing that's that this software provides that can be used to do the exact same task? >> Yeah, I understand. They C plus don't won't allow any other besides the ones that they >> So they won't allow it. So that's all right. >> So we're going to sh this next month and we're taking the cost. Okay. I think we had a motion for that. I second it. We got to do a vote. We'll start with council member Swinson. >> I council member >> I >> I council member >> I Okay, good. We got the time. >> We'll call. All right. So, an shelf till next month. Thank you. Okay. So now um looks like we've got our our Eagle Scout ride and it's perfectly on time. >> So this is Lucky with your uh we were tracking a 6:30 arrival and uh at 6:25. So if you would uh come up and provide us an update, we'd appreciate that. >> Absolutely. >> Hello city. Now then, I'm coming in front of the council once more to explain my newest idea for my evil project for this community, and it is barn owl houses. The reason I chose to make houses for barn owls is because they are naturally great pest controllers for the rat and mice that destroy crops. And I know that we have many barns in this community. And I plan to build two giant owlouses for Twin Lakes Park because the park has been a big part of me growing up and a big part of my scouting career. But uh after I get the permissions I need, I do plan to buy the materials between late October and early November. And since the project is meant to be a team effort that I will lead, I will gather my troop and build the houses sometime in late November. Then I'll gather my troop once more to take a little nature hike to see where the houses will go and install them in late December. The reason why I'm doing that last part is typically barn owls start mating between January and March and doing it before allows the owls to prepare for the season and allow the owl the houses to be acclimated to the environment. But some of you may remember the bird and batous that I plan to build last year. Well, they are completed, but due to a clinical error on my part, the Eagle Scout board did not approve that project. So, they will become a community project in spring of 2026 with the installation of the four birdhouses and two batouses. Are there any further questions? >> I got a question. How high off the ground do uh in this case, houses or nest? Oh, I have to go over here. >> Uh, they are typically around 20 18 to 20 ft in the air up upon like metal poles upon a metal base. >> So, so you're providing the not only the house but the the pole in the base. >> Yes, that is they click. And how how are they how are they anchored? >> Uh that is something that we are we were just starting to take into consideration as we did more research on how these houses are built. >> Mhm. >> Cuz they are not easy. I have found >> Yeah, >> it took me a long time to find my original plans for these owl houses. I'm going to have to elaborate. So, if you're you're going to you're going to put a metal pole, how deep in the ground are you going to go so it doesn't tip over? >> Probably going to be between 1 and 1/2 to 2 ft into the ground so that it doesn't like fall over or anything. >> Yeah, we definitely don't want to fall over that. But you may want to consider before the ground prints is that you know if you're going to put it in concrete or I think this guy knows depths of stuff and how you may want to consider having a discussion with them. I think you're going to probably have to put down. >> Okay. >> Yeah, I will take that and I can speak with you later. >> Sure. >> This is council member Glazer. So his phone number is on the website if you want to call him or send an email, but it would be great. I think you're going to have to go deeper than two feet. Otherwise, they're going to be tipping over and I don't want them to tip over on anybody. >> Yeah. >> Council member, >> a question. Um, I know my husband has put up batouses and he just puts those on the trees. >> Is this something that can be mounted to a tree >> eliminate the need for a p the cost of a pal and insulation because that's not going to be inexpensive. Yeah, we are taking that in consideration because if we don't do the pole method, we can make an extra platform upon a tree because they're pretty big houses. So, they will need an extra like piece of support underneath them mounted to the tree so that they stay safe. Do you have a plan to get it up 18 to 20 ft if you want to put it in a tree? >> Yeah, that is part of the reason why we want to do this main nature hike with my troop is to like scout it out and see any good areas to put these owlous. >> Mr. Mayor, that's one way I'd like to recommend that um if you could do this this hype that sometime when it coincides it it would be appropriate to coincide with maybe Joe's schedule >> that he could he could attend and then while we have access to the Ham Lake bucket truck that we've been using for um tree control that would probably be the safest way to uh um get these mounted up in a tree and uh with this as as little expense as possible. >> That's where I was going. So, perfect. Perfect. I think that I think there could be uh work with the city and they might be able to help you. As long as it's not off the trail too far and the Boom truck can reach it, you might be able to find a tree. Um because if you're going to put them up in December, we could have snow, we could have other things, but I think that uh talking with them and see what options are available would be very helpful. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> Any other council members have questions for you? Good. Thank you. Well done. >> All right. So, we are going to move on to financial approval of the uh resolution 2025 pre-sale bond issue. We do not have Miss Jagger here tonight. >> No, but we do have >> and Yep. So, they're going to present the bond or bond going for sale. >> Yes. Please, could you please state your name and tell us you work at Ellers? >> Would be great. >> Great. Thanks, Mr. Mayor and Council. I'm Bruce Kimmel with Ellers. It's nice to be back with you. It's been a couple years since we've last worked with you on a financing. I'm going to be referring to the pre-sale report that according to my PDF of your agenda packet is on page 120, right? It's 133 maybe on the the numbers there. But this is just a a highle overview of the proposed financing. And this discussion is really just an opportunity for you to ask any questions that you might have about the proposed bond issue, the timeline, next steps, and then there is a resolution for your consideration, essentially giving us the green light to work with staff to take those next steps leading to the November bond sale. uh either I or a colleague will be back at that council meeting to actually have you consider a resolution awarding the bonds to the winning bidder. And and so this is really again just sort of an authorizing of next steps. The final approval of the bond issue will happen at that um at that meeting in November. One thing I should note right off the bat, mayor and council members, is that I got some new information from Lori Jagger yesterday that the 2025 project costs have actually come in a little bit lower than the numbers that we were given um for the preparation of this pre-sale report. So just today actually we ran some new numbers with those um updated 2020 2025 project costs and it now appears that the bond issue amount will be closer to 1 point excuse me 1,45,000 instead of 1,460. That said I would like to ask that you consider this report that's in your packet as well as the resolution as written. I just, you know, will note of course for the record that we are anticipating a smaller bond issue and the final results next month will reflect that. It's just that there hasn't been time to update the resolution and I would like to have Miss Jagger look at these new numbers um that we prepared today based on that new information. So again, everyone's on the same page. We will be looking at a smaller bond issue, but if it's okay with the council, let's go ahead with the 1,460 for the purpose of this uh discussion today. So, I won't go through all of the details, but as you're probably aware um and this is on the next page of the pre-sale report, we're looking at providing permanent financing for three separate purposes. One is the the final financing for your 2024 street projects. Then you have your 2025 street projects and then equipment purchases. And the great thing about Minnesota um state law is that uh state uh authorities allow you to basically bundle three projects like this into one bond, which is a lot more efficient than doing three separate financings. You only pay us once, you only pay the bond rating agency and the bond attorneys once. And um the market prefers larger bond issues with bigger maturity sizes. Um so this will sell better and get you better interest rates than would three small financings. As you're probably aware um the street projects will be repaid with a combination of special assessments on the benefiting properties and property taxes whereas the equipment purchase the debt service on that portion will be paid from future property taxes of the city. We are looking at a term overall of just over 10 years. Uh and principal on the bonds will be paid in February of 27 through 36. That said, the debt service will really correspond to your budget years 26 through 35. So that's you recall the way uh the cycle works is you levy in one year for the bond payment that comes due the next February 1st. And you will have the ability to either prepay or refinance the last couple of bond years of the bond issue if interest rates warrant that or if you decide you want to um just pay off the bonds a little bit early. You will have bank qualification on this. This is kind of an insider baseball kind of thing, but um because you're issuing less than $10 million in the fiscal year, you are able to put a special tax designation on the bonds that get you a little bit better interest rate. And also, you have an extremely good um credit rating from standard employers of double A+, which is second only to AAA. And for a small community like Navan to have a double A+ rating is really exceptional and speaks to your strong financial management, your demographics, your property tax base and so on. So kudos on having that credit rating and that will absolutely achieve a very very strong uh result from the competitive sale of these bonds. I won't go through too many other details. I would just note um it's possible that the winning bid on this bond issue will have what's called a premium pricing structure on it. What that means is basically bond investors like to have coupons on the bonds that are higher than the actual interest rates or yields on the bonds. And so in order to have that larger coupon, let's say maybe 5% when yields are actually only maybe around 3%, they pay more than the face value of the bond. And that extra amount is called the premium. So what that means is that on the day of sale, we'll see who has the best overall bid, but we'll likely be actually reducing the bond amount a little bit to account for that extra premium that you're receiving. And you'll still net the same amount of proceeds that you need to do the final financing for the street projects and for your equipment purchase. I just want to flag that because again I just got done describing how you're going to be issuing $1,45,000. Um but actually when I am my colleague comes uh to your meeting in November you might actually see a final resolution of 1.3 million something and that would be because of that premium pricing. So it's kind of goofy. I know how can you achieve more money in in proceeds for projects than the actual bond amount, but it's because of this extra spiff, if you will, that they pay in order to have those slightly higher coupons on the bond issue. So, not a whole lot else unless you would like me to give you a lecture on arbitrage monitoring, which I don't think you do. Uh, but everything else looks very straightforward for this bond issue. Um, we've been in touch with bond counsel at Q Tech Rock for next steps on that side of things. Um, we have a credit rating discussion set up for later this month as well that Natalie and Lori will be part of. And that's really for the um affirmation of your double A+ rating. We don't see any problems with getting that affirmed. And then we'll be off to the races for the Bondsu um again on November 18th, which as you may recall it is a well, it's a regular meeting for you, but it's a week later than normal because of Veterans Day following on November 11th, of course. So then we'll be at that meeting after taking competitive bids on your behalf um to present the winning bid for your award. And then you'll have the bond proceeds on uh December 10th. And that's when you'll get all that money into your bank account to reimburse the city um and then to fund that equipment purchase. And that works really well too because then you'll have everything settled up before your end and you won't have be carrying any kind of a deficit um through to 2026. We also included a few uh debt schedules. I'll be happy to answer any questions that you have about that. You can see the three purposes stacked up in this one bond issue. Again, noting that we are expecting a smaller amount for the 2025 street projects. And um we also showed the estimated assessment income that we'll be paying roughly 50% of the debt service on the two street projects. Before we go to the resolution, do you have any questions about bond issue, the process of selling the bonds, credit rating, or anything like that? Can you maybe just talk about the bidding process and how that works? So, you take this, it goes out for bid and then you're going to get multiple, >> right, >> buy agents coming to bid and you're you're looking for the lowest interest rate, >> right? >> And the best premium. >> Yes, exactly. So, great question. Um, one of the great things about the city's bonds being highly rated, but also because we have such a strong culture of competitive bidding in Minnesota, is that we can put out a bond like this to the national marketplace and received it. It's it's hard to predict. Bidding uh patterns uh vary from week to week and month to month, but we typically receive very strong bidding from underwriting firms across the country uh on bond issues like this. So, not only one space here in the Twin Cities, but also Chicago, Memphis, um any number of places, they will have customers that want Minnesota tax exempt bonds. And it's really that double tax exemption. If you if you uh recall with MUN bonds, the interest that you earn on these mun bonds as an investor is exempt both from federal and Minnesota state tax. So, um, that's quite attractive and that's why they're willing to offer great interest rates to cities like Melvin because of that double tax exemption. And so, um, the market will see the offering statement, the POSOS as we call it, um, for the bond issue. They'll also see the credit rating from S&P and then on the morning of the 18th we'll take bids on the city's behalf and then do calculations to basically figure out which is on an apples apples basis who has the best overall bid with the lowest overall interest rate for the city and that's the the firm that we'll recommend for your award. >> Thank you. >> So this is just for my own education. You talked about the additional premium that they pay. >> Yeah. which seems to be just a benefit for the organization that you know this is awarded to is it some is it a tax shelter because >> no no yeah I'm just confused by that. >> Sure. So, um I don't know if you have your uh reports available, but if I could point you to um it's PDF page 126, but it's marked page 139. Um this is what we were showing as the overall preliminary structure of the bond issue again with that uh previous project cost for the 2025 street projects. And if you see, you can see the coupons there ranging from 2.85% up to 4.05%. Well, what we'll what we'll actually see those are indicative of current market rates, although we've inflated those by 50 basis points to provide some cushion. So, actual current market rates are closer to 2.3% ranging up to about three and a half%. But again, we we've provided some cushion there so that you're not um caught by surprise if rates were to increase, but we don't expect that to happen. So, to answer your question, what happens with premium bidding is you might actually see 4% coupons from the winning bidder all the way through. So, every single maturity might be at a 4%. And you might say, well, wait a second. Current market rates indicate that it should be closer to 2 and a half% or 3% on the short end, right? Not 4%. >> Well, so the winning bidder does the math and figures out how much extra money they need to give you for that first maturity for instance in 2027 to make up for the fact that they are getting a 4% interest rate on a bond that should only be yielding 2.8%. And that's the premium. Now you have to decide then well what do we do with that extra premium? Do we want to keep it for projects? Well, no. You already know what your project costs are. >> So what we do instead is we reduce the bond amount. We reduce that 2027 maturity. Instead of issuing 1.2 or 125,000, you might issue, you know, 110,000 or 100,000. and we use that premium essentially to make up for the reduced par amount. I know it's really kind of goofy and complicated, but we don't want to restrict underwriters from the ability to put the coupons on that they think are going to sell the best to investors. >> And so we're like, sure, knock yourself out. Put whatever coupons you want on. We just want the best overall deal for the city of NA. And that's what we figure out with the calculations. Thank you. Yeah, >> I'm sorry. I hope that helped. But it's um we just get questions, you know, if we don't explain it, then when we come on the SA sale date and you say, "Well, wait a second. We thought we were going to get a 3% rate and these are all 4% rates." You are still getting a 3% rate. It's just reflected differently. >> Thank you. >> Is there any other questions? >> I know the evil Scott loved my conversation. Uh so anyway, uh if there aren't any more questions, Mr. Mer, I'd ask you to take out the resolution as written in your packet. But again, with the caveat that we know the um the 2025 street project costs are coming in lower than that are reflected here and the actual bond offering will reflect that in the commission. >> And we can amend it to the mountain state. We can go to 1,45,000. You can, but then there are other I noticed that there were a number of other numbers in the resolution that we would have to amend as well. >> Prove it as is. Okay. >> Yeah. So, thank you, >> Mr. Mayor. Council Ringo, >> I would move uh that we approve the resolution providing for the issuance and sale of general obligation bonds series 2025A and the proposed agreement aggregate principal amount of 1,001,460,000 which is subject to change. >> I will second your motion on that. Any other discussion? No discussion. Roll call vote. Let's start with you. Uh, Council Member Swansson. >> I. >> Anybody catch that? >> I think he said I >> I think he threw it at us. I think >> Sorry, it's an I for me. >> Okay. >> Hi, Council Member Randall. >> I for myself. I'm an I. Council member Glazer. >> Mr. Mayor, I I am voting I on this resolution with um but I want to state for the record that um I'm voting I because of our financial obligations for the 2024 2025 road projects and responsibility we have to our our taxpayers, our residents that benefited from those improvements, but um I want to state for the record that I'm still not in favor of the specific rescue truck that the city >> confir I >> Okay, so with that uh motion carries and uh you can go ahead and uh work the issuance of the bond sale. >> Awesome. >> Thank you for give us an explanation on that. >> Yeah. Thanks. And and now you can uh regail your friends at your next party with premium pricing at all. >> Thank you. Have a good day. >> Thank you. >> Hi. We're going to move on to the next one which is engineering. Um is Shane with us at all to discuss this? >> You know, forgive me Mr. here, but being on vacation, I did not touch base with him, but I thought he was going to be here. So, um, most of it's pretty straightforward. Um, we're adopting the special assessments for the 2025 project. Um, as Mr. Kimmel said, the project did come in a little bit under, so the dollar amount is a little bit less per um, resident. Instead of 3660, it's 3150. Um you can see the assessment roles for all the properties that are going to be affected and we will be putting together um I believe the final payment or a portion of the payment. there's only some retainage left um is in this batch of claims to be paid for the project and we will be sending out the letters um out to all of the residents letting them know that they can pay the assessment prior to I believe that's going to be November 30th uh so that we can get all that to the county um before assessments are certified against properties. >> Okay. So we have two resolutions here. >> Yep. So, the first one is going to be on the 2024 or 2025 overlay project. That one I need you to approve so that we can go ahead and start sending the letters out to residents for what the final dollars are to them and then >> which should be on page 125. So, let's take that one first. Is there any discussion that we would like to have on that? >> Mr. Mayor, council member to make a motion approving the resolution adopting the assessment role for street, lithium street, 180 89th lane, 194th lane, and Tiger Street for the road improvement private. >> Second. Thank you very much. We got a second from council member Glazer. Um, any other discussion? Hearing none, moving forward. Council member Brian Williams, please start on with the roll call vote. >> I council Blazer >> I. >> I'm also an I. Council Rainbow. >> Hi. >> Council member Swanson. I >> All right, we got him this time. Okay, so that's approved. Moving on to the next one. Uh, Miss Johnson, you want to talk about the feasibility report? >> Yep. This is something that Mr. Nelson and I talked about with the next year's project. Um, he's got the streets that they would like to do the work on next year. And in order to, you know, last spring, you probably remember, we had to hurry up and do a feasibility feasibility report for the this year's project. you would like to get a earlier start on it and go ahead and get this feasibility start um approved so that you can get the overlay project um going and bring back a report to the city so that we may do the discuss the assessments in the project. >> So one thing and I read through this and correct me if I'm wrong but I don't see a cost in this feasibility report. Normally it's rolled forward with the project but what do we pay for something like this? >> I think we had about 500,000 We had asked >> that's for the complete project or I'm saying the feasibility report itself. What do we pay the city engineer to do this to bring this information in to understand that that >> one is a good question that I don't know that would change to answer >> and I know did this last year and it ties into our what our overall I believe our road plan is is to make sure we continue to move forward and fix roads with overlays uh so we don't have to do the complete reconstruction. That's the one thing this doesn't say is what is the cost of the city for approving it. I think it makes sense, but I just don't know what that cost. >> I can certainly send that out by email tomorrow, get everything back to you. I know it gets wrapped in cost. >> Is there any other discussion or anybody to speak on the uh the feasibility? >> Thank you. Um Mr. Mayor, did we not, and me, did we not have discussions at the time the county was here to look at the streets that went east and west from BA between 22 and 181st to see if they could be combined in for that project so that the cost would be less. Am I missing that in here? >> I think Miss Johnson can answer that question for you. We had a long discussion about that. Um several of the roads over in that area don't really service a lot of people. So the assessment amount would just be too high even to try to get it done. Um Mr. Nelson thought that it would be tough to uh get some of those roads for less than 780,000 I believe was one of the roads. Um and there were only 18 residents on it. So it just would not be feasible to do so. >> So it's a great question and yes, we absolutely look into it onward. >> Mr. Johnson, how how difficult is it to get a list of the potentially impacted addresses for these street? >> Um it shouldn't be that hard. >> That's what the feasibility report does though, doesn't it? It tells us how many is going to go into it >> cost >> and then Shane will go through and get all of the Ps and the addresses and figure out an estimated cost. But we'd like to get into the bidding process a little earlier this year than we did last year. So we don't know at this time >> just a point of information at least this may be a ballpark to answer your question about cost the where the total engineering cost was 37,000 for 2025 so split between all the engineering that's what 10%ish project >> maybe a little bit yeah a little bit less but 5% is close enough but that's all of the interior Repeatability is just that. >> I know. Yeah, it's part of it. >> So, it's a part piece of it. We know that he did a good job with it last year and got it rolling and for us to not fall behind schedule. Um, my recommendations and how we move forward with it. That's mine. But, anybody else have any other comments on that? Council member Switzen, do you have anything you want to say on this? >> Yeah, I think it makes sense to move forward with it. I mean, it seems like something we're going to have to do, so we might as well get the ball rolling. >> Mr. Mayor Counc. >> I'll make a motion to approve the resolution to order the preparation of the feasibility report for the 2026 overlay project. >> Second. >> Second from Council Member Rabel. We'll do roll call vote. Council member Swintson, you're first again. >> I council Rabel >> I. >> I'm also an I. Council member Gazer. >> I council member Blunt. >> Hi. >> Okay. Motion carries. It is passed. Chief. Oh, hang on. >> Chief, you're talking about fire department monthly report, please. >> Mr. Mayor, House Farmers. Thank you. Uh, we're going to talk about September um monthly calls. Um, you'll see on your report that we broke it out a little bit more um with some uh definition. Uh 21 calls for the month. Three required. um five uh difficulty breathing, five hearts or I'm sorry, two hearts, uh one personal injury accident, uh two seizures, two liposis, uh one unconscious, two falls, a severe bleed, a choking, and carbon monoxide alarm. So, um September was a busy month, uh for calls and training. Uh we hosted the open house um at the Heritage Days Festival that included landing a lifeline helicopter in the in the public area for the for the public to tour. Um air ambulances are used on occasion in uh in now then um being that we are a rural community and we're so far away from level one promise center. So you will see us um land those those types of aircraft. Um it was actually um excellent practice for for the fire department um because we were able to land that aircraft not under emergency conditions. So um it was a great straight for the public. So um we also hosted and participated in live fire training at an acquired structure on 181st um in the same weekend. So we went from Saturday to Sunday um and spent the better portion of Sunday at this training. Um it was performed um uh in conjunction with the state fire marshall's office. We're providing arson investigation um uh uh uh the house has provided arson investigation um areas for this class to come in with the state bar marshal. Um these are training not only on the county um uh fire investigators but also other metro area fire investigators. And these opportunities don't come up very often. So, it was a it was a great opportunity for now then to to showcase um our department, our city, and what we can provide um to help with the the investigation pieces throughout the metro. Um we had uh mutual aid from uh Elk River, uh Oakrove, and St. Francis Fire Department, and Ramsey assisted covering our calls while we're providing um while we're doing that training. So, um we will be closing out our recruitment campaign shortly. Um, we have uh a good chunk of applicants that we're going to move forward to interviews and hopefully uh moving forward to hiring by the end of the year. So, I'll stand with any questions for my report. >> Chief, can you talk about the number of number of applicants? What's the total number that you not qualified or anything else? >> Um, right now we're at uh I believe it's six applicants um which um is a little bit less than what I was anticipating. Um but we still have interest um out there. We've had several people calling city also. Um I I feel that we get to up to that 10 range. Um generally if we can get three to to six or eight employees out of that um we'll be doing very well. So customer chief, could you just do me a favor and could you um break out the the three fires that we had specifically what they failed? So the three fires were I believe without just off the top of my head a grass fire um and then uh two mutual aid fires that we responded to to I believe this whole the same processes. One was a sidewall fire and yes I do know how to fight a sidewall fires just like a chimney. >> So grass fire now then and then two mutual aid outside. >> Yes. Any other questions for the chief on what he's presented? >> All right, chief. You want to talk about uh the next one is request for council action on the fire truck approval of that? >> Yes, absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. Um we are looking to uh we're looking at a council action to um uh prepay the chassis for the the upcoming fire truck that we're going to sell bonds for. I've talked to uh Mrs. Miss Jagger about um do we have funds that we can um pay uh prepay this chassis um and then pay back those funds to the to the city budget when we sell the bonds. Um she has responded with the affirmative. Um the reason why I'm bringing this forward is um the vendor that we're working with um got a notification from Ford, who's the chassis maker, that there's going to be a a pretty substantial price increase um coming forward and that we need to pre if we wanted to keep the price that we had today with the with current um um uh spec that we have, we would need to pre- purchase that that chassis um as soon as possible. So that's why I'm bringing this forward now. Um, and this is to avoid um um a uh getting into the 2026 2027 chassis models and and that increase that comes with that. >> So your request is for approval for 95,000 initially and then right behind that. >> So it the initial so the initial will be 95,387. Um the remainder of of the truck that we talked about um the $514, uh $90, um the remainder of that would be paid on uh December 2ndish when we issue those bonds. Um prepaying the chassis and the truck will um get us a $20,000 $564 discount, which brings that truck into somewhere in the $496,000 range. So, we're under the $500,000, but we had virtually thought that truck was going to be >> Chief Miller, there's some there's some talk out there in regards to um pollution control standards and uh for diesel trucks and I kind of pay attention to that because I drive a diesel truck every day and they're talking about reverting some of those standards which will could essentially reduce reduce the price of a of, you know, a a diesel pickup or, you know, a chassis cab like the one that we're purchasing. We don't want to um it's too much of a risk to look and see what happens with that. >> I have not heard any of that kind of um talk or discussion, especially from the manufacturers. The manufacturers are are moving straight forward that that those aren't going to be reduced. Um I I think it would be I think it' be premature for us to to have those discussions. Um because I don't see that at the national level happening. Um but I again manufacturers aren't telling us anything different than they're going to stick with the emissions controls that they currently have in place. Um and I would I would assume that anything that's going to be reduced would probably be years off from that because I most most times that takes um congressional action. >> Thank you. Any other questions for chief on this uh uh process to pay? Chief, is this the right truck for us? >> This is the right truck for us, mayor uh and council members. This is the truck that that um that uh we initially look at the the department um put a committee together to look at this vehicle and make sure that this will serve our needs um for the next 20 years. Um, so we're very confident that this is a truck that's going to serve the needs of the department and the community moving forward. >> I I do know that there's uh pricing pressure. I'm just going to talk about tariffs. I'm dealing with them every day right now. So I don't know how much of this truck is made. I know water is pumps are made here in the Twin Cities. So that's good. But I'm assuming some of this vehicle components is coming from overseas and the tariffs are definitely impacting raising costs. So, I think this is a solid plan to move forward with it. I don't really want to issue the whole bond, but that's the way it's working out to get the $20,000 savings. My one concern is the last truck took like four years to get here. I see this says 24 months. Um, but it needs to be like delivered in 24 months, no later than 24 months. >> So, speaking with the manufacturer, Mr. Mayor, council member, speaking with the speaking of the manufacturer, um, they are on an 18 month build schedule once they get the chassis from Ford. That's why it's imperative to preurchase this chassis now so we can get it to the manufacturer as soon as possible to have that build schedule even tighter. >> Mr. Mayor, >> question. Chief, the this is a different manufacturer from the the truck that we just received. >> Does this particular manufacturer offer the same type of incentive financial incentive to the city if they're late in delivering like the other company was? Yes, that's where the M council members, that's where the $20,000 savings comes in. They have to deliver within that that time frame. Um so there won't be any I've worked with this company in the past with with um with other projects. Um I've never had a truck that we've uh I've been involved with ever. This company is very strict on their their time frames. >> They're close enough that people can go visit. they are definitely close enough to go miss them and put pressure on your question. >> Um well the way I'm reading this is that the the 20,564 is actually a discount to free things for the chassis. Um my question is more >> penalties therefore >> penalties. I'd have to look I'd have to look a little bit closer at the contract to see if there are penalties involved um with that because I think they're 24 month um contract on that. So I yeah that is not >> it would be I do agree. >> Yeah. >> So if it is not delivered that there's a daily penalty or whatever the case is. I did see in here that they said they pulled a 24-month delivery schedule. So and it's written right in the contract. Yeah. No three year no four year. None of that greasiness we we're going to pay for. in less than two years. >> Any other discussion on that? >> Mr. Mayor, >> Council Ringle, >> there's no more discussion. I would move approval of prepayment for the chassis for the new rescue pumper truck and contract acceptance. >> Okay, I will second the motion. Is there any discussion? >> Hearing none, we're going to start on this side. Council member Ryan, you're here first. Vote. I >> council member Glazer. >> Nay. >> I have an I. Council member Mango. >> Hi. >> Council member Swanson. >> I >> Okay. Motion carries. >> Mr. Mayor. >> Chief. >> Oh, I'm >> Chief. I think you're good to go. Thank you very much. >> Okay. Thank you very much. I just wanted to make a clarification on an email for council member Laser's uh question that he had on the check that was written for the $9,000. In my head when I was in Arizona, I thought it was for this one. So, this check will still be written. The $9,000 was the balance due on the previous truck check after the discount and given us our 3% back for all the days. >> Sorry about that. That's okay. I was tied to a fire truck of some type. >> I was going to ask >> just the wrong one. >> I apologize. >> Deputy Chief, you're out. The chair supporter. >> It's great to see you today. Welcome back. It's good to be back in the beautiful city of Navan again. Uh my name is Bill Jacobson. I serve as the chief deputy for the sheriff's office and I served as the sheriff's liaison for uh for a few years here in the city of Taliban. just covering for Cole tonight. Hopefully I can I can fill the issues adequately here. So I do have for you the sheriff's report for the month of September of 2025. Quick overview is 156 calls for service, 10 over to the baron facility, which we'll talk about, seven alarm calls, 18 medicals, and six I'm sorry, 16 animal calls. of the Barnon detail for those calls. On the 7th at 6:39 p.m., we responded to an assault between a reported assault between two juveniles. Um, we arrived and there wasn't a crime that was committed. We mediated that. Uh, again on the 7th later that night, an assault report, a juvenile had assaulted a staff member. Um, that juvenile was charged, but uh with fifth degree assault, but they remain at the facility in their care. Uh on the 12th at 4:38 we had a runaway juvenile. As is common, we were able to locate that juvenile and bring him back. On the 16th at 5:56, um some disorderly juveniles. Again, we arrived. No crime had been committed. We were able to mediate that situation successfully. The 21st, another assault report with a staff member as a suspect. Um our major crimes team investigated that and determined that the complaint was unfounded. essentially didn't happen. Um, on the 21st at 8:11 p.m., uh, we responded to a mental health crisis involving two separate juveniles and they were both transported by ambulance for additional care. On the 25th, another medical call um, we assisted Elena on that and then again that juvenile remained in the care of staff at Bar None. The 26th, another disorderly call. Um, that juvenile was arrested due to the due to the amount of damage caused. um if I recall that was felony level damage and uh that juvenile was booked at the regional juvenile center in Lakes to face charges. Uh on the 27th, another mental health crisis. Uh in that case, that juvenile was transported to the hospital by a line for additional care. Couple other calls on our radar on the 12th at 2:28 p.m. We had a damage to property report. Um the complainant reported her vehicle had been vandalized, the stereo had been stolen. Um no suspects at this time. We did talk to someone that she identified as a potential suspect, but um there's no evidence there. So that at this time is still an active investigation. Then on the 13th, one of our deputies was on routine patrol and discovered a stranded motorist. Um again determined the female driver had a misdemeanor warrant out of Chicago County. Um she was transported to RJL book to face um to face the charges on her misdemeanor warrant. Um all in all, a pretty um pretty out of uh um Um, pretty unremarkable as far as serious calls, which is the way we like it here and now then. Um, sounds like Veritage Fest went off really well. Sounds like you did get a helicopter, which is super cool cuz I know Natalie and I had email a little bit about that and I'm glad to see that they were able to come out because that is such a cool thing to see. And speaking uh for the fire chief a little bit, uh, it is so nice to be able to just kind of see a helicopter come in without some other major disaster unfolding where you can't sort of check it out. So, um, those folks are great. Was that Lifelink that came out as well? >> Lifelink, man. >> Yeah, they're great. Um, they were out at our open house, too. And, uh, it was super great to see them out there. And then you got to see some of our canines in action, which we love. So, um, with that, I don't have much else for you. I'm just, uh, I'll stand for any other questions you have. So, there any questions for Deputy Chief? >> Sir, we appreciate what you do for us. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> I don't know if this is appropriate time to ask this question. and and it may actually be more appropriate for M. Johnson, but just wondering how we're doing in regards to um ongoing communication with Bar None and their conditional use permit. >> Yes, it is still in progress. Um Mr. Rupy and Barn's attorney have been in contact and they're it's the people here want to work with us, but their home office is it California? I think it's in another state. um they want the attorneys to take care of it. So um Bob is working with them a little bit right now and we'll be having another meeting I think next week he's supposed to update me on what >> going up that go from 2024 to 72 calls right way down here to date we're at 89 so it's increased up we're about 17 over Mr. mayor from last year at this time. So, and that number is is for sure higher than prior years as well. So, great question. Okay. >> All right, sir. Thank you very much. Thank you all. Good to see everyone. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Miss Nash, my name is Tony. You want to start with the monthly report? >> Sure. >> Happy to answer any questions on the monthly report? >> I didn't have them. >> Any questions on the monthly report? Moving on then the next item is um items B and C on the agenda go along with each other. The first is an interim use permit for a commercial kennel at 8614 211th Avenue and the second resolution is the issuance of the actual commercial kennel license and for that this did go before the planning commission. the they recommended approval subject to the conditions that are included in the findings of fact in your packet. I'm happy to answer any questions, but this is a pretty simple home business. It's a five no more than five dogs, no employees other than the owner um and the property and and if he ever wanted to expand, he would need to come in for an amended condition use permit. I think there's one more important thing to note just that the site is as loud as 10 acres. So he's got plenty of plus. >> So the one to five that that's client dogs, correct? >> No, that's actually written up that any dogs because we don't have any way of actually knowing if they're client or um >> so that includes their own personal dogs. >> Yep. >> So finding on the facts is page 182. Read through them. I think like Miss Nash said, it's important that you all went through P&Z. Uh they did a very good job of writing questions. They asked a lot of questions. Um so I think they did a good job on this one. So there's two motions to approve on this one. >> Yes. >> Or uh two resolutions. The first one is for the interim use permit and then the other one is the issuance of the penalt license. Correct. So, would anybody like to start with an emotion page? The first one looks like it's on page 22. The resolution is on page 18. There you go. Question 180 is the first resolution. That's where the findings no findings are next. >> Mr. Mayor, >> I would make a make a motion to approve an inter permit for an extended home occupation for a commercial panel located at 8614 2011 Avenue. >> Second. Well, there's a very quick second. All right. Roll call vote. Council member Graham, you start again, please. >> I council member Blazer, >> I have an >> I council >> I >> and council member Swanson. >> I quick and easy on the first one. Motion carried. Now we'll move on to Does anybody know the page number for the next one? Mr. Mayor, page 200. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council member Brian make a motion to approve the resol resolution issuing the commercial kennel license for the commercial kennel located at 8614 211. >> Second. >> Second from council member Randall. We'll start in opposite order. Council member Swanson, you're up first. >> I council Randall >> I. >> I'm in I. Council member Glazer. >> I council approved. >> Thank you guys. >> Thank you. Okay, next up is subdivision for police states. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This one also um encompasses two items uh letters B and E on this agenda and both require a resolution for approval as well. So, the first is um a minor subdivision fourth place. This is for one lot off of 229th Avenue. as part of this um 229th Avenue itself is a a road that is um it's been in existence for a very long time. It was not designed to city standards. So it's missing some components um that we typically would have. One would be that we need to have the rightway actually given in an easement to the city for the portion that they control. Right now it's by user only. So it's basically we're using and maintaining it. So you have an easement but only to the extent that we're so fine or anything like that. Um and the second is that there is not a culde-sac at the end of that half mile road today which is important for um emergency response purposes um and when any larger vehicle goes back there to have that turnaround site. So, as part of this, there are requirements that they um grant the city an easement for that right away and as well as constructing gravel called a sack on the site in the location that's shown in the packet. So, page go to sack just so everybody knows what 216 217. >> It's hard to count on 211. I'll say that. >> So, page number for you, but >> 217 216. It both shows difficult to say what we're going to do. Um, and because of the way that they own property on the south side, that culde-sac is going to rather than coming in and being straight off the very end of the road like would be a little more typical, it is going to dip down into that property instead. >> So, does that whole area become an easement then? >> Yes, that's that whole thing is an easement. You can see on page 217 um you can see where the road easement shows up pretty well. What's that dashed line that's going around? >> Mhm. >> May also want to just touch base and just talk about how this road is because it borders us in St. Francis. It's like I almost say no man's land, but it's not like it's clearly defined and that's where this this turnound is necessary for. I know the resident would prefer not to have it, but due to safety reasons, there's no other place to turn the line. So, that was a big thing in the planning and zoning. Um, we plow the road apparently or whoever plows the road, whoever gets there first plows the road, say Francis or else. >> Yes, there's no formal. So, it's frequently common that in this situation where you have a tunnel line road, we call it, that the two cities would have a formal agreement on maintenance and upkeep as well as any improvements. um in this situation here and I think in every one that you have with St. Francis anyways um it's been kind of some one entity does some another entity predominantly does others and this one is predominantly it sounds like maintained by Joe >> so it's quite interesting I learned a lot just in planning zoning about this knowing Anything else? Miss Nash would be >> No, I don't have anything else. Otherwise, it's um other than those two things, it's it's common. It's basically the same thing for every minor subdivision. These are the two unique items. >> So on page 203 would be a resolution and that's the first one to approve. >> Yes, >> Mr. Mayor. Council, >> if there are no additional questions or objections, I would move resolution uh 2025 to be determined um approving a minor subdivision for place forms. >> I will second that motion. Is there any discussion on that? Hearing none. We'll start with council member Swanson. >> I council Rel >> I council member Blazer >> I counc >> I >> Okay, motion carries. First one complete. What is the page number of the second 235? >> So the second one is related to the development agreement for the site. It's a relatively simple DA because it's predominantly related to the construction of that culac along with installation of the wetland buffer signs. >> The findings of the past that we should read about on this one or not? >> No, there's the resolution and then there's the development agreement itself. building one single family home. >> This is the same thing that was approved by planning and zone. >> No, planning and zoning doesn't see the development agreements, but it it tracks along with the um prior resolution that you just approved in terms of what the terms and conditions are. It's just that formal document to go with it. >> So, we don't get a formal document approval. Got it. Thank you, >> Mr. Mayor. >> Council member If there are no additional questions or disagreements, I would move that we approve resolution 2025 number to be determined approving a development agreement for the development known as based funds. >> Second, council member Glazer. Any discussion hearing? None. Start a roll call vote. Council member Brown off please. I council member Glazer. >> I I'm an I. Council Rainbow. >> Hi. Council member Swansson >> I. >> Okay. Motion carries. And the last one. We'll bring this up. Miss Nash, you can touch base on it. >> Thank you. Um, we are starting that zoning ordinance update process and as part of that, we do need the council to select two members to be on the committee that will help to do some of the heavy lifting of that early review before it goes out for a broader public review. So we we have uh we had two volunteers from the planning and zoning which is Dan Hapla and Kelly Perrell. Um because I'm the leaison for this. I would like to volunteer myself to be on this. I continue to learn and work with Miss Johnson as we get plenty of questions in planning and zoning and no different than uh our first resident just brought up today was that there's challenges in that process. We want to make a streamlined process that hopefully we can put identify what the cost is then they know what that is going forward instead of doing industrial base. That's the ultimate goal which I think we can be transparent with residents. >> Mr. Mayor, >> council member um please go ahead. >> I would also like to volunteer. >> Any other discussion? >> Mr. Mayor, >> council member Swansson. >> Yeah, I mean I was going to say I would volunteer if uh there was no one else. Uh, I mean, I will concede that I don't have the the expertise I think as Councilman Glazier has in this, so I'll defer to him. Um, he's in, you know, sort of the building trade. Um, so I think both of you would make a good choice. So, I would support the both of you. >> I'm super excited to get some volunteers because this this is a lot of work. This is this will be multiple meetings and it's going to be in-depth reading and trying to help figure this thing out. So, but it's going to be I I believe the pathway to fixing our ordinances and making our our residents much more comfortable if they want to support land. That's the ultimate goal. So, thank you for chair. >> All right. So, anybody might want to make a motion on that. >> Mr. Mayor, >> council Rainbow. >> I would move that we appoint Mayor Shane Gibbon and council member Ken Blazer to the planning and zoning work. >> Do a second on that. Is there any discussion? There's no rainbow. >> I would just thankful >> this one thankful I'm going to tell you >> is it is will set us hopefully on a good path. >> Thank you. >> Hopefully we can make positive change. >> Exactly right. All right. Council member Swson, we'll start with the roll call vote with you. >> I council member Rainbow >> I. >> I'm an I. Council member Glazer >> I. >> And Council Member O'Bri. >> All right. Motion approved. >> Miss Dash, you're good to go. Thank you very much. >> Thank you very much. >> That was a lot. All right, Miss Johnson, city court updates. >> Uh, just a couple little things. As Eric had his 21st anniversary on October 1st with the city, November 26th, >> Can I ask a question? Do we do anything special for them when they have their anniversaries? >> Uh, we did in the office. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> You made it at least you wish them congratulations. I texted Yeah, I brought in lunch for everyone. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Um, November 26 is our revisit the budget meeting. Uh, Chief wanted me to let you know if he was going to be out of town, like he would attend via Zoom, if that was acceptable to council. All right. And then on Saturday, I do have one more thing. Um, while they're out working on our server, trying to get things all settled there, they also dug the trench from the city office over to the recycling center. So hopefully I will get more of an update. I just was dealing with it when I was in Arizona. So hopefully this week I'll get a better update as to when we'll actually be able to have service set up over there. >> Yeah, the recycle center. >> Yeah, because they could be digging it preliminary before it get the ground freezes. That could be one reason to dig it and they're not ready or maybe they're setting it to just >> right. I just have to see the status where Craig is. >> And is that something you can call podcast and get an update from them on on when they're going to do that? >> Um that would be ARG. We still have ARG, but um Craig is just doing it out. They're just moving the line, trenching the line from the city office over. >> So yeah, so my understanding is um schools for businesses doing it. >> Okay, perfect. and then hard wiring in the cameras >> which would be great. Okay. Anything else for that? >> Nope. >> Can we switch over to new business? >> First one for new business is ordinance 2025 repealing and replacing chapter 1 section 5 the administrative enforcement. Who wants to lead the discussion on that one? This has been um some of the ordinances that Dileia has been working on with Bob and with Marker, the attorneys um trying to get everything done because we had taken out that administrative dollar amount because we have the different um they call it the A and B >> enforcement. Yeah. We wanted to get that taken care of and try to get these into place. So the comments uh you'll see there are from Mark Alstead. Um there isn't a whole lot that we were changing. Um there was a thing that we could uh in the event an administrative hearing officer may find the reporting we could use u rum river consultants as part of our as our um professional for an administrative hearing if we happen to have one. >> That was going to be my recommendation. >> Yes. >> Came out in their summary. Yep. So, basically it's doing this. We need a um two motions. One to approve the changes and one to do the summary publication because it's not enforceable until we have the summary publication done. And then to go with that would be the fee schedule in which we changed a couple of the uh fees as well to include a few uh changes like for using card stock or using regular paper. We changed some shelter costs, I believe, for trying to increase to actually cover some of the city costs as well as doing the administrative fines. And that one is on page 257. So being a class A then would be defined as a zoning. That would be a $200 fine. So, anything that I need Cindy for, um, anything that deals in all this, zoning for, um, any kind of a fee, uh, that we have to enforce, you would be able to, uh, help with those. Class B then are the nuisances. That would be, um, let's say our chickens or the junk in the yard or the complaints that come in um, that are violating any of the nuisance ordinances. And then all other violations would be $100. Um the only thing that would be different would be the excessive use of law enforcement services and that stays the same because that was a separate item. >> So when we look at our our agenda, the ordinance repealing, it's chapter 1 section five. That was only the first couple pages. Correct. >> Yes. >> I've only took us through page 244. Is that correct? >> 245. All right. So, I'd like to start with that and we'll start knocking these out one at a one at a time, otherwise it gets confusing. >> Is there any questions on repealing and replacing Mr. Mayor? >> Council member Glazer, please go ahead. >> So, it was attorney Allight that was that were consulting with on this, correct? >> Yes. He had a he had a concern. If you look at page 241 and it pertains to um a line item on page 257 and specifically talks about um his concern about um potentially fines doubling if there's more than one events in a calendar year. And so, you know, my question is, is there does council want to do anything have a conversation or make any changes to that? And the wording the wording on for 1-5-3 is is kind of vague anyhow because it says fees may double, >> right? >> So, at whose discretion and what are the criteria for deciding whether something should double? needs to be kept. Yeah, I think a recommendation on what that should have been changed to should be in here right now. We can make something up, but typically it's got to get done by the attorney anyway. >> It does. And he does have on the fee schedule fines doubled with each offense in one calendar year. And it says fines may be given weekly. That is not something that we were going to do. I believe that should have been removed. Sorry, I didn't touch that before. I'm going to recommend we run it back by him and say this is what it should stay instead of us making it up in here. I don't really want to approve it if it's not done. I'm very concerned. Yeah, we're talking and he's I'm assuming going to remove the fees may double with each administrative offense um in one calendar year because he's highlighted that. But then if you read the note, I thought it was all going to come based off the other schedule that we produced. So I'm a little bit confused. >> Mr. Mayor, I agree with council members later that we don't ever we don't want it word in one way in one section and word another way in another section. And so and and there we've had long discussions about the difference between may and shall um and >> they're very different. And so if and and yes, if there's some sort of um to the the point of who's going to decide if it's going to double or not, I mean, yes. And that could get very expensive. And if I think that has been part of the challenges we had in the past was, well, okay, you had two weeks to figure it out. Oh, wait. No, now this person had two weeks and then that person had a month and then it doubled and then it didn't double. And some of these things are going to take time in theory. So we would be I don't think we would necessarily be enforcing a doubling of fine um if if it's actively being worked on and >> so maybe scenarios a couple scenarios to it and maybe that's exactly what we need to kind of prove the concept as we do this. >> So I know that's the first one but are all of these and you said fee ties into the same thing. >> Yeah, that would be the fee schedule. >> What page does that one start at? That was >> 247. >> Yeah. So where it is on there is 257. >> Mr. Mayor, counc I would say we theoretically can. Yes, we could probably. Is it worth approving the fee schedule? But it up to that section. Now that would imply reposting it twice. >> It would mean republication. >> Yeah. >> So if uh would please the council I could get that verified with attorney sites and then bring it back if we could look at it real quick at the budget meeting once I have an answer I can send an email to you as well >> clarification I'd like a couple scenarios run through um it's typically I prove my concepts as I I'm going through and developing something like this to say yes it makes sense it fits the time criteria they're not getting double fined or if they are getting double finded there's good reason for it so would that carry us all the way through C D. Is it all this? Yeah, >> just just No, it would make it through D. >> Um I do have one other question then. As long as we're talking about it, >> do you as a council believe that $200 and 250 is enough to get the attention to get people to do what they need to do? >> Mr. Mayor, >> so maybe we can use a recent email that council received in regards to a an issue between two neighbors pertaining to rooster. >> Is is is that one is that the the person that owns the the the stock the follow are they going to be fined $250 for a nuisance? >> Um they would get two letters and if they didn't correct the situation by the third letter they would get a fine. So, so it's my understanding, it's my understanding this particular homeowner was there before the the the neighbor built or moved in. And um >> that is correct. And he is allowed to have >> Yeah, he's allowed to have the roosters. So, yeah, in this particular case, it wouldn't be a fine because it's not really a >> an issue. Okay. >> It's an issue between neighbors, but if it was, then that's what would happen. they would get two letters and then the third one would have a fine. So, in the case of a couple of uh junk properties, they've already received a couple of uh notices once this was approved, then a fine letter would be going out. >> So, I think to answer your question, it could grab some people's attention very strongly. It may not grab other people's attention at all. >> Right. I've had the sheriff out at one particular property um twice now to verify if they started cleaning it up and they have not. I've got another property where an investor owns a property and can't get rid of the people in the house. So, he's trying to go through the court system to get them out. Um and I'm struggling with that one a little bit because I struggle to find the property owner who's going through a process to get somebody out of the home that has made the mess. So, I'm kind of waiting for the courts to make their decision on the eviction. >> You should have a process. You should be able to follow the process. So, >> it is and I don't have a process when they the property owner isn't the one occupying the the property. So, that is something else that we've talked to Mark. It sounds like maybe it's another opportunity to ask our cities on how they're dealing with it because there's no doubt that's a that's a huge challenge. >> And we don't do um rental inspections. So, it's difficult to enforce it on somebody who's at the property that doesn't own it. >> Mr. Mayor, one, >> one last question. Maybe please um you know, correct me if I missed it when I read this. Um most of the other fees that you hear are that you know residents are coming to us for something that they willingly want to do. What is there I would be more concerned as opposed maybe as opposed to fines doubling with each additional fence in one calendar year. Is there is there an issue or concern with um enforcement fees not getting paid? And if so, do we charge late charges on those if they don't get paid? Um, my understanding because we've not really done it since I've been here is we charge it if they don't pay it by the time I think we send them a warning letter. It must be in like August before assessments can go and if by the end of November when we can send the assessments to the county to be certified, they'll get certified against their taxes. >> But the late fees that because that's a big one. You know, like you said, this is this needs to be removed that fines may be given weekly. I don't know that that's appropriate, but every month that goes by, there could be some percentage decrease on that line. It would incentivize them to pay it. >> Something like that. Is that what you're thinking? >> Yeah. >> And before they get certified, it all comes back to council >> to approve to go there too. So you can make an adjustment if you choose. >> So if they wanted to publicly speak about it, they could. they would have that option to say, "Hey, this is why we try to do whatever cases." Yeah, >> they can explain the circumstances. >> Um, what would please the council as far as an interest or late fee, but I could run it past the attorneys? >> So, just say, let's use the do this month for $250. And so, if you don't pay it, is it every month? It's uh 10% like $25 that I don't know, Dan. What are your thoughts? >> I I Mr. Mayor, I think this this is kind this has kind of been the issue in the past there that that the the the paint by numbers book was very blurred and there's all these little exceptions and okay, you you get into this situation where it's the the offender is not the property owner. Okay, now what? And then that tendant went over here and then oh nope, they are. So now you're dealing with an in a giant floor chart. And that's where you get into again using words like there can be an exception because it's the property owners, not the res, not the person living there. But if it is, then how do you get that? And that's I think part of that's been always part of the problem or the challenge was those types of things need to be spelled out more so that we're not running into, okay, what do I do now? Oh, here's one that I missed. um or you know we're I'm trying to be we're trying to work with them but it's been two months and they're trying to go through the courts or that or on the other side of that they just don't care and are just not not doing anything about it if it if it if it is one of the the the junk removal ones then you know well then they may may need a little more incentive that 25 bucks okay whatever I have I put off doing any of the work and I'm not paying the 250 so what's another 25 bucks I think we've experienced that many times in the past. >> And the other thing that I need, Mr. Mayor, council, is um at what point do we go in and do the abatement and then charge it back >> ourselves? >> So, I mean, I think that's kind of where was part of the at least to me if we're going to make a change that instead if we're going to have to redo it again, let's you include that as and I don't know how much of that needs to be in the ordinance or um taken care of in some other some other way so that we have a clear concise path of how that gets enforced and to try to take care of as many of the exemptions or exceptions that we can run into. >> Your goal should be as black and white as possible enforced all the same. I think that's that's your ideal state and then if there there is an issue and they want to come up here then >> the idea that way everybody's working out the same playbook. This is the complaint process. If there's an issue this what part of the process are we in? Have you filed a formal complaint yet? Well, no. I've just been, you know, calling you and talking to you about it, Council Member Bryant. Well, okay. We need to go start with make filing the complaint, then we can work through the process. That kind of to me that needs to be spelled out. >> I agree, Mr. Mayor. That's >> as far as responsibility, I mean, it's the homeowner's responsibility to make sure that their property is adhering to to code. Um, whether they choose to rent it out or not, that's a decision they make. If they don't have a solid agreement with their tenants, is we don't regulate that. Many cities do, but we don't. If they don't have a solid contract with their renters, then they suffer the consequences of not being able to say you got 15 days or whatever your lease says to get out to to take all this stuff out. The homeowners in the long run is still responsible whether it's them that's causing the problem or kids that are living there or renters. >> So we shouldn't handle it any different. >> Doesn't matter. as far as abatement that will come into as as Dan said is you know are you working with us have you have you not worked with us well then you don't have a lot of sympathy with for somebody that refuses to work with staff to try to um eliminate the violation if you have somebody that you're working with and it's a a realistic process that they're using that is something staff will have to have some given take on that and then bring that to council to decide whether we feel comfortable with what it is the property owner is doing um versus um is not >> Mr. Johnson, I request you to take it back to our attorneys and represent it. But that includes the fee schedule, which is item C also because that's on page 257 because we got get rid of the verbiage that it could be fine to me given weekly. I don't think that's appropriate. >> So, Mr. Mayor, >> council, >> I would move that we u under new business A, B, C, and D, the staff they get returned to staff for further review. I will second that motion. >> Any discussion on that at all? >> No. >> We're going to do a quick vote on that for AB and C. Council member S, your first C. >> I council Randall. >> Hi. >> I council member Glazer. >> Hi. >> Council member Brian. >> I. >> Okay. AB C and E return. >> So, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Okay. So, we're going to uh determine an interest or a late fee, how to enforce it, uh get a complaint process, basically a flow, a flowchart as to if this then that, if this, then that. Okay. I will that passing tomorrow. >> Thank you very much. All right. So, the next one down is 12E, which is ordinance 2025, repealing replacing chapter 1, section 3 of the city council salaries. Who would you like to talk on this one? >> Mr. Mayor, >> so in the past we've had um this in the city code um and it just was never updated appropriately when previous councils made made changes to it. And so this is one of the ordinances that Julia has gone through and started to look at. And so it's just updating um and taking some of the items from the stipen policy and merging that into this. So it's in one document for council. The next um piece was um >> can we just hold that one right there >> and talk see if there's any other discussion on it and we can pull that up. >> It made sense. It's very clear and concise and it's all in one location. >> Yeah, there's no changes to like the dollar amount or anything like that. It's just getting everything in one place which it should have been prior to. >> Any other discussion? >> Okay, we'll start the vote. Roll call vote. Start the council. I need a motion. >> We need a motion. Mr. I'll make a motion to approve the ordinance repealing and replacing chapter 1 section 3 pertaining to city council salaries as well as um to um approval of the summary publication order said ordinance change >> second any discussion hearing none counc >> I council member >> I c reville >> I >> and council member Swinson Hi. >> All right. So, you included an F in there to summary publications also. >> Y. >> Okay. Uh, next one up was is mine. Um, and basically what it is is if you flip page 264, uh, the League of Minnesota Cities has a an essay contest for fourth, fifth, and sixth graders um, to write an entry to the 2025 mayor for I'll say day essay contest can be emailed or submitted online. Um, and out of this, let's talk about the reason what they're going to do. So the essay question is is cities provide a variety of services and programs that make our lives better including parks, recreation, street maintenance, water and sewer, libraries, police, fire, and more. If you This is a question to the fourth, fifth, and sixth graders. If you were mayor for a day, what would would you do to make one of our services that that make one of our services that your city provides even better? So that is the the question. So if we have any fourth, fifth or sixth graders that would like to write an essay, um the information, where do they got to send this thing, Natalie? They got to send it to get sent to League of Minnesota City's mayor for a date and it is listed in here. So if you have questions on this, you can follow up with myself or you can follow Miss Johnson on where to send it. but might be a good opportunity uh for your kids to at least understand and write an essay. So, I thought that was really interesting. I wanted to present >> and Mr. Mayor, >> council member, >> I believe I believe we're supposed to take this letter and put it on the city um >> on letterhead. I would put it on the website as well, but we would also probably put it on Facebook and have it be a letter from you and send it out to all the schools in our city as well. >> That would be that'd be wonderful. So it would go to Elk River, St. Francis, and Anila, >> Mr. Mayor, >> Council Rainbow. >> Um, we have numerous homeschool um parenting homeschooling being done by parents in the in this city here. Um, I would assume somewhere there's a list of those. I don't know where. um if that is something we could track down too and and offer the same opportunity to those students. >> There's probably a group of private schools also >> that tie into the same pack charter. >> Um don't we have some residences whose um their students go to Al River schools? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. So it's Dr. Hans. That would be wonderful. All right. So I would like to make a motion that we approve. Well, I guess it's just discussion. We don't even have to make a motion on this one. Great. >> There's just discussion. Any questions or concerns on this one? >> Mrs. Johnson, if you would send that one out. >> Okay, let's move on to 13. Old business address. We've got consent. >> This one, which is I from the >> Thank you for catching that. So, we're talking about the approval of claims for September 3rd to October 6 and the treasury report from September 2025. All right, Mr. Council, what questions do you have on this? So, one of my questions was answered and that pertain to the um the claim for the the fire truck. The the other The other thing that I I have questions on is the the city paid $3,480 so one of the our employees could get a class A driver's license. Um my question in in my email to Miss Johnson was um I I thought this was a condition of that person's employment and I was not under under the impression that the city was paying for it nor did we budget for it. Um, I was told that administrator Laner um took it upon himself to approve or or offer that to that employee. But that itself is if we go to um 10-3 of our personnel policy um job related licensing. Well, while the city um in certain circumstances will pay for these things, it is my understanding by reading 10-3 that the final decision needs to come from the city council. And I don't know that there was any resolution or vote or vote to approve that. It's just something it's my impression right now that administrator lard took it upon himself to um create that expense. Does anybody in the council know that would have came to council? Could it have came to council before we were on council? >> It would have been it would have been before we were on council because obviously Mr. Ler left before our term started. >> Mr. Um, one of the things you do need to look at in policy is what was and it could be the same, but what was the policy that was in effect at the time, not what we just approved because there were changes to policy um, previous policy to what we have now. So, I I don't know what the policy was at the time. So, >> yeah. and and so I I would be curious to know that I would I'm I'm guessing that the policy was very similar. But the other thing if this would have been regardless if this would have been brought to um council first, one thing that's very and I spoke to somebody today that has numerous people with class A licenses and sometimes they pay for that. The the caveat is that the the company, in this case the city, gets some protection by um the the employee having to sign an agreement that they will stay for a certain period of time. If they if they leave, then the there's a a prorated recovery that the city gets because we've lost the benefit of that um paying for that. And and I'll call that call it education in itself. Um, and that will that'll be very similar to um what some companies require when they make a a large um financial outlay for tuition reimbursement type of situations. So I think whether you know the city should or shouldn't have paid for this. Um, I I don't know at this point, but there I still believe that something like this needs to needs to come to council for council to have an opportunity to talk about a large expense and then also what what are they the the long-term either protections or ramifications um if that if that employee decides to leave um to other better opportunities which they got because the city paid for it. Mr. Mayor Council, >> um I I know of private companies that have done that. I've not known about public that have done it. I know in the past in my previous employment, we trained the law enforcement officials and it cost us a lot of money. I don't know that we were ever able to say if you leave after this before this time period we want this training money back. So I don't know if that's something we can legally do. That would be something that we could direct staff to look past the Minnesota cities on that. If we can require a a contract that says if we spend more than a thous I'm just pull a number more than $1,000 in training or licensing of some sort that you commit to employment for this length of time. If you leave to that either we get the full amount back or prorated however we choose. to find out first if we can as a p public can maybe do that and then if we can then move forward with it. Um as I mentioned earlier I don't know what the policy was at the time. Um, if it did give the city administrator the ability to make that decision and it was within their budget, then if that administrator as the responsible party for the city made that decision, I don't know what we can do. >> But it, you know, if that was if that was in a budget, it wasn't carried over anywhere and we weren't prepared for it. We didn't know about it until so till now. We didn't budget for it in 2025. >> Mr. Mayor, >> I know when Mr. Schultz was offered the full-time job, it was with the condition that he was willing to go get a CDL and that the city would pay for the training. I don't know. I just that was another administration. I just know that that was part of his employment agreement that he would do it. Unfortunately, he didn't do it sooner. He did his EMT training instead for the fire department. and didn't have time to do it till the summer. Um, supervisor Blae wanted him to get it before this winter season so that we do have a third driver >> for the big trucks. >> So, did it say in there specifically that it should be approved by the council? Because I think this is the key point because then it could have been the discussion point. So, in in par in paragraph 2 of 10-3, um, where it's talking about other things that the city may also pay for, um, let's see. [Music] All requests for tuition, tuition reimbursement will be considered on a case-byase basis by the city administrator with final approval or disapproval provided by the city council. So, because you can look at it and say this is not like a college course. This is a in this case requirement. So, all right. But and I think it's something we got to be cognizant of that if there's something that we are sending people to and it should be discussed as a council because all the questions that Mary just asked, all question that council member Rainville, Council Member Glazer just asked are very appropriate and that's the decision making with Lori. But we know that I want to go back to what we approved for uh from a budget standpoint. If it's paying $5,000 or less, you have the ability to approve it as long as it's budgeted. In this case, it wasn't what then it would have. But is is tuition is that considered the same thing as training say compare different job descriptions that be it'd be like picking up a trade that you're going to go through and get your plumbing certification that we're going to take care of. It I would say it all comes down to however we want it whatever we want it to be whether it's you know there there's advantage there's needs for college education clerk training um your CDL all these different types of things you need to be aware of it [Music] >> so Mr. You get something that's in that gray area, bring it up to the council. That's what we can do. This one's in this case, it's past tense. It was before us. >> I think that satisfy your requirement. Yeah, I'll say yes for now. It's it's just something, you know, again, we just got done talking about budgets or we're in the process of talking about budgets for 2026 and we're we're looking at at expenditures for 2025 and there's 3,500 bucks all of a sudden that we have to hold from someone. >> No, Mr. throw this out there too. Um, it costs more to rehire somebody if we don't have a CBO. If we require somebody who had a CEO to be in this >> all this is true statement. Yeah. Something comes up and bring it from the council. I think that's the biggest piece that we can do. So, we're transpar >> with any of the classes. >> Sure. Sure. Bring them up. >> Hey, you want to take this? All right. We can look at it. Um, and then it's transparent. Okay. Are we good with that one? If we move on to 13. >> No. >> So, Mr. Mayor, >> do I make a motion that we approve the claims as presented? >> Yes, that's right. Check that one out. >> Claims as presented. I'll second that. Well, open for any other discussion. Cry, can you roll, please? >> I do. Yeah, I say I >> I also I council Reno. >> Hi. >> And council member Spencer. >> Hi. >> Okay. >> Thanks for keeping me in check here. I'm ready to go to 13. >> Yeah. Well, we've done that before and we had a special meeting to make sure those bills. >> You guys are definitely checking. Uh old business address over time policy. Um, Miss Johnson, you want to start off what you wrote up for a resolution or request for possible action on this? >> Yeah. Um, while going through and approving time cards, um, the mayor had some questions on, um, why the overtime wasn't being paid to some of our public works for some of their time. um that was on evenings or weekends and that was an issue that was going to be t discussed about or I'm sorry discussed at a later time after the um personnel policy went through um stating that if they didn't actually work the 40 hours there was no uh PTO or holiday time and be able to do that. So if they worked three hours of overtime but they took a PTO day, they didn't get overtime for those days in the evening or on Saturdays. Um so you just asked me to bring it back to council and have it be revisited. There are two different scenarios that have happened recently um where the guys either stayed late or had to come in on a Saturday and because they took um overtime or because there was a holiday they weren't able to get that time. So the first one is we we shel this one we said we'd bring it back. So and I think there's a couple asks uh one is some examples. So, I think we have that. But I think Council Member Glazer, you asked for some data on this one. I don't know that. >> Well, one of the things that we that we had talked about doing was working with the um Minnesota small cities to have them do a and I forget what the term is for the >> Well, yeah, wage the the wage study and how cities pay overtime. But we weren't willing to pay for the study for the the cost of them, you know, putting that survey together. So, that that work never got done. So we don't have any data to to back this up. >> Is there any? >> Yes, we we we have we have a very small sampling of of data that was given to us previously from some you know a few cities that Rogers was one, Zimmerman was one. >> That's right. >> And I I forget what the uh the handful of other cities were. >> Um >> we did get some yesterday. You're correct. All right. >> So, you know, one of Are we is this open for discussion? >> Yes, please. >> Um, so so you know, the one of the things that I do want to address is that it if in the first paragraph of um of the RCA, it said the last line of the first paragraph is it was intended to be in changed with the last city council. to my one of the things that I want to clarify for the last city council to to my knowledge I I know of three people from the previous council that would not have voted in favor of changing this one person that would have voted in favor of changing and one that I'm not aware of. So it's not something that the the previous council was willing to approve to my and and based on conversations that I have with other people. So I I think it's important to point that out. Um the the current policy that we have abides by state law and it and and it is actually better if it if companies and employers really wanted to. The the the federal mandate for paying overtime actually involves having to work 48 hours. And to me that would be unfair. So, you know, I I I prefer the the state um law, but in as an example, in the first in the first um example one um one of my concerns is we a couple of months ago we approved um flex time and this correct and did you want to say something? No, but I I will correct something on that when you're done. >> No. Well, let's let's correct it now. So that >> if you want to go on to flex time, you also have a policy that says anything over 200 hours at the end of the year gets lost if you don't use it. So if they try to flex their time, then we're encouraging them not to take PTO, but we're also encouraging them not to work overtime. But so so so we should one of the things that we're trying to do is we're trying to manage over but I have I have never I've never worked for um a government whether city county state of course I you know when I was in the military I was working for the federal government but you know Mayor Hibben can can verify that we didn't get paid overtime for nothing right So, but in in this case in in option one, the the person this particular person worked 8 hours on Monday, 9 hours Tuesday, 10 hours Wednesday, 6 hours on Thursday, and didn't really need to add two hours of PTO. They were adding two hours of PTO to get to eight hours and then eight hours on Friday. Without the two hours of PTO, they had one hour of overtime, which they got paid for. But this is and this is something Mr. Premier that I tried to address the last time we had this conversation is this is a situation that is going to get that the intent the intent of of vacation time is not for the city to to pay it 150%. And that's essentially what we would be doing. >> That's why we're bringing it back up for discussion. We didn't resolve it and you want to bring it back to the table and see if we can come to resolution. >> Yeah. I I guess I was under the impression that that we approved the the personnel policy. >> We can make it and and that we were moving forward with it as as it as it as it set. Now, one of the things that I did bring up in those conversations was if we want to talk about a specific overtime policy for public works employees because their situation is unique compared to office staff. they they at times can get called in at night night and weekends on emergency situations whether it's for a culvert that that washes out or it's you know emergency snow pl so it I think it would be worthwhile to spend some time looking at that for the public works employees but from the stand can we just take the conversation there just >> take >> yeah because the way that I the way that this reads it does It doesn't specify whether this is just for public works or whether this is for all um uh >> what's the city staff? >> Yeah, but city staff. Okay. Um you're you're currently our only exempt employee. Correct. >> Correct. >> So does this incorporate all non-exempt employees or is this just just something that we need to have a discussion on public works? >> So the way it was written it could be for all the city. You could take the conversation and go public works. You could separate that out. You could take it all. You could we can bite two of them in any way. So looking at it, yes, you did approve the personnel policy is approved. This is one that we were not in alignment on. And I said, let's shelf it. Let's get a little bit of data and try to get data that didn't work. Now, we had some examples. I said I I requested to bring it back up for discussion. If you want to take it just a public work, let's face it just public. I I think I think we really need to to um because you know people that people that um uh and and I'll in in some cases you know our public works employees aren't unlike um the the the line workers at Kexus and I always consider the line workers to be much like first responders and they they have a very difficult job and sometime and especially working in the middle of the night um and so I would I would really I would really be willing to look at this and and we do a deep dive into what other cities are doing for their public works employees when they have to when in very specific situations um where they're called into you know a work above above and beyond what the normal schedule requires. >> But couldn't we just state that right now >> because so I think there's a couple examples like the one was for was this for the culvert for the couple hours here? Uh, no, that was correcting the finishing the Jasper so that it could be usable overnight. >> So, it's calling in for a specific situation is really what these are coming down. So, I I do look at every time every week, not every week, every other week when and the amount of overtime I think the most has been eight hours for for but now again I I started in January so I haven't seen a full year but it's not being used. That's what I can tell you. um looking at it, it is they're calling in for certain situations. That's where I see the overtime or if we in this other case it was uh uh the recycling would pay is I believe what it was. So I I personally don't believe it's being abused at all. But if you wanted to say just public works and said if they get called out it should be called out on overtime if it's out of their schedule. I mean it could be a pretty simple statement. >> Mr. council. Go ahead. >> Thank you. Um I I would I mean if we're talking about public works versus other hourly employees, I think the only other hourly employees are the office staff which currently are the are there's three of them. And I I do not want to discourage them from participating in afterhour things like the the night to unite. I I imagine that they were being paid for that when they were there working and if one of them had had, you know, that Monday off on PTO for some reason and wasn't properly incentivized to give up their night to go toite tonight. I I think that would be a negative for the city. I mean, I think they interact with residents uh far more than probably anyone else because they're answering the phone calls or sitting at the desk and I want their face out there whether it's at the the recycling day or at our council meetings or at events like that. And so I don't I don't think we really need to distinguish between uh maintenance employees and office staff. I think this issue is is fairly insignificant. Uh, moneywise, I I I I don't see this being abused by our staff. I mean, I I trust our staff to to use good judgment. If there is abuse of this policy and someone's gaming the system, we can always change it, but I I for one like to uh encourage them to work those hours and be able to, you know, work those Saturdays or those evenings and incentivize them in some way. Mr. Thank you, Council Randle. >> So, Mr. Mayor, um I agree with Council Member Swimson. Um our public works, we have a small group. They're very dedicated. I don't see them working any more hours than they have to. But when something needs to be accomplished and needs to be completed, they are dedicated and get that work done. So if it takes them after their eight hours, it takes them after their eight hours. Um for the example of Thursday, two six hours of paid time and two hours of PTO. We don't know what that PTO was. Maybe it was a doctor appointment that was scheduled three weeks prior and we didn't know we'd be working on Jasper at the time. Um, so it it's difficult even with flex time to say I'm going to switch this week but then a call virtual is out and then my whole week is changed. So, um I I believe that both administrative and public works, all our staff that is not that are non-exempt um should get paid um for anything over 40 hours um whether or not they have a holiday in there or PTO. Um, you know, we I did a breakdown of the meetings that we called um the council in 23, 24, and 25. In 2024, there was just over two weeks of meetings that staff attended that was not qualified as overtime because it wasn't part of their 8 hour day. So we penalized employees or the employee by not paying for over 40 if she had additional time off. So I I I I agree with Council Member Swinson. It is um I don't want to discourage our employees to and their commitment to the city and to the functions that they do. Um and it is insignificant. Um there isn't that much, but we need to be able to depend on our employees and have them be dedicated and get their work done and and get when things are outside of the work work regular work day that they're still going to do that. Um Miss Stal state came tonight, you know, to make sure that everything's up and running. Um I don't know if she puts in for that time or not or does it on her own, but she should be able to do it and and she should be able to get paid for any time. >> If she's here, she needs >> Yes. We can't ask people to volunteer. Um, and if it's legally possible, um, I believe we should pay our employees, whether they're administrative or public works that are not exempt, um, for anything over 40 hours, whether or not they have a holiday in there or whether or not, um, they have PTO. >> Why did we have the conversation and approve flex time? >> Examples exactly like this where let's say one of the office staff is they they work there 8 hour days and then they come to the council meeting for an hour or two and we told and basically we approved that they could they could come in late to let's say they were here 2 hours additional they could come in late two two hours the following day. Why? Why did Why did we even approve that to get to this point now where where we're going to be paying we're going to be paying overtime for maybe a 10-hour day and and somebody somebody uses uses PTO and then there's holiday time. So, I I don't I'm not I don't have a crystal ball to say what this this is going to cost the city, but it is going to cost the city additional money in in employment costs that we haven't budgeted for. And I I I'm just I'm not I'm not in favor of it. I'm in favor for for a carve out specifically for public works for for specific situations that we need to we need to define and and move forward there. But >> can I coun you at this point? >> Mr. Mayor, I whether or not the policy applies to public works or the office staff, it it can apply to both. I don't see it necessarily as an issue, but it's but it's but it's a matter of what it's for and what's the purpose. We talked about having flex time and that's there. If I had a doctor's appointment, then I don't have to take my PTO hours to go to a doctor's appointment and I can save those two hours to go on vacation. So, I can I can I don't have to worry about it. And um and yes, I understand that. um if if you go over 200 hours that and you can't carry over can't carry over 200 hours or five weeks of vacation or PTO time, but part of that is to make sure that it gets used so that you can be on vacation um throughout that year and adjust and adjust for it. There would be exceptions to the rule um that can come up in any case, whatever it is. But we also talked about f we talked about flexing hours. So if we know that there's a night to unite event or something else going on or we need somebody in admin at recycling to help out that we adjust schedule so that we're not having to pay overtime. But we need to make sure that that to me we need to make sure that that somehow that that gets followed because I just don't necessarily want to have to pay overtime just because whether it's one one hour or 100 hours that hour is not insignificant. That is money that our taxpayers are paying to to to fund things for the city and we're in charge of from a staff perspective and council perspective and make making sure those dollars are spent wisely. So it does need to be looked at and evaluated. Um there are plenty of businesses and I understand cities different where where if you have a union site or not that you have different rules that you apply by but um there are plenty of businesses that don't that um if you have a holiday then you don't get overtime and I can't imagine that other than these extreme emergency situations or different time periods where where um we should be we should be able to go well okay if this can wait till tomorrow that I don't need to stay here to to put in the extra time for the hour or whatever too that it needs to be done. But if there are exceptions, we can accommodate those when it happens. So um to me, this is another situation where there's there's there's plenty different um there's plenty different scenarios on the flowchart that may or may not come up. But I don't think having a blanket policy that says no matter what if the no matter what any and every hour that is um earned whether it be PTO or holiday or worked over 40 gets paid overtime because yes that can can turn into a lot of extra dollars that aren't that aren't always fully budgeted for. >> Okay. >> Um I I just think it's it's a fairness to our employees. Um, we want to treat our employees well. We want intention within our employees. In the time that I've been on the council, um, I have never I have not seen an abuse of employees working overtime. Again, our employees have families. They want to work their eight and they want to go home. But if an instance that is un that isn't their doing, if a color goes out or trees go out or whatever trees go down and they happen to have PTO that week or it's a holiday, then they should get paid for those overtime hours. They shouldn't be penalized because the the feds had to get a bazillion holidays. Um they shouldn't be penalized because they've had to make appointments and lose their PTO. Um, but yet they did stay late and work on something and and I think that that should they should be paid for that. As far as flex time, we do have flex time, but as if it was kind of goes down and said, yeah, look at the the crystal ball. You don't know from time to time. And if you're going to do flex time, it's got to be within that same payroll cycle. So, if on Wednesday of the second week of payroll, something hits the fan and staff needs to stay late for whatever and they've already taken PTO or there's a holiday in there, they shouldn't be penalizing it because you can't you can't predict those things. I I believe that Navany does a good job in staffing the office and keeping any overtime hours down. Again, our employees have lives outside of the city. employment and I don't see them working any more than they have to other than to get a job get the job of Congress. >> Can I ask one question for council members of Ben? Say we have a stolen nurse >> and say it's Saturday and Sunday when they work. >> Do they do they typically work less during that week? Do they get some comp time or do they just keep rolling and work through what have you seen? I know in the past that that there have been times and now you can correct me if I'm wrong. It's like okay that um um that administrator said hey we got a snowstorm coming Saturday don't come in Friday and because you're going to be plowing Saturday and Sunday. I know that that's happened. I think I think Joe Joe has even matched that where you know we got snow coming tonight go home and get some sick >> which is a great way to do business and keeps it cost effective for the city. >> And Mr. Mayor C >> I'm hearing or saying the same thing but it's a matter of coming up with a policy. There are times where there's going to be exceptions that our staff who regardless of who it is should be compensated for coming in um to take care of a snowstorm or whatever could be happening. um from from in the office where it's required where it's necessary to work extra but but that should be the exception of the rule but we don't have neither written down if we're coming up with exceptions and how that those get handled. >> Mr. Mayor, >> that's great. Council member Spencer, go ahead. >> Yeah, I I think it just comes down to whether we trust our employees. I mean, we have good employees. They do good work. I I think it's I mean it's if I were one of the employees I think I would be offended that the the notion behind uh not approving this would be a distrust of employees and thinking that they're going to gain the system. I mean we have good employees. I mean it I suppose we could think out every scenario where it might be right or wrong but I don't think we can think of every scenario and and I don't want to manage that in that detail. I think again we just we trust our employees. They're good at what they do. I don't want to disincentivize them from coming in. If a culvert goes out on a Wednesday of Memorial Day week, you know, Wednesday night, and the guys are at home and they're called in and they're thinking, "Oh, geez, I'm going to come in for straight time and I'm going to come in at 9:00." You know, that could end up costing us more in the long run in delaying addressing that. And I just I I don't really see much of a downside here. I do get that, you know, the extra half for the hours worked that this impacts is extra money, but I I think the benefit to the city in telling the employees that we trust them and also just financially incentivizing them to come in to do that work on a week night or a weekend. I I think even just one of those events could pay for this for years. And so I just I really see this as as coming down to whether we trust our employees to not abuse some system. And again, if they do, if it turns out some employees abusing it, we can readress it. >> Can I can I do this? Can I request the council that uh I'll work with Mr. Johnson and the city attorney and see if I can write something so we have a policy that makes sense? And and what I'm going to do is propose it that it just do public works. I know we could propose all. I know we could approve. Um but I think it's a good a good point. Um and it's specific when you're called out when you're not supposed to be working is really the thing. But I want to write it down. It's really nice. I I it's trust, but the policy helps me verify is what it does. And so would you guys be okay as a counselor if we shelf this for today and we bring this up next month and give you some time for development a little bit. I'll bring something back up that I think we can probably get more consensus on than what we have right now because it's slight split. >> Well, Mr. Mayor, can we take in if we're going to take some time to do that in that time, can can we approach cities like for instance spoke east um other small cities in in our vicinity that >> and ask them what they're doing >> and ask them what specifically what they're doing for public work. So, you want to name off some cities because Miss Miss Johnson do some homework for us. So, East Bethle, Oak Grove, >> Oak Grove, >> St. Francis, >> um maybe St. Francis. Um Baldwin. >> Yeah. Baldwin, you know, small smaller cities similar to us in size. Um and and find out specifically what they're doing. I've got those four. Got those four. All right. Is there any any more? I don't >> but I think we can come out of that. We'll take that and we'll process that. I'll try to write something and then we can carry on with this conversation. But it's so split on this one. I I would like to bring us together before we we doing anything. >> And Mr. Mayor, >> I just wanted to address a couple of things on behalf of the of the employees. Um the evenings, weekends, that's awesome. Um, the flex time. It is easy for the office staff because they haven't been there very long to flex their time because they don't have a lot of PTO to use. For myself or a couple of the public works guys, it's difficult to be able to use all your PTO when you want us to flex the times that we have to come in later. Um, I'm not supposed to work on vacation. I worked the last five days multiple times a day because things had to get done. We had a server go down. If Dileia wouldn't have stayed, your packets wouldn't have been out and we wouldn't have had a meeting tonight because we wouldn't have got it posted on time. We have elections. Those are times that we spend a lot of extra time. There are times when we don't get stuff from our subcontractors or from people that are through your packet. There are deadlines to meet and if we don't meet those deadlines, you don't have meetings to conduct the business that needs to be done for the city. And I also would like to go back to what Dan said as well. It's not necessarily about trust, but this city has spent thousands of dollars training and training and training, and I don't want to lose the staff that I have. This is a good st, a great staff. We had one of our residents who was very upset with the process come in and compliment us. And I think the city needs to take that into consideration as well. I believe that this is the first staff in a long time that is appreciated by its residents and it would be really nice for everybody to be appreciated by your council as well. >> Mr. Mayor, >> well well these things all have merit. We are not a business that generates revenue. We don't make widgets. We don't provide a service for fee. We take money from our residents, our taxpayers to fund to fund what we do. We have I I believe that this council is not being as responsible to our to to our residents from a fiscal standpoint by by doing something like this. Most of those I unless unless with the exception of the people that that work for for a government agency whether it's state, county, um most people do not get this type of benefit from payroll. If if I walked into my if I walked in I've always worked in the in the private sector. Yes, I worked in you know quasi for a quasi government um organization like like a utility. Uh, but if I walked into my boss's office and said I was unhappy with, you know, with my pay from an overtime standpoint, he he'd say, "Well, that's our policy. And if you don't like it, there's the door." And I don't I don't want to have that. It's it's I don't have that mentality or mindset with our employees, but for forgive me, but for for the people that have worked in for uh in the public sector their entire lives, they they they're they don't have the same reality for that those of us that work in the private sector. Yes. We it's a free will to work state. If you don't like the benefits that that your employer offers, you you have the option to go and find place else. And I know council member Swenson has talked talked at, you know, in detail about, you know, we're trying to retain our employees. Sometimes we lose employees. We we our our employees get very good benefits. I have never ever worked someplace where I walked in as a new employee and got five weeks vacation. But some somehow somehow our our staff needs to figure out how to I don't know whether whether it's a managed time. I don't want to throw something out there and say that they're not managing their times, but they have to figure out how to use the PTO that they've been given just like any other company that says, "Well, you get to carry over this much. If you don't use it, you lose it." That's the reality. So what what what the problem that that I feel that we're facing is we things keep getting brought to us to continue to enhance the the benefit package. It it's it it's like it's like there's no there's never a a satiation point where people are satisfied with what they're getting. >> This is me bringing up by the way. Nobody asked me to bring it up. I just brought it up because I thought it was unfinished business. I I yeah, I appreciate that. But but you know, we've we've talked at length and and I I guess um people know where I stand on this, but um we I I think we we're doing a disservice to the taxpayers because taxes are going to go up because it's whe whether it's $1,000 or whether it's 10 or $20,000. And and so one of the things that's going to come out of this, because I I have a feeling, you know, regardless of how I feel about this, something is going to pass that's going to change this, we need to we as a council need to go back to um there was a time and council member Rainbow and Council Member Bri Brian may be able to verify this where on a monthly basis council was given time sheets and payroll reports and I think we need to go back to that. You you can seal >> I know we can see all right now I have right now I have to request it but they used to it used to be given to them in the packet >> but it can be it can be done via email we can take them same time sheets email them out there we can get every one of them that that's not >> just printing them out just cost money so >> I would request that we review them via email us >> yeah that's that's fine >> so if you would like them we can make them available and you can have all time sheets um because that's completely transparent >> 100% Go ahead, >> Mr. Mayor. Um, at one time the attorney said we couldn't do payroll. So, I would ask that, if you haven't already, clarify with the attorney what we can and cannot see. There were some issues back in data privacy issues. So, we would want to make sure that we are abiding by data privacy. >> And I believe that actually that pertains to the actual payroll stuff. >> I don't remember. But we just want to make sure that whatever step we take, we are in um in line with what we are allowed to do. >> Ask a question, please. >> Yeah, >> I don't believe we're doing anything wrong because all is the name and hours and >> and we have different systems than we had before also. >> Um and there are, you know, as far as putting it in packets. Um there are issues of if people have guarantees on their wages, we can't show some things. So we have to make sure that what we're providing is >> yeah so just to clarify the information that that Miss Johnson has given me to date is sufficient for for to satisfy what I need to look at and that and that's the time sheet which has no personal information besides the name >> and and the payroll report that you've generated for us it it but I have not seen any any payubs that that would have anything that has to your tax. So, and and that I'm not asking for the pay stuff, the the payroll report and the time sheet is asking. >> I I I just want and I I would look at that also, but I just want to make sure that whatever we're providing is accordance to data practice law because we don't want to have issues for that. >> So, if you bring this up maybe a month, we'll get we'll get some data to back it. We'll bring it up again. It was a good discussion on it. And although we may have taken some time, I I think perspectives are definitely being heard on this and we understand that it's a very divided council. >> Mr. Noun, I >> I would prefer that if we're going to have any further investigation and discussion that we also include our administrative staff on this. >> We can make a decision down the road if we go two ways, >> but without that additional information, we can't make that decision. And I think it's disservice to our employees if we don't. to the taxpayers. I agree that there's costs, but as Natalie had said, there are costs in continuing to rehire and retrain and work not getting done. And that cost us a lot more than we barely compensate on. >> If anybody doesn't like that, they can give me a call. got a call saying you're doing too much for >> this. It wasn't We don't need to because it was not >> I just or if we're just tableing this or we're >> I was requesting the table but do we need to do a vote on it? I don't think it was written >> have a motion directing staff. >> Okay. So, I would create a motion. Well, I will make a motion to ask Miss Johnson to pull this the data from the four cities and we'll work with the attorney to see if we can come up with language that is appropriate. Um Mary has just requested that we do it for both sides, but so let's bring it up that way and see what direction it goes. So, not only for public works, but for city staff. >> So, >> absolutely. >> That's the motion. Anybody like to second? >> Second. You got a second. All right. We'll call vote. Council member Swson. >> I council Randall. >> Hi. >> I'm I. Council member. >> Hi. >> Council member Burn. >> Hi. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Mayor. Is there a second? >> Second. Thank you guys very much. All right,