[Music] No, I don't think so. [Music] 12 seconds. >> We have some music playing in the back leading up to our meeting. >> It being 5:30 on Monday, August 25th, call to order our city council work session. Please rise to say the pledge. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you everyone. Okay, can we do a roll call, please? >> Council member here bonis here. Melbower here. >> Mayor Bobo here. All right. Uh, Chief Schmidt, Mayor, uh, we're here tonight to have a little bit of discussion over the course of our work for the last three years to get to a joint powers agreement with the city of Beville. Our consultant Charlie Smith is here, Mayor Todd Miller, uh, Ginger Berg, and some of our working committee from how we got to this point today. So, um, before you are two documents that I supplemented your packet with. the first the executive summary for the joint powers agreement which goes through kind of the why of the process and the upper level highlights. So um before we continue just really exploring understanding the wise and and how we got here we're really looking to create long-term sustainability with our fire and EMS services between the city of St. Francis and this we've been working under contract together for just about two years now. It has worked remarkably well. um we have provided a higher level of sustainability and efficiency for both of our communities and through this process we've just been really encouraged by this rel working relationship to move forward. It also provides a strong stronger legal authority than a typical mutual aid agreement which we were working off of for a number of years prior to this process. It improves efficiency by reducing duplications of facilities, equipment and administration. enhances service quality through unified staffing, training and resource deployment. And by creating this separate entity through joint powers agreement, it does provide a li creates a separate liability from the city back to the district. So um we have worked through the process of the JPA which was sent out to last week. Um and at this point I'm happy to open it up for any questions, discussions, comments that you may have. >> Anybody want to go first? Nummy, >> I don't really have any questions on it. I think it looked good. I think that um you I mean the committee has worked really hard on this and um I am excited to see it move forward. >> Thank you. >> Uh Joel, >> I have no questions either at this time. I've was kind of involved for a while there in the beginning um after Steve got sick. So I'm I'm very well aware of what's going on, but no questions at this time. You had the one question earlier today with a text to me. Did you clarify that >> the other day? Well, the the question I was curious about was the fire district, but with the the current agreement till the end of the year, I don't think that's part of it, but I mean, I guess I could ask that, but the reading part of the I don't remember. I don't have it. I have it in front of me, but um anyway, the uh the statute that you mentioned in there, I guess it it did mention about the uh indebtedness and whatnot. And I was curious if that was the fire district and then the taxing authority of that or if that's something that comes later, Dave, if you know what I'm talking about. >> Yeah. So, the indebtedness, if you're talking specifically to a taxing district, that's another layer on top of the joint powers agreement. We cannot become a taxing district until we become that entity >> right >> powers entity then that can open the door to become our own essentially taxing district much like the school district >> that would be a couple years down the road that would be a significant heavy lift to get to that point but I think that as we see other joint powers agreements throughout the state start to slowly make their transition that direction. It's something that we can certainly explore as we move forward. >> Okay. Yeah. I was just I was reading the statute that's referenced in there and it mentioned some of that. So, I just wanted to clarify if that was a step we're taking now or if that came later. So, that that answers my question. >> Yep. We're not entering into a taxing district today. So far in the state, only one one entity has taken advantage of that taxing district piece, which is the clo area. Um they actually helped create that document for the legislature. Um, but nobody has dared to to take that next step after that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> And just for clarification, I I don't know why not find it here, but Joe had forwarded the statute or whatever else in there. Do you have that in front of you, Joe? >> Uh, give me one second. And my only question >> was it was when it said composition of the board >> it would the way I read it and I'm no lawyer so the way I read it is all members have to be on either one of the two councils in my is that >> except one >> on the board except for one where that's where we get our member at large. So the the specific language in the joint powers agreement calls for two council members from each city, >> right? >> And then our member at large for the board of five >> and that falls under the statute that Joe or Charlie or >> thought the I don't want to miss but I thought if you form taxing district that's when all of >> Okay. So if you move to the taxing district then everybody has to be a council member but under the JBA you your constitution of the board the way I understand it can be whatever you decide as a >> okay >> thank you >> I did I did I did find it was 471.59 and then subdivision 11 was what I was reading about with the indebtedness and whatnot. Um, I did have another question, but now I lost it. So, when I think of it, I'll bring it up. >> That's fine. Thanks, Joel. Amy, >> I don't have any questions at this point. >> And I I'm part of the board, so I'm fairly familiar with caught up to speed pretty much where we're where we're at. So, I don't have any questions. Go ahead, Joe. >> Yeah. So, the the the question I had as well would had to do with the board. Um, that that fifth person, it was just interesting to me. I mean it makes sense to have an impartial person. I'm just kind of curious where do we go with that? Um like how do you decide what obviously it's it would be somebody without a vested interest I would think because it says outside influence or outside perspective I guess. >> Yep. >> Um go ahead. >> We've had a fair amount of discussion. I think probably maybe our last three meetings we've probably touched on that topic in particular. Um we did reach out to an OKA Champlain. We spoke with SPM and other entities that have utilized that aspect of their board having that outside third party. I have less concern today than I did when we first started having this discussion. Um, talking with the NOA Champlain, they actually seek out retired fire chiefs from outside the area to serve as that member. Um, which they've had great success with. Bruce West was formerly part of the NOA Champlain and now it's Scott Anderson fire chief. um they seem to really like that process. Um and we talked about a little bit of our timeline too where we want to get this thing moving because we can't move forward with any of the other legal aspects of the joint powers agreement with unless or until the joint powers agreement is executed. Right? So we can't open bank accounts and tax IDs and FDIs and pension transfers and all that other stuff until we're a legal entity. Um, we had some discussions at our last meeting about maybe appointing Charlie to that position just to get us through the next three to six months, get some get some work product done, then open up that that at large number for applications and then fill that position that way. So, it doesn't leave us in the lurch. It allows us to continue to move forward and then we can really go through a thorough process to find that fifth person long term. >> Okay. Any any other questions or concerns or comments? >> So I guess from here the next step in the process is we would bring this forth to the September 15th meeting for final approval. We would then bring it to Bethl their meeting that same week which would be September 18th for their agreement and execution of signatures. and then we'll have to convene a board and and really start getting to some of the more detailed work of all of those things I previously mentioned. So, I just want to make sure that before we get to September 15th that you all have had a chance to see it, ask questions, everybody's comfortable moving forward and if Mayor Bethl has anything to add, I would certainly welcome his comments at this time as well. >> Nothing at this time. put a lot of work into this and a few changes and Chrissy's got in here but I think anything I might have to add is just more comment for you know nothing really balance chief has done a really good set and it's working very very well extremely well as members can attest to very want It's >> it's been a long journey for sure. And >> to Joe's point, right, we started this back with Mayor Feldman and >> Joe came on board and Mayor Bogle came on board and our team has sat through a number of meetings, a number of dialogue, a lot of discussion. Um, and I I said this at at the last meeting, the team that we've had working on this, the amount of collaboration that we've had is truly a testament and a reflection to the success that we have that we're having right now. So, we're really excited to keep this thing moving. Um, still have a lot of heavy lifts to go, but couldn't be more proud of where we're at today. So, >> I would agree. And yeah, I I don't know just off the top of my head, the three major topics that have been discussed at most of them has been that at large member, the taxing portion of it, and uh and actually creating creating this JPA that it would allow other entities to join us. There's a lot a lot of time spent on that and we want to create something where if they want to join us they need to be serious about joining us not just shopping around. So and that was a huge goal of this process is to hopefully create a joint powers agreement that will be the first in its kind in a manner of scalability. And I really think we've accomplished that. So I'm excited for sure. Okay. Any other questions or comments or concerns? >> So, with that, we will move to put this on the September 15th agenda for final approval and signatures and we'll continue moving forward. >> Sounds good. Thank you, Chief. >> Thank you. >> Uh, do we need a We don't need a motion to adjurnn, do we? >> No. >> No. >> So, meeting adjourned at 5:41 p.m. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Praise God. >> Thank you.