I did this today. called to order the meeting on Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 at 6 p.m. Please rise for 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. >> Roll call, please. Jenny. Mayor Bogle >> here. >> Council members Melbour >> here. >> Fis >> here. Advig >> here. >> Robinson >> here. >> On to approval agenda. Do I have a motion to approve tonight's agenda? >> I'll make that motion. Mr. Mayor by Councilman Utvig. Do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Councilman Mulebower. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I pull the same sign. >> On to the consent agenda. Do I have a motion to approve tonight's consent agenda? I'll make that motion, mayor. >> Motion by Councilman uh Robinson. I have a second. >> I'll second. >> Second by Councilman Muower. Any discussion or anybody want to pull anything or talk about anything in there? >> Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I pull the same sign. >> Meeting open to the public. Derek >> got seven copies. So, city administrator. Uh the five council members and city attorney, please. Thank you, Mayor Vogle, members of the council. My name is Derek Lind. I actually live in Ramsey, part of the ASIT and Noa County Election and Integrity Group. We've been at this now uh me myself. I'm coming up on four years here in March. I saw two weeks ago you guys were discussing the post-election review. So, I I was hoping I could just come up here briefly and go through a few things. I I promise I'll be brief. Most of this paper information you can take home and read on your own time. I just wanted to get it into your hands. Uh if you could follow along with me uh page by page. On the first page there, Rasperson poll September 2025 nearly 2/3 or 64% of the country doesn't trust machine tabulars right now. So there are concerns throughout the country about that. Uh if you could go to the second page and focus on a yellow line there, that's how St. Francis votes. Uh the point of me showing you that is I got a feeling that your constit constituents are also concerned about those machine tabulators. I think they're probably consistent with that first page that I gave you. Uh next page, third page. One of the questions asked last week was how many cities had done this? Here's a list of the seven cities when they did it and then what it looked like. They have the number of precincts and how many how many precincts they wanted to count. It's kind of a total there. At the very bottom, they've got the cities of Oakrove and Ramsey. They were doing stuff at the poll pads. I'm not here to talk about polls. I'm here to talk about post-election review. If you could go to the next page, please. This one has a kind of a blue header. This is the Nelson Gamash race. One of the questions raised two weeks ago is are these machine tabulators accurate and this race actually was very close. I think it was settled by is it 48 votes and they did a recount and in that recount they found 26 votes. So this is an example of the votes changing. What happened here was often times somebody will fill in the the oval for Nelson and also write in the name. Machine won't count it. machine sees that as an error, count counts that as zero. So you don't pick that up unless you do a hand count. And that's why there was, if you look at the the right hand side of the page, Nelson picked up 21 votes and gamash also picked up five. They both picked up votes, probably over votes. That's probably what happened. So that's that kind of speaks to the accuracy of the machines. It's not fraud. It's just there's there's a kind of a glitch with the machines or or an issue. Next page should be stapled together. two pages. [clears throat] This is important. So, I want to make sure everybody understands this. This post-election review idea was not something we invented. It started up in Big Lake and this actually took place in 2022. They really did a post-election review and they were going to do it again in 2024. The problem is we stole their idea or copied their idea, brought it to Enoka County, spread it to seven cities and that's when the Secretary of State said, "We got to stop this. We don't want this." So, I'm going to let you read this on your own time, but this is correspondence proving that that really happened. And in that video I sent out, I showed you pictures of the actual post-election review. Next page is a letter from the Secretary of State. We'll we'll spend a second on this and then you can look at it too on your own time. He took an entire page to explain to you why you can't count your votes. He actually sent this to Big Lake, but it applied to the other seven cities, too. And you have to decide if you're comfortable with that explanation. In the very end, he said, "It is our opinion that because it's not random, you shouldn't be allowed to count your own votes unless you're selected randomly in a post-election review." I have an issue with that. That's up to you guys. I'm not here to persuade you. I'm just bringing you information. And then the last page, uh there was some questions about what exactly is a post-election review. Uh I think somebody said they go all the way down the bot. They don't go all the way down the ballot. They're only supposed to uh Anoka County has two, isn't it? >> Yeah. Yeah. 128 precincts. Noa County is supposed to sample four and then they only check the top two. races. They will never check your races unless you have a recount and it's close. So, nobody checks your level of race or or anything higher than that. Now, what Anoka County did is they expanded it to the top three, but then they got mad at us as it and threatened to go back to two. Right now, I think they're still doing three. And then they also expanded the cities. They took it from four up to eight. So, that's proof that they could do more. But that's kind of the history of where we're at with this. I originally I was going to just drop this off and walk out the door, but I think I'm going to stick around for your discussion, I think, because some questions may come up. I I know you guys might not have been expecting me, but do you have any questions right now for me? >> Nothing. >> Okay, I'll let you read this on your own time. I'm just going to sit there and if any questions come up, let me know. >> Thank you. >> Thanks for your time. >> Thank you. Thank you. Uh, seeing nobody else, we'll move on to old business. Uh, Minnesota State Flag Resolution 2026-04. And I think we kind of had a consensus. So, this is just kind of formalizing from the last meeting. So, this is formalizing it. So, do I have a motion to approve resolution 20264 in opposition to any display of the Minnesota state flag? >> I'll make that motion, mayor. >> Motion by Councilman Robinson. Do I have a second? >> I'll second it. >> Second by Councilman Fonis. Any discussions? >> I I just have one question because to me this means that we're opposing flying the M. Should we Is there language that >> the new official flag you're opposing? >> That's fine. But this doesn't say that. It says to display the Minnesota state flag. >> That's weird. >> A little confusing. Mayor Council. So, this was this was a duplicate of all what has been put in place in practice already. >> Okay. >> Um that is how the other jurisdictions have been wording it. >> Okay, that's fine. I just it to me if I looked at that I would read that we're saying we're not going to fly state plane period. >> So that's just my >> it's a good observation on that. >> So >> what this really means is we want to fly the 1957 Minnesota State flag. >> Correct. Mayor and Council, within the language of the resolution, it goes into, you know, where we're we are basically addressing the 19 or 2023 and we are going back to the 1957 and yeah, and just why? So, >> and then my only other question is, is council okay with I mean, we're we're going to have to keep replacing them and that the we may have to pay a little bit more for flag that aren't. [laughter] >> So, I just again, [clears throat] it's just things that we have to consider. We're talking about being stewards of our taxpayers money that it goes all the way down no matter what it is. So, I mean, clearly you have to replace a normal state flag. That that happens. But when we're going to a flag that's no longer recognized by the state as our state flag, there may be additional costs. So, I just want to bring that up again. I don't have a problem with it. It's just things that we need to be thinking about. >> Last time we talked, um, Paul, you were going to find out how many flags. >> Yeah, we have enough now. That's not the problem. The problem is is that they wear out, right? >> And as they wear out, the longer it goes that it's no longer recognized as our state flag, it may be harder to come by. That's all I'm saying. So, I just wanted to point that out. Again, I don't have a problem with it. It's just when we're talking about money all the time, this is again one of those things. So, >> little pro for you on that. I did just a little bit of research on it and at at least right now flag companies are more than happy to print any flag from any state from any design you want to print it and it's really not >> okay that's good >> not extra cost so >> just typically as things become you know change [clears throat] yeah so just something to think about >> anybody else >> I wouldn't mind seeing the 1858 flag but [laughter] >> we have what the 1953 in stock so >> I know I looked them up either. That one was really cool. >> And there's there's no uh extra cost, which is the biggest thing at this time given we have them. So, just that that note for the taxpayers, >> right? Anything else, Joe? >> No. >> Amy, anything else? >> No. >> Kevin, >> I'm going to start a go flag me fund page and um we'll get taken care of. So, no, I'm all for it. >> Thank you, Sarah. >> Nope. I don't have anything else. So all those in favor signify by for resolution 20264 which is in opposition to any display of the Minnesota state flag which it technically is. We're going to be returning to the old Minnesota state flag. So all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I pull the same sign. Resolution passes on to the public works contract agreement for 2026 27. Is that gate you? >> Yeah. Mayor and councel, before you tonight is a tenative agreement between the city and the local 49 representatives. Uh this was negotiated throughout the 2025 calendar year and it is for a two-year contract for 26 and 27. With that, Dave or I are happy to answer any question. >> Joe, I don't have any questions other than it's a dumb one. Um why do we go from Roman numerals to numbers? Mayor Council with this contract we did a lot of clean up. Yeah. So it it's been forwarded and >> curious and this we're working to clean it up. >> So >> well everything has been brought up to date otherwise. So >> yes, >> that's all I have. >> And may council it was requested um that we switch over to that and we said okay that's certainly okay. >> Is it algebra? They don't like letters. >> Amy, >> I don't have anything. >> Sarah, >> I don't [laughter] have any questions. >> Kevin, >> nothing here. I appreciate the work that Dave and Kate did. >> I would concur. I know I know it was a little longer hall, but I'm glad we could all get to a agreement point. So, looking for a motion to approve resolution 20265 approving a tenative agreement between the city of St. Francis and the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 49 representing the public works bargaining unit for the calendar years 2026 and 2027. >> I'll make that motion, Mr. Mayor. >> Motion by Councilman Muar. Do I have a second? >> I'll second it. >> Second by Councilman Fis. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Post same sign. >> Contracts agreed to. Last thing under old business here is the Anoka County Post election review. So, I think we all got the letter that Kate put together here and talked about. So, I I don't know what discussion feel free uh start with Kevin. Any discussion on that, Kevin? >> Nothing. I think it's worthwhile and I'm glad we're doing it. That's all. Thank you, Sarah. >> Well, I don't have any further discussion Amy. Me >> either. Joe, uh no questions. I think it's been discussed before and touch base on it. It's a start. I would agree. So, that's that's kind of where I'm at with this. What what what I want to do is send this send this letter with our signatures to them and I'll I'll reach out to the election Pam Leblanc at couple weeks. Give a couple weeks to look it over and want to see their response because at some point in time I I think this may I say may may go to a have to go to a resolution. But what I want I want to give the OP county an opportunity to respond and because the county has indicated that they have some of the same some people from the county have indicated they have some of the same concerns. Well, if they're going to act as our agent, if they're saying that they're in charge of elections, I want to see an effort on their behalf to appeal to the state secretary of state to change what we're asking for. So, I think we'll start with this letter and stay tuned. is what I would have to say. So, >> do have a quick question uh for Dave maybe or I'm wondering if you're going to respond at all, but what's what's a reasonable amount of time to wait for >> typically? >> It was on Dave, you turned it off. [laughter] >> Mayor and council, I would give them about 30 days. Okay. Um so that and a after that um mayor and councel you can take you know further action or further discussion [clears throat] um as appropriate. >> Thank you. >> Thank you Dave. So at this point in time I don't think we need to pass anything. We just need to sign it. Is am I correct in this? >> Okay. >> Need a vote on anything to launch? >> I don't believe so. >> Mayor and counsel. This is just a letter. Um, it's being sent on behalf of council's direction. It is not a formal resolution. So, if you want to sign, certainly can. And that will be forwarded onto the county. >> Thank you, Dave. Okay. On to city meeting open to the public again. Derek, do you wish to talk talk again real quick? >> Real quick. I forgot to mention when I was up here, you have all these things that you want to say. It's it's my opinion that you absolutely should um pass a resolution. I understand you're not going to do it tonight. This is the start. But I think that's where we're going to get to. They're probably not going to honor it. That's going to be with the canvas board that happens in August. But what you're doing is you're sending a message. It's a strong message that you're joining those other seven cities. Now there's eight and we're not done. I don't know if we're going to get more, but you're adding one. And and I think you guys would have been there two years ago. I know you had some turnover in the council and stuff like that. So, I think it's what your people want. So, that's all I had. Again, thanks for your time. Um, I hope we get there with the resolution. >> So, I'm going to go ahead and leave. I think you're done with this issue. >> Yes. Correct. >> Okay. Have a good night. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> On to the city administrator report. Kate, >> mayor and council, just to let you know, uh, next week Paul will be acting interm while I'm out of the office. um over the next month, month and a half, we will be coming forward with some steps on the highway 47 project is we'll have to hold a public hearing and which is considered local consent. So in our part as we're reducing the road, we'll have to actually hold a public hearing and those resolution steps there. WSB will as our engineer lead us through that. Uh we are working on several work session topics. I think we've got three or four departments that have things that are moving around. We're trying to get organized. So, and once we get into February, we'll start looking at some dates and then we are looking for some housekeeping with the charter. So, the next charter meeting um I'll be working with BGS on a few housekeeping items and questions and we'll asking the charter for some cleanup and then coming to you after that. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Sure. I have no questions Kate at this time. >> Kevin, >> as far as the charter Kate, um we were talking about extending the mayor's term. Again, that wouldn't happen until 2028 if we were to talk about that or it wouldn't happen in 2026. >> Mayor Council, so when we last spoke, the consensus was to put that on the 2028 ballot. So we would pick that conversation up probably mid27 to start some education pieces and then it would >> does it should it take that long and what's the problem with putting it on 2026 >> mayor council I believe the consensus when we were talking about this was that the greater population that comes out to vote in 28 >> that's right >> we would be we would be pressing a lot of time now to try to get it to 27 because there's a lot of steps with the county we have to go through and create our questions. And um so yeah, 28 is probably the most likely at this point being that we're already in the 26 as well. >> Okay. And then as far as Highway 47 discussion, would it be worthwhile to have another sign like we did for our truth and taxation? I again I don't mean I'm not going to even call it opening Pandora's box. It'd be alerting the public to an important issue. Is it worth doing something like that again? Uh again, there'll be some input stuff, but this we can preface it by telling the public it's already, you know, the cow's way out of the barn. We got a whole herd of cows now. So, but would it be worthwhile to have a signage again? >> Mayor, council, possibly. What this public hearing um signifies is that the the design is complete. So, there are zero changes once we get to this point. Um, actually once we're to this point today, the design is is set. Uh, the public hearing is really a state housekeeping process saying that we understand we're reducing the size of the road. The roundabouts don't require local consent, but the lane reduction does. So, we're more than happy to to share that and and welcome the the residents in, but I would ask if you have quite a few people in opposition to that or want to see something else on that road, you know, what is your answer going to be to those questions because the design will be done. So, we definitely can can advertise once we know, but um we'll have to understand what what you're going to do with that request if it comes in for change because it's too late at >> again. Maybe we could preface the announcement with the fact of what you just said. This is it. We're we're at a final point here and we we're making you aware of such a thing. It'd also be nice to highlight the hard work that the staff and you have put into it and the timeline of monies applied for money's gotten and then give credit to our legislator as well who's helped us along the way. You know, not to blow your own horns and stuff, but it was work. It was real hard. It was hard work and good work and it should be recognized. And then this is what we're doing. And then also let them know what our responsibilities will be because we're not scot-free. There'll be some responsibilities on the city's part which and give them a little taste of what's to not a taste but a preview of what our obligations are financially as well so everybody knows the big picture. >> Sure. >> A roll out of the design. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And the project moving forward. >> Are there Kate? Are there any other going forward after this one? Are there any other public hearings for the 47 project? Mayor Council, for the pavement, I don't want to speak for the utility because that will follow its own process. Um, but for the pavement portion, I am not aware of any public hearings. We've done all the community engagement. We've had seven years of that already. Um, so this is really the final step before we take the design that we've completed and hand it off to the state. Um but there right other than the public kind of presentation at at night to unite and you know I'm looking to put it at the pioneer days as we've talked about having a table there. So other than just that education piece there's really no greater input other than this next step where we're saying the city is giving consent to the fact that we are reducing the road from four to two lengths. So, >> and if you think some of this is troublesome or it's not worthwhile of any of the thing, the bullet points I made, that's fine with me, too. It's just we've come this far. It's been so many years and be finally say this is it. But >> it'll definitely be a milestone. >> Don't throw you under the bus for one second there, Paul. Do is there a public hearing associated with the underground side of this at some point in time then? Yes, Mor Council, there's actually a few steps and we're we're just starting on that right now. Uh, and we'll give you a breast of it as we go along. >> Okay. Very much. >> Any other questions, Joel? >> So, the public hearing is required by law, I assume. >> Correct. >> The design is set so nothing can change. >> Correct. >> And the public hearing is for the purpose of just letting the public know like we're getting their feedback. They say they hate the lane change. They want nothing to do with it. What are the possibilities at that point? You just stop the project completely or you move forward. >> So, mayor and council as >> it's just kind of a setup by the state and the order of operation either kind of done to where it's just sets. It's weird. >> Well, mayor and council, so for the last seven years, Mindot has listened to you to remove that claim. So this is an action where you're putting your words and what your requests are into a resolution. >> Okay, >> with that you're asking the you're basically telling your public that that is what you're doing, >> right? >> You you could have people come forward that absolutely don't agree with it, >> right? Which you probably have a few I would think >> if if you were to not pass the uh consent. Um, >> well, it's a waste of time and money for the last seven years and the hard work that we >> I don't Yeah, you the the city project it can't die >> because of the pavement. So, it would probably fall back to what we continue to be told is they will take off the pavement that's there. They will put back the pavements that there and there are no intersection or lane changes in this project. So, that's where we're sitting right now. We either consent or we go a next for 20 to 40 years with what we have. >> Well, the reason I ask is because it's to me it's you always hear how the public will say, you know, the city doesn't listen to you or whatever, it's always, you know, negative stuff unfortunately. And I think that public hearing at that point in time when things really can't be changed you up to you're not listening to the public. >> So just putting that out there as far as you really don't have a say at this point. I mean, you can voice your concerns anytime to anybody if you'd like, which is always welcome, and whether where you're at in the process could determine whether or not anything could be done about it, but it just it sets us up to look awful in my opinion, which is fine, whatever. But it's part of the job, I guess. But >> hopefully they'll remember all of the meetings that we did invite the public to >> years ago, and there was a lot. And it's all in how you word it. Hey, we listened to you and now this is what we came up with, >> right? >> And so, but I I understand what you're saying. >> There's also parameters. >> We did listen to them because [laughter] they said they wanted stop lights and we said no. So, we really did listen to them. >> Well, there that did change, you know. >> I mean, it's it's a and I hope they understand it is a cost thing. It really is. It's not that we don't want stop lights, but there is a huge cost that comes with those stop lightss. But let's be honest, they told us at those meetings that's what they wanted and we >> That's true. >> We went back on it. So that we I expect to get a little bit of kickback from a few people. But >> what if you show them the price tag of the two million plus dollars it would have cost? >> But we did show them that at the beginning. We told them that it was going to cost money. We told them that it was going to be [clears throat] on us. We told them we told them we told them and they still said this is what we want. So we we >> Well, there's a few people at the taxation meeting, too, that said, "Don't touch 47. We don't need any bad drivers all of a sudden, too." >> Yeah. Then we're have that, too. I'm just saying. >> Fix the road. Fix the road. Fix the road. And then when the cost comes, some people are going to be opposed to it. >> Why'd you fix the road? >> No. Yeah. And we know that's going to come. We know we're going to have some of that. But just >> I just thought it was better to say something than let it just roll through the >> Y machine. >> That's all I have. >> Okay. Anything else for Kate? Anybody? >> No. Kate. >> Okay. On to council member reports. Uh Sarah, >> I don't really have much to report other than that there is again I want to reiterate there is the Pioneer Days planning meeting tomorrow night, Wednesday, January 21st at 6 p.m. at the Legion. And then I also want to highlight the chamber casino night on January 30th at the Refuge. It's a very good fundraising and a fun night with community. >> Thank you, sir. Kelly, >> um Sarah's got part of my thunder there, but the same thing, the Pioneer days needs volunteers. I mean, there's just no doubt about it. It doesn't come off smooth and good unless people help out. And everybody says we always wanted back, you know, when when it wasn't here, it wasn't up to par. You know, people complained. Well, here's your chance to be involved and be a part of it. Make it something special. So other than that, I'll be going to a Jaylick meeting next week with the chief police and um that's all for now. >> Kevin sir or Amy >> um I just had a couple things. I had um an email from a resident and she just had a couple couple questions. she wasn't able to come tonight, but um she said that in the last one of the last meetings we talked about how there hasn't been a lot our meetings haven't been very long and she suggested that we get started on the budget now um since instead of waiting till then and wanted to know if she or anybody else from the public could could help with that. So, um, just because we've been talking about the budget so much, she was like, "Can you get started early?" I just wanted to maybe that could be part of our work sessions that are coming up. Um, and then also, um, she wanted to know, and I got the answer to this today, but, um, she wanted to know if the fire district, um, meetings were open to the public, and I did respond that they were. Um but um when I was looking at the calendars earlier today, I didn't see the fire district meeting that was today on our calendar. And I I understand that it's probably on the Rum River District calendar, but I feel like our city calendar is where people would look. And I just wonder if those meetings could be put on our calendar as well. Um I just feel like that's where people would look for them. That's where I looked for them. Um and I do think I would know. Um and I I I did know and but that's where I looked for them first. And so um and she said, "Well, when are the meetings?" And and so I don't I don't know. There's just an idea on could those meetings be placed on our city calendar as well. And um and then also if if the meetings are open to the public, they are right. >> Correct. >> Um so if if the mayor and and Kevin are there, what if I wanted to come um to the meeting? Um then we would have a we would have >> tech technically you can observe as long as you're not participating in the official discussion I believe. >> Well and mayor and council we we post any meetings that we suspect we may have a quorum. So you'll find pioneer days meetings events meetings such as the fire district we'll post them with the possibility we'll have more than two. >> So that's like that's like that's a given for like all the meets. Okay. Not not all the meetings, but the ones that are most obvious that we anticipate could have. >> Okay. And where where is that posted? >> In our lobby. And so our official posting is the bulletin board because we are not required by statute to post online. We just do that as a best practice method for transparency. >> Um Okay. >> Right now we're we're in between the two websites and them getting theirs updated and ours is under construction right now. We're really not adding a lot of things to it, but it's always posted on the bulletin board whenever there's a meeting. I can add to the calendar, too. Um, I just don't know how long I can add to the calendar before we start messing with the production of our website. Um, but yes, they're they're always posted on the bulletin board. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Okay. I just thought, you know, if she couldn't find it and didn't know, and then when I was looking at my calendar today, I was like, "Oh, I didn't see that on there." Um and so I just I just thought that would be where people where people might look. And my question about um posting meetings if you know more than two of us are there you know that that would go for you know the planning commission meeting you know the EDA meeting like in most of those committees there's two of us >> there already. So, if one of us wanted to just go observe, and I understand what you're saying, you could just go and just sit in the back and just don't participate. Um, which it would probably be normal anyway to if you're just attending a meeting, >> take notes and then talk here when you're >> Right. Right. So, I just wondered um should we just say that we could have a quorum at basically all of the committee meetings or, you know, I just wonder what you did with that? >> Yep. So, Mary Council, again, if if we anticipate that possibility, but for like the local government meeting next week, we probably won't post it because we we have a history of one attending. So, we do make that judgment and we post a lot more meetings than we made aware of just because we anticipate that the possibility exists. So, >> okay. >> So, help. I would just say, you know, call us. If you think you're going to go to a meeting, reach out to Kate or Jenny and let let them know. Then they can post it whether you're there or not. It is irrelevant, but then they could post it. So, >> okay, that's all I have. >> Okay, sure. >> Uh, I reached out to Jenny earlier too about where the board stuff was. Um, and if you email Dave too, he'll send you the agenda, all that stuff, too. Um, he did email me that because I asked for it, so the the information is there, too. Um, and I was kind of curious how the >> they I just they do plan when their website is up on having all of that information online. just right now they're getting booted up and >> well that's one of the things I think it it's I get where you're coming from too as far as it'd be nice if we could both have it just because most people people have a hard enough time for some reason finding what they want online because it's not on Facebook but for whatever reason I think it's you know the information will be there when they get it up but um given it's a separate entity I don't know if it's because it's not a taxing district or what where they're not required I just assume given it's a government entity like the school board or whatever have to be posted too. That's where I was like, "Okay, where do I find that?" >> Well, it is posted. It's just the official is the bulletin board and the online is not a statutory requirement. >> Okay. So, it's it is posted but not >> Yes. Yep. >> But you told me earlier >> and we will tie it in. We can link their website to our calendar once their website is up and running. I can I can do a cross link between our calendar. So then you can click to get to their agenda and stuff. our websites are going to be completely separate now. >> Yeah. Well, and I just figured people would look so however it's on there, you know, it eventually, maybe not right now, but um you know, I just I just feel like people will look at our calendar before they will go go there and if they don't see it, they don't see anything, they'll be like, "Oh, okay. Well, there's no meetings, you know, and so but meetings are going on and you know, they wanted to stay um you know, involved with that." So just somewhere sometime make it obvious where they can find information. >> We just discussed this too. I can give you a quick update on that there. We're hoping that the website it's in process. We're hoping end of February early March we'll be launching the river district website. So it's it's close but it's a little way away. >> As well as a YouTube tab and on there as well. So you could be broadcast per se. >> That's still in the working. Correct. But right now for at minimum it would be the recording of the meeting out there and hopefully we're talking about doing it just like we do city council meetings that's being worked on as well. So >> yeah, go ahead, Jim. >> Uh I would just thank staff too for all the work you guys are dealing with with that as well. Um, and I spent about an hour and a half with Darcy looking at uh the CIP, uh, looking at the budget, looking at places where you can possibly save. And I got to be honest, I don't see a lot. Um, there's some things that I'm sure we can talk about in work sessions and I'm sure we'll get there. But to put it out there that it did take that time. The public is aware that it's being looked into. But what we come up with is questionable because again it's it's city level is a lot different than state level. State level is very interesting right now. Um [laughter] >> I won't get too much into that. >> You're being cunning. But yeah. >> Yeah. Um but you know that's what that's where I think a lot of my criticism go to federal and state with waste and fraud whereas being involved with the city level um you know people talk about the Doge with the federal level and all that and I think that's not a bad thing to look into what are we doing do we have subscriptions that aren't being used all that kind of stuff. Um at the city level it's more direct towards where your money is going. We don't we don't subsidize things here like state level and federal level. So when you're looking at the taxes and stuff that's directly going to, you know, to me it's it's all services. I understand we might have a little disagreement on some of that stuff, but um at the same time it's it's it's applied directly to where it's easy to find. You can see that there's not a lot of waste there. So I just wanted to put that out there. But I am looking at >> that's all I have. >> That's true. >> Forget where I left off. Who would I catch everybody? >> Just yourself. I see you. >> Thanks. Sorry. [laughter] >> So, we did Yeah. Kevin and I just had the Run River board meeting right here and the really big updates is the one I just told you at the website working through a personnel issue that you're aware of and that's in the works. Um, no county fire protection council meet this Thursday. I'll be going to that. And then encourage anybody the LJGO meeting Kate referenced the Hanoka County local government official meeting is next Wednesday the 29th and the biggest item on there kind of an interest is I don't know how many of you are aware of it the Minnesota DNR changed the rifle shotgun zoning stuff. So there's going to be that's going to be issue discussed at length at that meeting. So, amongst other things, but other than that, that's all I've got. So, anybody else? Anything? Seeing none, do I have a motion to adjurnn? >> Make that motion, Mr. Mayor. >> Motion by Councilman Muer. Do I have a second? >> A second. >> Second by Council Fis. All those in favor signify signify by saying I. I. Pull the same sign. Meet adjourned at 6:37