Mary, your mic's not hot. Josie, can you hear us? Can you hear us? We're gonna get feedback. Maybe turn your volume on or something. If I turn it off, she's not hearing us. [Music] There we go. Can you all hear me? Yeah. Yep. Can Yes. Great. Thank you. And you can hear us. Yes, I can now. Thank you. Okay. Working with the technology here. Thank you for calling us. I think we're good to go. Okay. I'll order the work session on Monday, June 9th at 5:30 p.m. Please rise for the pledge of allegiance. Pledge the flag 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. Kate, yes. Council member Vonis, here. Robinson, here. Here. Mayor here. On to So, where do we want to start for the charter commission? You want to go, Kate? Yeah, Mayor Council, I can start. Tonight, we're going to continue the discussion regarding the changes to both the mayor's term as well as the charter overall. With us tonight is Josie with uh the League of Minnesota Cities. She is one of their staff attorneys. As seen in your packet, there are several items that were previously discussed with both charter and council with a few pieces that have been clarified and some of the conversation. Uh, tonight the goal is really to answer the questions and determine our path forward. So, the decisions tonight will allow staff to really move forward with an education piece if we decide to move both the charter uh question or the mayoral term to a ballot. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions, but really our expert here is Josie, and we can work through the process and and see what questions we have. And the floor, floor is yours, Josie. Hi. Well, thank you so much for for having me tonight. Um, so my role at the league, I'm a staff attorney. I'm able to provide uh general information and resources. And then as part of our uh charter assistance program that includes information and resources specific to any questions you have about um uh charter cities and um you know I'm here to answer any questions you might have about uh I I heard you're potentially switching from being a charter city to a statutory city. So happy to answer any of your questions um that came up. I provided a lot of information via email to Kate previously. Um, so any other questions you might have, I'm happy to answer. Do we want to go or I'll let someone else start. I'll go first. Mayor, go ahead. Okay. I'd like to just address just the mayor's term portion. We want to talk about charter first. Mayor, so you can take it as as any direction you want. Um, the mayor term length, I'm all for four years. I think it's equitable uh for the city as well as the individuals who take the time to knock on doors and talk to people and it's what you're supposed to do when you run for an office. But um I I don't have a problem at all with the four-year term. I think it uh it's a benefit to the council and to the public. I I concur with with Kevin. I don't think it's an issue. Again, it just needs to be on the ballot so people can and we'll do a better job of educating people about what the question is and and why um this time around. I think that's the biggest concern I have is that we make sure that we're letting people know and understand the question because I would guess that probably of everybody in this room, I'm probably probably the only one who looks at a sample ballot before. No, I do. Not a lot of people do then. And if they they don't they get there and there's a question and a lot of times they just skip it because they don't have any information and they'd rather skip it than answer it wrong. Um I agree with Kevin that it and and Sarah too. Um, I think I personally think it's very inconsequential to go from a two-year to a four-year as far as asking the public. Um, and I think it's a pretty simple question. I get what you're saying. If people don't aren't prepared, I I think it's a pretty simple question, but didn't we go down this road one time and they they answered no. So, if they don't answer, that's not a no. That's just a no response. It's not like it you know does it it depends because sometimes on a ballot if you don't answer I mean it it does because nobody if five of us go in and only two of us answer that question then that that's your answer. So the more people who don't answer it the less clear you are are on how people feel. Well it's on them though too. It is. You're correct. But a lot of times if people know that it's on there ahead of time, which that's a question for Josie though, too. So if that was on the ballot and biggest issue I think with the questions come is the way they're worded sometimes in the state. It can be confusing. Um I think if you ask it in the right way, just straightforward, I don't think it'll be an issue. you know, should the mayor term be two years or four years or would you have, you know, whatever. Are you in favor of changing it to four years instead of two years? Um, yes or no. That's pretty straightforward. Um, but if somebody doesn't answer that, does that count as a no given that they voted but they didn't vote yes for it and on something like that? Yeah, we'd have to get that squared away. Joel, um, I don't know the answer to that, but I can look into it and see what I can find. Okay. Are you done? Oh, well, I just want to say too, thank you. Um, I I think that like what Kevin said that if you know the time that it takes to knock on doors and do your campaign and everything that um I think a four-year term makes more sense for the mayor because it makes sense for the four of us. Um I and I don't know how many other cities have two-year terms for mayors and two and four year terms for mayors. I think I think four years is is not unusual. So, I think that I'd like to think that we'd have pretty good luck in um uh convincing the public to to do that. But, I just want to make sure I understand if we all voted yes to changing it and all of the charter members voted yes for changing it, then does it have to go to a vote? And I understand that some of the council people think it's really important for it to go to a vote. So it is is that correct that if all the charter members vote to change it and all the council people vote to change it then then it doesn't go on the ballot council that's correct. However, if it was petition it would then go back to the ballot. So if if all of our chamber our charter and all of our council voted yes and we skipped the the ballot, the residents would have the right to petition to still put it on the ballot. Okay. That both representatives from both parties have requested. Yeah, I think I think it's important for it to be on the ballot. I think uh I personally don't have an issue with it. Um obviously a lot of the people say it's good. Um, the only other beef I have is I want it to be on a presidential year because nobody shows up for the off-year elections and I think that that's very important for that seat. Well, that makes sense. So, unfortunately, you might have to campaign too. That that does make sense to me that it if we're going to put it on the ballot, it needs to be in the right the right time frame, you know, to get the the most number of voters. That makes sense to me. But I feel like there's so many other decisions that we or previous council has made that are a lot bigger to me. Just I'll just use this building and the police station as an example. Um, you know, we need we spent a lot of money there and we didn't put that to a vote. We didn't we didn't ask the public to do that. We they voted us in or the previous council. it wasn't me here, but they voted the council in to to to vote on their behalf on certain things. And so for me, if I look at spending however between the two buildings, however many millions of dollars that was spent, this little issue of two years to four years is very small in my mind. So, um, but everybody can vote the way that they want to here on this council and at the charter, but to me, it's a really small issue. I, um, that that's just how I'm looking at it. We make so much bigger decisions. Um, I bet you I bet you if you asked older people in St. Francis, I bet you most of them wouldn't even know if the mayor's term currently is two years or four years. I bet they wouldn't even know. And so it it it's just it's not like we're saying, "Hey, let's make the mayor term 10 years," you know, or something really. I think there's there's two ways to look at that argument, too. I think if you So, not disagreeing that the public would be nice to be involved in in some of those decisions like the buildings and whatnot. But I think too, as we've seen, nobody wants anything changed in this town is is the the feeling I get. And this is just from obviously, you know, when we talk with the rural people, we talk to the city people, nobody wants anything in their backyard, which, you know, that's their right to feel that way. Um, but I think too when you're talking about they voted us in to make these decisions. That's true. And that's an argument in my opinion to say that should be on the ballot for them to make that decision to say, do I want this person to represent me for four years or two years? So, or you could say, you know, they voted us in to make that decision and we don't need to ask them. But if you're talking transparency, again, it almost has to go to the ballot. But my only beef again is just that please make it on a presidential get the timing right. I understand that. I'm just going to go along. I agree with a lot of Amy's points. I and I got to say up front for the public, anybody who's watching, it doesn't affect my two-year term. So, doesn't extend anything there. But I I mean, I'm just since the majority wants it on the ballot, I'm okay with that. And I think we target for a presidential year. I recognize that we're way in front of the horse there, but I think that's okay. So, I don't know. I think we have kind of a consensus on trying to go to a fouryear. And when would would that be this? So 2028. And mayor, I don't know if you want to. So Gary showed up as as a member of our charter. So you want to any input you want to contribute, Gary? Well, I think pretty much what you said so far is what we discussed at the charter meeting also, you know, but everybody pretty much felt I felt that they wanted on the ballot. I'm like I say, I think we're all okay with that. I I agree a lot of Amy's points, but I'm okay putting it to the ballot and we'll target for the 2028 2028 year to make that change. So So we would we need um in the next council meeting a vote to an official vote to do that and the charter would need to meet again to officially vote to do that or or what would the timing on that be? Mayor and council, we have a lot of steps from here to there. So it wouldn't be on the next meeting. Uh but staff will start working on on all of that because we'll have to design a question. But we are way ahead of it. So we'll lay out the plan and go I guess we would have our annual we would have our annual charter meeting again before all of this would start. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Okay. That's I guess that's where I was going. It was the charter should meet again before their next meeting in January. and this mayor council that's possible but we'll we'll get that time frame laid out. Okay. I think that kind of settles that one on on to the charter commission itself. Uh Jerry, you want to go first? Want to say anything? Talk about whether we Well, yeah. I'm just kind of here to to learn about it. But u Yep. But one thing we've had problems with ever since I've been on it um is getting people to fill the vacancies, you know, so there's not a lot of interest in it. So maybe the statutory route would be the way to go. For me, I personally think statutory is necessarily better, but easier to deal with. Um it it's a matter of opinion of whether or not it's better, right? because you can you can be more restrictive than the state, but you can't be more lenient necessarily. So, you have to follow statutes anyway. I kind of lean towards less government's better. Um, and that's kind of where I feel that way. I mean, some of the some of the restrictions that are in the charter I think do kind of make sense. Um, I know when Rob got voted in, um, he wanted to still serve on the fire department. You can't do that and be a council member because you're an employee of the city. So, I understand that being the boss of your boss is a big conflict when it comes to some of that stuff, but other than that, I don't know what would really of it other than I've read the points here that were provided, but to me, I think it's it's just less restrictive, um, less stuff to jump through, probably need less legal, uh, spend less money on legal when you're coming to clarity on the charter, things like that to where it would benefit us more to dissolve it. That's my That's kind of a question I had. Josie, a real quick question for you. Joel just kind of alluded to it or whatever or just said it. In general, everything statutory a city, all the rules and regulations pretty much apply to a charter. So, is that correct? Um, generally, so there's two uh I guess you'd say codes. There's chapter 412 which applies to statutory cities and then there's chapter 410 which applies to charter cities. Charter cities are governed by chapter 410 and then of course the city charter. It's where you have issues where maybe the the law is or the charter is silent onto something you'd look towards um the statutory provisions and for statutory cities um to figure out you know what to do for a specific situation. Um so it's a little more nuanced. Um and then of course there are areas where uh state law might um preempt a charter provision for example. But there's no there's no places where charter would preempt statutory. Uh, no. Unless, um, the only thing I'm thinking of is, um, you know, maybe there might be certain things that a charter city can do, uh, given its um, just ability to regulate its kind of general welfare clause or police powers um, that maybe isn't provided in statute elsewhere. By your way, if you got questions, guys, I basically what I just heard is that if like you say there's more you can do more with your police power so to speak with a charter. Um so you can do more but you can't do less than what the state allows if that makes sense for the most part. I'm just confused on on what's what's the biggest benefit I guess to being a what's the number one benefit that's really want to be a charter city but to do it? I mean do we do we do you have an example of that or Yeah, I could speak generally to that. Um I think charters uh the major kind of uh benefit to charter cities is that um they can really tailor the charters to fit the unique needs of the city. Um and so for example there's things you can do in charter cities that you can't in statutory cities like uh referendum initiative and recall. Um also election by wards is another thing that you can do in charter cities that you can't in statutory cities. So there's um things like that that charter cities could do that allow them to kind of tailor um how the city uh government works based on kind of the unique needs of the community and um what input residents have in government affairs at the city level. Thank you. Does that mean it puts more power into the council's hands than than it would normally? when you say what are the city's needs who you know you you determine city needs you shape them and then you act on them um I don't understand the difference between the charter side and the stat uh statutory side I mean you're here for the public good overall um I'd actually like to go back a little further why did we become a charter city in the first place back in the day Gary you know when we did that or St. Francis did that. I don't recall if there was some dispute with the council at the time. Is that why it came into effect or I I don't know. So it might have been a reflex of some sort and it just hadn't said by golly pitchforks and torches. Let's do this. Yeah. I I don't recall. I wasn't on from the beginning so I don't know. Okay. Well, I think it's concerning to me that like Gary said, nobody wants to come to the meetings or fill a spot. And two, if you want a spot, you can write a letter to an arbitrary judge who doesn't know you from Adam. I don't know if they do a background check or whatever, and then you could get a seat on the charter, which has some authority over the council and how the city is steered. So, I don't I don't agree with that concept of it. If it's not hasn't done us that much good, and we can't get participation, we're lucky to have participation at our meetings, let alone an important thing. Well, what seems to be an important thing as a charter commission. Um, I don't see why we'd want to stay a charter. Um, and we still have to follow guidelines of what the state lays forward. You know, big brother, big sister, whatever they say, we still have, you know, there's guard rails for us. Um, I don't know why we would want to stay a charter. Well, I think I think too to change anything in the charter, you have to have a unanimous vote by the council. Well, so it's basically one person does it and you can't if you you know, one person disagrees, you're not going to change anything either. So tighter guard rails on that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. To make changes on your charter documents if you don't have a unanimous vote, it does go to a ballot. Well, that's so you can still change it. Just go to correct. I'm assuming did the I mean did everybody because there was I think there was three or maybe four of us that our terms all expired at the same time. Did everybody reup? Do we know mayor council I think we still have a vac because I know there's one vacancy but the four that because all four of us our terms expired on like March 31st or something. Did everybody did you re I did. Yeah. I got already got my stuff back and did my old fun stuff. You did too. Do know if Steve did and Malcolm was the other one, right? So, I mean guess did it. I'm guessing they did, but if they didn't, that would that would leave us with more and and that that is concerning because I mean all of them are a little bit older and maybe don't want to do this forever and that's going to be three vacancies all at once if they you know potentially it could be and how do you run a charter which is three of you know no right I'm just I'm saying like seven or I think there's spots total So I yeah we're on it and you know um I'm on it till 2029 again but again it's it's I mean that vacancy has been there a long time a very long time. Well, and when we did meet about it in the charter meeting, um I I think that I I don't I don't want to speak for Malcolm, but he I I think he had a different take on it than you did, Gary, that you know, well, um I I think he was like, "No, we're going to be here. We want to be here." So I you know I don't I don't want to speak for him but my feeling in the room was it was a little both both perspectives were there for sure and um and so and I personally I've heard that before where well it's really hard to fill these spots and I just I just don't know that that's a reason to say oh let's not do it anymore just because we can't find people to fill the spots. I just have a hard time I have a hard time with that. Um, but I understand what you're saying, Kevin, that it seems odd that just anybody who applies basically is is just on there and they're they're making, you know, decisions potentially make decisions for our city and, you know, kind of a bit above the council in some cases. And I know that does that seems odd to me, too. Um, but I I I just like having I don't know how many times the council has had to go to the charter to like, hey, help us figure this out. Um, you know, like I'll just use the case of Rob because I know go to them for that. Um, you know, I don't know how many times that has happened, but I personally like having a another committee there that can help us help us interpret things. um when it's needed and we only meet once a year usually of course if something comes up um but I personally know offhand off your question do you know offhand when the because I've been on it for quite a while and I've had no interaction what maybe even you know how long it's been since we've we've never had well there was a change that needed to take place because the wording wasn't there something but I don't council. Correct. So, back in in I want to say 2018, I think bar brought some language changes. Yeah. Very. But in the 10 years I've been with the city, we haven't gotten complaints directed towards the charter to correct anything. We haven't gotten resident requests. Um, usually our meetings are fairly quick. Would you look at legislative changes? Back uh back when Barb Held was here, we had an issue when uh Steve Feldman first was elected and uh after the election took place and he won. Then one of the council members dropped out or resigned and they voted to put Jerry Tvite back in the old mayor to serve beside the new mayor and that didn't sit very well with Mayor Feldman. So and he was just there for we didn't change anything but it was a discussion. But the council the council voted on that just like they did when I took over for Steve. That wasn't Yeah, we did. Yeah, we didn't change we didn't change it, but but he went to the charter for clarification or Yeah. Yeah. I think he potentially wanted it he wanted to change it to that the incoming council got to choose because that's who was serving on remember that. Oh, I do remember that the timing was very Yeah. Like it was right before the election like right before Yep. And it had the 45 days and all that. I do remember that the whole conspiracy theory mayor I'll refer to Josie but council cannot also be a staff member is the same for a statuto pay so that I I don't believe that's unique to our charter that is state law matter your city make up that's not that's the only Joel's nodding yes so yep you're right there are a whole series of conflict of interest laws um that govern um both contractual and non-contractual situations ions. Um, but also employment full-time and part-time for cities. I'm willing to bet too most of the residents don't know that we're a charter. They don't know. Most people sadly don't pay attention um to a lot that goes on in the city until they're mad at something. You cut down a tree. Well, and if if we think the question of should we go from two years to four years to mayor may be hard to to get that passed, this question would be really hard for, you know, for for the residents to vote on accurately because just like you said, most people probably don't even know we are a charter city or what that is. Um, so that that seems that seems There's a big education piece there, but again, it's it's the same thing. I mean, a lot of people apparently don't get their mail the city of St. Francis either. So, you can mail something directly to their house and a lot of people don't see it for whatever reason it is or they glance at it and throw it away. Oh, it's from the city. I don't care. Whatever the case is. Um, that's where I think the education is going to be tough on staff because how do we really educate people? I mean, we could try, but and that's the best you can do is try, but I think I think it's worth a try. And my reasons I may that's pretty easy and it's straightforward and then it's just they decide on whether or not I mean I know Steve loved the two years because he felt like you get a majority change if you're really not happy with the council. Um and I understand that reasoning, you know, but I think too it's just how people feel. Do I want to have that that power of the ballot um every two years or can I live with a fouryear, you know, like everybody else? Or maybe they'll think they they won't have to show up to the polls again for four years. I don't know. You never know. Back to your fourth year thing though, real quick. I mean, for somebody, I would say relatively brand new might like myself into it. If you're just running for council or mayor for the first time, I don't care who you are, it's going to take you six months to a year to develop the relationships and to start understanding what's going on 100%. And then you're right back into running again. And I just don't think that's productive. I don't think it's It depends on how mad you are when you get mad because I know me and Steve sat in the audience for two years and started talking to the staff two years before our election. All good. The wastewater got us going. Yeah. One uh one question I thought of if if we were a statutory city now, would this mayor term be even coming up or would that be already Oh, that's a good question. in in that statutory thing. You hear that, Josie? Yeah. Could you clarify your question, please? If we were a statutory city right now, would this mayor question even come up or would that already be in the statutory um well there is a a statute I can't remember the the exact uh provision but um statutory cities can also it's kind of determined by city ordinance but they can essentially amend their ordinance to change from a 2-year to a 4-year term. So it's also a capability that statutory cities have and um it's it's done by amending city ordinance. So that would not be a ballot question. 20507. Joel found it. 20507. So I I just want to rephrase that. So if we switched from a charter city to a statutory city, then we could just by ordinance change change the mayo term without having to go to a vote. Well, but but people like it to want it to go to a vote. So, well, both of these would have to be on. Well, I guess you could I don't know. We could probably put anything on a ballot that you want. Mayor council, you can put a lot on a ballot. Um, and that is correct. So, a lot of our charter language and and a big piece of this is not only getting it to the ballot, but if the charter if we have a positive vote to dismantle the charter, a lot of those those pieces have to be moved into to our ordinance. So there's a very big process where you know we would want to be very prepared to to then do our two readings and our 30 days so we can move these pieces. But yes, we have we have multiple people up on the ballot. So that I just think I I I think we should look at the statutory and it's for all the reasons you guys said, but I I I number one is I don't I I think 99% of the people don't know that we are a charter. They don't know anything about a charter. They don't want to know anything about a charter. Number two is we as we stated, you can't fill it. And number three is even if you could fill it with citizens, it's it's got to be a citizen who really wants to dig in and and and know things. It's not just a matter of filling a role. You got to find a citizen who's really passion passionate and wants to no one do something and if you're meeting once a year for 15 minutes most of the time our meeting people think that that must take a lot more time you know and it doesn't well there's a few people I think we try to recruit too to get on it when I know when Steve got on it Feldman and you tell them it meets like once a year and that is still too much for a lot of people they just don't they don't want to commit to anything. It's unfortunate, especially they don't want to commit to something they don't understand. And I mean, I'm being frank and honest here. I mean, up until the last four or five months, I didn't know anything about the charter. Now, I've done some digging into I feel somewhat informed about it, but I'm still feeling Well, that's what keeps people out of government in general is the the fear of sitting here and whether you don't know or you feel like you can't learn certain things. I mean, there's a time in my life I was not mechanical, whatever. I worked at a grocery store, you know, I got sent to college to do HVAC and I was like, we'll see how this goes. Turns out I could do it, you know, but you got to put some effort in and just people are people don't feel like they have the time to do it again until they're mad and they show up in force and that's I mean the same thing that got me here. So I totally understand that. So in general, forgive me Kate. I mean I I know you did some of the background on this before. Let's just say tonight we come to a consensus that we want to switch to a statutory a then com charter commission has to have a vote as well. Is that correct or so mayor since since it's a work session and we don't have any formalities basically I would go back and I would work with Josie and I would work with Dave shops and we would create a timeline and those steps and we would have to get the formal approval of what we would need to don't know for sure is which election are we targeting this one too. Would you want to go after 26 or would you want to go after 28? Um we're going after 28. I would recommend starting that education piece as early as possible. We would get newsletters events. Um and that's why I wanted to know tonight is are we going to because I would be after the 19. So, I think we have this time and and those goals and those next steps to come, but I definitely wish those in regards to getting all of that lined up. We're going to have to get resolutions because we'll have to talk to each have quite a few steps to start with. Well, that's kind of something I thought of too is if we say tried to rush that to uh not necessarily rush it, but if we try to put on the 26th election, we get rid of the charter. Now, we have to deal with the mayoral situation where it's on a ballot. on a ballot. We have the statute here that says you can change it. You basically have to talk to the county and tell them immediately once it's changed. Um but does that is it easier to do them both at the same time and then you have time to educate people? Um or if we do this first, does that kind of muddy the water for the next thing too? Yeah. Which one to do first? And or if you just do them at the same time, you did them at the same time. No problem. I think it's better transparency if you did them both at the same time. Doesn't look like the show game, you Right. Right. So I I lean towards the same time and probably I would shoot for 28 then just because of the Yeah. I have a question for Gary. you of the time you've been on here and say you had a full house a full table when you did these. Do you felt have you felt the chart has been beneficial and the input that you had at those meetings for however many years you've been doing it or do you think we're on the right path by dissolving it with because it's kind of a tattered mess. Well, yeah, I think you know the discussion on the charter has been beneficial but again you know meeting once a year that's a long period of time you know to even remember what took place at the last meeting you know exactly you know it just doesn't you know it doesn't flow well it doesn't seem like do you recall how long have you served on the trigger I think what are they fiveyear terms this might be my fourth one oh so close 20 years. You've been on almost 20 years. Have you ever had like other than Steve's situation, but I do remember him wanting to change a few of those things. Has there been like a reason to call an extra charter meeting that you guys have that you recall or a lot of them or I mean it's pretty? No, we've never had there might have been a question or something that maybe we met twice or something, but yeah, nothing major. I don't think it hurts to keep it intact until Yeah. Not the next election, not midterms, but the next presidential election. I think for transparency and all that, you get to education, you start doing all that, you keep it all together. I think it makes it easier for everybody to at least the attempt to educate people. Do we have a consensus to uh pursue uh changing to a statutory A in 2028? I agree. Y I agree. I'm a hard no on that. And it's no, Joe. So he puts four to one in an informal vote here. Sure. So Mayor C, before we let Josie go, any other questions regarding this process? I think we're going to learn a whole lot more in the upcoming Well, thank you, Josie, for your time. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you so much. Take care. Thank you. Bye. I'm smiling at her like she could see us. She couldn't see us, could she? I think she can. I think she's watching the the feed. Oh, but not like I'm like, "Okay." Like, wait. I got nervous for a second. on to the uh liquor store. Joel I've never done this. Just talk to us for Thank you, Gary. Thank you. Thank you for coming, Gary. I'm here tonight to request the addition of a full-time employee, existing employee, been with us for almost three years now. can close 30 hours a week. And with Christie leaving back in March, the hours are there for him to go fulltime. And the staff that are still there would still have the hours that they're currently working. The biggest gain from us moving him to full-time would be that he's already a solid employee. He's one of the few that's kind of jumped on board with me jumping in. And he's he's a yes man. He does the things I have to do. And He's just a very productive and younger employee that I'd like to see stick around for a long time. Who would like to start? I'll start. How many full-time employees do you have now? Three. This would be number four. And that would leave you with one part-time then. Four part- timerrs. All right. Um, what was Kyler before he came to you? What was his occupation? Fairly sure. U he'd already been there for a year and a half when I started. Oh yeah. You think he's been under used at this point or previous? I do. A lot of potential. He's got a solid head on the shoulder. Most of the customers on a first basis knows the store pretty well too. It's potentially being at some point. That's not the purpose of this of this promotion. more to have somebody that can work the hours to do it rather than hiring another new employee and training in another new employee. Otherwise, you'd be three full-timers and then five part- timerrs and yes, from his salary, it just shows the budget impact. Um what hourly what would that give him a substantial raise or is this a promotion for him more or less other than the full-time hours? Not entirely sure on the wage structure. I do believe he would be at a different tier. um his main his main need for it is that he needs benefits. So that's that was my next question. Don't give him the fulltime position. He may Okay. And you feel that the investment's there. He'll if you if he goes in full-time, he's probably going to hang around for Well, nothing's ever forever, but forever two to five years at least. Yeah. I do think that he he'd be a valuable part of our team and that he would step up even more. Is he a family person? You have a family? He lives with his mother and younger sibling here in the city. Oh, really? Okay, that's all I have. Thank you. No, I I've I've seen Tyler there several times. He he does know his stuff. Um he's very good with customers. I feel he is. Um I think he would be I think he would be a good employee. I think it would be beneficial to us to hide this. Okay, I don't know, Kyler, but um if you switch from three full-time, you currently have three full-time people and five part-time people. Three, four time. Does that kind of taking out, you know, one one body out of that mix? Does is that going to leave you with enough people for when people have vacation and all of that? Yeah, because you'd be working then 40 hours a week instead of 20 to 30. So, okay. You'd be adding more potential time off, but you still have this solidarity employee that open a little bit more seriously. Doesn't Okay, Joe. I don't have any questions. Um, I appreciate what you're saying. I I'm kind of sour on hiring more or upgrading people right now. Um, just with recent lack of development to support more staff, so to speak, a few things. So, I'm kind of I'm leaning towards no nothing personal or nothing, you know, I don't know Kyler at all. I'm trying to do the math in my head and think about the tradeoff from the not hiring somebody to then upgrade somebody to fulltime giving him benefits. Ask the manager. He's probably done the math. Mayor, I'm just thinking in my head. That's just my own. I get it. And I'm one of five. Yeah. No. And this this isn't an impact to our levy or our budget. The store is a standalone enterprise fund. Okay. So any of this cost would come directly out of Joe's budget and does not apply to any of our general levy. That helps a lot. It's just me trying to manage my business better. No, I appreciate that. That's that helps me a lot. I actually lean more towards Yes at that point. That's my biggest thing is it's where are we at with all that? But I forget that I'm still still trying to grow the city, make it smaller, make it expensive. Well, I hear too. I I I mean, I do think that because the guy needs benefits, I don't reason to say yes. But like you say, if the solid employee doesn't say he needs and if it's self- sustaining and self-supporting, then I don't really have an argument against it. Um, I I know what you're saying that um, but somebody who needs ben health insurance and benefits, I can I can really see where that person's coming from. My husband and I have been self-employed for 25 years. And we have paid as much as $2,500 a month in health insurance for our family. No joke. No. And for for 20ome years, we have done that. And, you know, as you all know, my husband was a part-time employee here. If they had offered part-time, if they had offered health insurance to part-time employees, that would have been huge for us. And there's been many times where I've thought, you know, one of us is going to have to go out and get, you know, leave our business and go get a a full-time job somewhere or a part-time job that does offer benefits. There are there are places that offer benefits to part-time employees. They're very few and far between. But I I'm I'm not going to lie. There's been dozens of conversations in my home about that over the past 20 years. And for someone to say, "I like it here, but I need it. I need health insurance." That is a reason to to give him what he wants if it works within the budget and he's a good employee and you you want him to stay. um that really is because it it really is it just it's a game changer for the person that needs the the health insurance and um and the other benefits. Um so I'm I would be all I would be for it. So just because I've been in that vote for a long time. So um I can appreciate where he's coming from. When you said in your memo or whatever uh roughly a $30,000 change to your budget. That's after taking away the part-time, I believe. So, hours the previous employee plus the current employee and the benefits that would be added. Okay. I I mean, I I share some of the same concerns you had, Joe, when I read it. I mean, I don't in general, I don't like adding full-time employees to anything in general, but I respect what you're doing. and I know the job you're doing over there. So, and I get the situation you're talking about. So, and I'm the younger of three employees. So, I'm thinking about my longevity, too. I'm not gonna obviously my my dream is to run that store until I retired and eventually pick up this whole city. But, you just answered my next you just answered my next question. So, everybody's not going anywhere. You'll not be allowed to leave the city. that I could take on that I wouldn't grow with. That's 16 years, right? You got 16 years left in you. I I mean I don't I think I think I I don't know. We just do a consensus. It's not really a vote again. Kevin, we just go down the line here. I don't know. Kevin, I want one question of the 30,000 that included the benefits portion of it. Okay. That that's that sits better with me as well. So I I'm all for it. Yes. Yes. Thank you, Joe. I wanted to do that with you.