That little thing that hurt. Look at you just 30 seconds to step. I got to put it. You're here. That's good. Call the order of the meeting on Monday, September 15, 2025 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 Vogle, >> here. >> Council members Muower >> here. >> Bonis >> here. Ubig >> here. >> Robinson >> here. >> On to approval of tonight's agenda. Do I have a motion to approve the agenda for tonight? >> Make that motion, Mr. Mayor. >> Motion by Councilman Newbower. Do I have a second? >> A second, Mayor. >> Second by Councilman Robinson. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Pull the same sign. On to the consent agenda. Do I have a motion for tonight's consent agenda? >> I'll make that motion. Mr. Mayor, >> Councilman made the first motion. Do I have a second? >> Second by Councilman Um, Muower. All those in favor signify. All right. Any discussion? >> No. Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. The same sign. >> On to meeting open to the public. So, we have two sessions tonight for meeting open to the public. I would encourage I'm assuming most of you are here for the tax and for the water and sewer part. So, I'd encourage you to wait till the second meeting open to the public. But if if you're here for a different topic or if you'd like to speak now, we'll we'll hear we'll hear you now. So, would anybody like to speak right now? All right. On to old business. Uh city cell phone policy. Okay. >> Yep. Mayor, council, before you tonight is the revised cellular phone policy that we talked about two weeks ago where we had given employees the option. What this does is this changes it to the November 1st transition and then uh maintains the bargaining units that they will end at the end of their bar uh units. So with that I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Uh Kevin I have no questions sir. >> Sir >> I have no question none for me >> Joel. Only one I had I guess I didn't catch it in this case is if if somebody in their current bargaining session wanted to switch earlier they can switch earlier. Correct. >> Correct. Mayor Council, we do have some in the bargaining units that have already switched. So they would have the opportunity to go at any time, but what this would do is at the end of the contract, it would just put that in place. >> They're saying they can't hear in the back. They're waving at me. >> They're going. >> No, they're not. They're telling me. >> Thank you. >> Y >> and we need a motion on this then. And do I have a motion to go ahead, Dave? >> Uh, yes. It would be a motion to approve revised city. So, >> everybody has to talk really loud tonight. I'm sorry. But I don't want everybody to keep doing that. So, sorry. We're working on it. >> Is muted, too. We're not used to having this big of a group. So, excuse us, please. >> Red. >> Oh, red is on. >> I screwed mine up. >> So, do I have a motion to approve the city cellular phone policy, the revised edition? >> Make that motion, mayor. >> Motion by Councilman Robinson. Do I have a second? >> I'll second it. >> Second by Councilman Fis. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I pull the same sign. on to the accept the shared services study. >> Dave, >> mayor and councel, uh, for your review, tonight is our final shared services study. Um, we were fortunate enough as part of our ongoing discussions with Bethl for joint fire protection to secure a $40,000 grant from the state of Minnesota. Um, what this shared services study has done is kind of provided us the framework and the roadmap for ongoing um, fire protection initiatives with the city of Bethl. So as part of that process, they looked at our structure both from a city and individual department standpoint. They did a complete analysis of our strengths, our weaknesses, where we can create some efficiencies if we were to combine as a joint fire district, which is what is in front of you today. Um the important piece of this is it's simply a piece of information. Nothing in this report is legally binding. We may use some of the recommendations, we may use none of the recommendations, we may use all of the recommendations as this continues to develop. But as part of the process, it would be formal for the council to accept the study as finished. With that, I can answer any questions you may have. >> Okay. Amy, you want go first? >> Sure, I'll go first. Um, well, I had Well, first of all, this was the first time I'd seen the shared study um findings. I don't know if we've had a >> It was emailed out prior to the work session as well. >> Okay. Um, well, I had a few questions. Um the there was I I kind of got stopped right where it recommends that we would have more full-time staff. Um, and I I feel that the council has voted on that a few times now, and we have said that we don't want more full-time staff. And I think that the study should have or we should be looking for ways to reduce expenses and reduce the number of calls instead of just adding to it. And um, I feel that we we haven't adequately pursued that. And again, nothing in here is legally binding. Because it's in the document doesn't mean that we're going to do it. There would still have to be a process, whether it be through councils or fireboards, if there were any positions to be added into the future. This wasn't drafted by me, nor was it drafted by Kate, nor by the council. This is a complete third-party analysis based on a 30-year fire service expert and their recommendations. Whether we accept them or not, that's a decision for another day. Again, it's not legally binding that if we accept this study that that's what we're going to do. I would attribute this very similar to our financial plan that we did prior to pulling our bonds where it's just a plan. Things can and most definitely will change. So, I wouldn't get too bogged down in the details of this is the recommendation so therefore we're going to do it. That would not be a decision that I would make independently nor you. >> Well, and also too, um, at the previous work session, um, you mentioned, well, there there would be a fifth person, correct, >> on the board, um, two from our council and two from Bethl. Correct. >> Um and the fifth person um is yet to be determined, but because um is his name Charlie who did the >> um because Charlie did the study and has all of these recommendations um it would be it wouldn't seem right to me that he would be that fifth person. You mentioned that that was a possibility. Um I I wouldn't agree to that um myself um because of if he did the study and these are his recommendations, of course he would vote for all of these things and push for all of these things to happen. And I I just not sure that that's where we've wanted to go in the past. Um, I think that expenses have gotten a little out of control as well as everyone here is here because everything costs more and we need to find ways to reduce the tax burden on our residents, not increase it. And if just you know just one aspect here um in the past years ago um the fire department used to do fires, accidents and major medicals. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> So major medicals, heart attacks, falls, stroke, things like that. Right. And so um and a few years ago during COVID it that level that you were asked to do was increased um based on um just the changing times with the pandemic and Alina that we have a contract with to do >> there is no contract for the ambulance. They own the license. >> Okay. Yep. >> Um but they service our area. >> Right. So they were having trouble like everyone else during that time responding in a in in the time frames that they try to respond in. And so we were asked to pick up more calls, the the the less severe calls, if you will. Um, and now years later, we're just continuing to do those calls. Now, I in no means whatsoever want people to not be helped when they call 911. I mean that that's that's not it. But I feel that we should be looking at the call responses from Alina and let them go back to handling those more or less severe calls um to take the burden off of our taxpayers. Um, that's that's what I would like to see happen and I've mentioned that a few times as well as another council member has said that we need to find ways to reduce the number of calls and adding two another full-time staff member another as the inspector in this study. I don't see how that is going that direction at all. it just is going to more expenses. And >> again, we're not adding anybody. This is just what has been fleshed out in the shared services study, right? This this isn't a request to add anybody. Um to your point, there's always room for discussion and I monitor just like everybody else what we're doing on a daily basis and how that impacts us. We're still the cheapest labor unit and the highest trained labor unit to handle what we handle and we do it very well. As we continue to move forward, I've had conversations with individual council members that we do continue to monitor this, but run volume is only one component of a fire department as well. So, we look at this from a toptobottom perspective, not just simply a run volume perspective. We're also focused on outcomes, right? Of course, >> we have opportunities to reduce run volume when we make contact at the time of need as well. So, it's something we're very well aware of. It's something that we continue to monitor. And again, I I would just caution you. I get when you see those words, it may invoke an emotion. That's not what we're asking you to do today is to approve full-time positions. That's not what we're asking for as we transition to the fire district over the course of the next three months. These are simply recommendations from one person. To the point of our appointed position on the fire board, it's important to also note that if the JPA is approved tonight and Thursday in Bethl, we have a very short window to start making some very important decisions. The recommendation to continue with Charlie Smith as a part of that process is having somebody who's not only familiar with what we have had questions on, but has worked within a district previously to just get us to that jumping off point. It's one vote, right? There's still four other votes on that board that are representative of each city. So, even if he said you're going to hire 15 full-time people, you need four other people to agree to that. So, I hear you. We're not even close to that point yet. This is simply just the recommendations that were fleshed out. Again, they're not mine. They're not the councils. They're not the city administrators. >> Well, and I feel that if we're going to switch to a fire district, that's a very major change for the city of St. Francis. That's basically shutting down the St. Francis fire department and starting over. >> That's correct. >> It's Yeah, >> we're not going away. We just have a different reporting structure and relationship. >> It's a line item on your tax statement. >> Yes. >> Then there's different voting. We're going to get into that in the next >> Well, to me it's the it's the same topic, but maybe I jumped ahead, but it's similar. Um, but I feel that >> that is a major change and there's been other smaller issues here that other council members think we need to take it to a vote. Um, I'm talking about the two the two-year to fouryear mayor term. Um, that's been discussed up here. That and to me that's very small. That's a very small change. And I I don't see why we're not taking this to a vote to change it to a fire district when it's to me that's a much more m more major change for our city. And um then than than something as simple as that. And so I that's that's just where I'm coming from. >> But it is kind of coming to a vote here. >> We are taking on the next on the next >> No, I meant a vote from the people. Um the uh >> gotcha. >> Council member Milbarer has said that he thinks that the two to fouryear term mayor term change would need to go to a vote and and to me that's very different. So >> statutoily I don't even know if that would be up allowed. >> This is a decision that the cities are making as councils on how this would be formed. I don't know if I've heard of a district that sent it to a referendum vote to the stakeholders to be created and maybe Dave has more information. >> Well, maybe not. I'm just looking at the the gravity of the decision and and and that is sometimes you have to go with your gut and that's what my gut's telling me and and it I just think that >> we need to find a way to reduce expenses and and >> please keep in mind this helps with that. We are now sharing the cost of the fire department between two cities. >> Okay. So the the cost the budgeted amounts here um I saw the the different options as far as how the finances would be handled. Um if if these amounts are used, does the council still have the ability to vote for those amounts going forward? because I feel like if we vote for this then uh we're going to be like well it was in the it was in the joint partners agreement that you were going to give us $483,000 this year and I feel like I I feel like that's going to come to back to bite us. Um I feel like I think I feel like this group of five people will have less say in that in later later years. >> D may I >> Yeah. So, Mayor Council, so I think we're kind of tying two things together tonight. Um, the shared service study, you know, we we approved to apply for the grant back in September of 2022. So, I'm working on a couple other pieces with this. Um, so three years ago, we applied to the state for the shared service study. We got the funds and what it was for the purpose of just this study was the holistic look at is fire working, how is the fire working, what does each department have for equipment staffing, what is that long to long-term view of this region. So, it was really a study of what is working, what is not, and what do both cities have. As part of that, um, being that we're only starting with two cities, they took a look at all of the different ways we can split the budget. So, say the amount isn't changing a penny from this year to next year. It's taking this is the cost of the fire department and in there is the examples of what would it cost each city proportionally to pay for the exact cost of of what it's of what it costs today. So, if we're at X today, how do we determine who's paying what portion? So, right now, um, St. Francis is paying 100% of it. And what the study did was look at several different ways to break that down. The study was very, you know, this is that basic foundation. What came out of that is the JPA. And that's the next step where we determined in our group based on both mayors, based on the councils, based on the staff that were part of that is which formula was fair to both cities, which formula allowed both cities to adapt to growth, to changes in value, to changes in tax rate. Um, and that was actually determined how that split would happen in the JPA in the next step. But that's whether the budget is $10 or $100,000. How it will always get split that way. So Dave on an annual basis as a district is not a taxing authority. It's not moving towards that. It is still paid for by both of the cities. So Dave will come forward in May and he'll create a budget $100,000. Then he's going to have to go to each city and say, "Here's our budget. This is your proportional share." And that is what you're voting on is five. So the two on the board help work with the Dave in the budget for the district. The five of you vote on the budget that's presented to you for St. Francis's share. So you're not losing any authority. You're still a two member on the base of the board of the district, but you're five when you vote on that budget number that we are then going to be putting in our annual budget. That isn't isn't the district. So, he's got to bring us a new number. We put that, you know, Darcy and I work with that. We put it in the budget and when you vote on that budget every year, it will include that proportion. It becomes a line item. Like right now, we're looking at capital equipment, we're looking at employees, we're looking at um utilities, all those expenses where you're voting on all of that now. Next, he'll become a line item contracted service and you're going to vote for that contracted service. So, the study is is really just the base, but the JPA is the approval of how that gets broken down, what creates the board and how that board brings that information to the cities and when you approve it as a body. So, I hope that helps unpack something. It does. >> Well, I I'm I'm really anxious to listen to the other council members questions, but I I am a no on voting for the JPA purely because of that that that fifth person. Um I think that it will be hard to choose that person. And I this isn't anything against BETHL. I know they came to us because they needed help. That's understandable. They have a much smaller population and and everything. Um, but I just feel that we should be looking for ways to reduce costs and I heard you say that this does, but I I I am a no. Um, based on principle or no? >> Sure. >> I have no questions about the shared service study. >> I don't have any questions. I just want to reiterate that part of the reason that we're also picking up some of these calls is because of the ambulance response time. And even though it might not seem like a big deal to you when your family or it's you in crisis, that extra 10 minutes or 20 minutes or 30 minutes that we're seeing response time for ambulances is a very long time. and and whether we don't know. They can get there sometimes for a fall and now by the time someone gets there it's it's a different call. It's been worse. Something else happened. I don't I don't think we're being irresponsible on our going out on calls. I think it is a service that we provide to our residents. Dave has worked very hard at building our department to be able to respond for our residents. And if it's an extra $2 a month or a year, I don't I'd rather have somebody there in 3 to 5 minutes than wait 25 minutes for the ambulance to get there. And we're not seeing those we're not seeing those response times come down. They're not coming down. They're continuing to get worse. So I think as a baseline, this is a good start. It doesn't mean this is where it ends. This is what we have to do. And so yeah, I'm I'm in favor of this. >> Kevin, >> I just want to reiterate this was born out of a need by Bethl primarily, not St. Francis. We went for hire to now then for it was like 75,000 a year for three years. We got paid, not we, the city got paid for their services to help now then get their fire department up on their feet. To date, I'm uh I don't think they're on their permanently on their feet yet, but but this is originally born out of 400 plus residents in Bethl that was going to have a fire department. none. Close the doors, put a lock on it. They weren't going to have a fire department. So, that's how this all started. I've been involved in this process for the last three years. And I think it's more than worthwhile. And as far as personal uh experience, they came to my house in 8 minutes. Health uh the ambulance came in 22 minutes. Nothing norm needs to be said. Our guys are highly trained in what they do. There's other cities nearby that are building new fire departments and buildings and they don't offer their guys are not equipped and offer the same services and skill sets that our guys do. Plus, the fire department has one of the smallest budgets within our city. When I first started here, I think it was $410,000 as opposed to 3 million for a police department. But you know what? Police, fire, roads, and bridges, that's what cities give you and that's what you want and that's what we allow for. So, I think you need to do your homework a little bit more. And you can proud to vote no. That's cool. But you got to know all the facts and dive into the packet. This is this is preferred by the state of Minnesota fire marshall to combine uh services. There's cities buying million dollar. Our fire engine costs what $680,000. I think road just replaced theirs for 1.2 million. They waited a year to get it. We waited a year to get it. But again, we we time timing is everything and looking ahead and being good forecasters and what you're doing. So, but everybody's got a shiny new equipment. And the identity, the biggest thing, too, was an identity situation. Every town wants to have their own fire department. We're we're so and so fire department. You know, that's really what what are we here for? What do we do here? We fight fires. We save lives and we help people. So, the fire marshals strongly endorses and we had two individuals that come to the majority of the meetings the first two years of this venture and we're saying how around the state we're losing firefighters. They can't get volunteers. departments are depleted and they're they're a skeleton like and there's outlying cities that don't have services whatsoever that would die to have anything close to what we have. >> So, but it's highly endorsed by the the fire marshals of Minnesota and again if you if you combine services instead of buying one fire you know everybody three fire engines are purchased by one that hub and spoke service areas around your area. Same thing with training and but it if it's truly a money-saving situation here and um this is a template for the future actually someday we could be coming and talk about this for now then might want to join us or whatever or somebody bigger than us might want to say I district they might be having some issues. So it's it's it's really about working together not raising the cost and stuff and trying to get some of this identity BS out of the way and get back to what you're supposed to do is serve the public. So that's all I got. Thank you, Kevin. Um, I I have no problems with the the study at all. I there like you, Amy, I have some concerns about the recommendations, but they're just recommendations and uh I you know, I we definitely got to watch our budgets and everything else, but I I'm just looking at as a recommendation that the five the five the five person board will come back to us and and we'll move on from there. So, any other discussion about the shared services study? No, I would just reiterate, I guess, to the public that it's what we're doing right now is we're voting on accepting the study. The next topic is the actual JPA and things about that. So, it's literally just saying we see your opinion and we're accepting it. >> So, I have a motion to accept the shared services study. >> I'll make that motion, mayor. >> Motion by Councilman Robinson. Do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Councilman. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. >> Motion passes on to the JPA shared fire protection. >> Dave, >> mayor and councel for your approval tonight is the final draft of our joint powers agreement. Um I think council council member Robinson summed it up very well. This has been a three-year long process. Um we have been through three mayors uh during this time. Um, we secured a $40,000 grant from the state to make sure that we're doing this process with a high level of fidelity and that we're accounting for everybody's needs. Um, so before you is the final recommendation for a joint powers agreement to move forward with the fire protection district with the city of Bethl. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Uh, Kevin, >> I have no questions. Sarah Sarah, >> I have no questions. >> Amy, >> I have no questions. Joe, >> um, just to reiterate to the fire district that is not being actually created. We're creating a fire district board. Could you explain the difference to me one more time? I know we kind of went over it in the work session, but >> Yep. So, the fire district itself will be governed by a fire district board. That board will be made up by two council members from each city and an atlarge member that does not live in either city. they are the that will be the mechanism that will govern the fire district's day-to-day operations. As Kate explained earlier, the city council still manage the fiscal piece or contributions of the district. Um, so there's a and there's obviously a lot of moving pieces within that, but that's the easiest, simplest version I can create for you. >> So, we're not creating a separate line item on the taxes right now. >> We are not creating a taxing district right now. Correct. That's that was my question that every time I read it, I have a hard time getting it out of my head. When I read it, I see it and it just it keeps popping back in there. So, just re reiterate now we're on the record with that. So, um other than that, um I can understand Amy's concern with having the recommener being on the board um and somewhat being biased there. Appear to be biased, I should say. Not that he would be. Um that would be unfair to Charlie. Um, but is there is there any other I guess option that we would look at or do we have any other I mean obviously to start it we would have him and then >> because right now we don't have anybody lined up. So unless we can get somebody lined up again is and then they're two-year terms. >> Yes. And I guess the best way to answer your question is because we have a lot of legal processes that we need to go through from now until the first of the year when we're officially that district such as bank accounts and t tax IDs and FDIs and pension transovers and all of those things. We're going to need a full board to accomplish a lot of those tasks. I'm not expecting any changes. We we already know what our budget is for next year because we're honoring contractual prices up to this point. So there's no bandwidth to add staff or anything like that through the recommendations. So I don't want anybody to have fear that well this is our way to get around it. That's that's not where we're coming from. This is simply for us to get our wheels underneath us with somebody that has been actively engaged with not only drafting the joint powers agreement but has listened to our committee both from both cities on where we need to be and where this needs. So, I think from from just a consistency standpoint and being able to meet some of our deadlines that we have coming up, this is probably the not I don't want to use the word easiest, but the smartest way to go about it moving forward. >> Okay, >> I have no other questions. >> Okay, just for clarification on that, D correct me if I'm wrong, but this this new JPA would not officially start till January of 26. >> January 26th. Uh with that, anybody else? Anything? Seeing nothing. Do I have a motion to approve the JPA shared fire protection? Shared fire protection. >> I'll make that motion. >> Motion by Councilman Muar. Do I have a second? >> A second, mayor. >> Second by Councilman Robinson. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opp. >> I. >> Four to one. on to new business. >> Um, and just one last piece on that. I will be attending the Bethl Council meeting on Thursday for their approval. >> Thank you, Dave. >> Uh, on to council appointment to the fire district board. >> As we previously mentioned, in order for the fire district to operate effectively, we will need a board in place as called out in the joint powers agreement. Um my recommendation as we get this thing kicked off is to appoint uh Mayor Vogel and Council Member Robinson purely because they have been a part of this process for this year. You guys have a very clear understanding of what the JPA is calling out. Um and with that is certain you certainly have the flexibility or freedom to make another appointment, but again just because we're working on a relatively short time time frame um having some of that histrionics of where we're going would be important to the success of this. They're still not hearing so I don't know it's myself included. So I don't know try to speak as loud as we can here. >> Sure. >> So uh just so I'm clear these these these terms would be two two-year terms in I mean it would with my term explain. >> Correct. And what we would likely do is offset one of the terms as we move forward. I know both of you are going to be up for an election cycle. So if we do have to make a pivot, we do have the flexibility within the JPA to do that, but they would expire your terms, your term, your term and council member Robinson's term would expire at different times. So as we kind of move through this process, we may have to massage that a little bit. Um, but I think again just to get us going, this is probably the smartest way to go about it as far as having the history and understanding of where we're >> Joe. As long as you guys are okay with the commitment, I have no problem with it. >> Amy, >> this what we're approving today is is just um these two council people. We're not doing Charlie's role. I'm sorry. I don't know. >> Correct. The appointment to the board itself for the city of St. Francis representatives. >> Okay. >> You're welcome, sir. >> As long as Kevin and Joe are on board, I'm I'm happy to support them. They not Joe. I'm >> Mayor. they've they've been in this the whole time or most of the time you've jumped in and did a lot of your homework. So, um I think they're the appropriate people to put on there at this time. >> Kevin, >> I'm proud and here to serve Kevin. >> So, do I have a motion to approve uh Mayor Vogel and Councilman Robinson to the fire district board? >> I'll make that motion. >> Motion by Councilman Robinson. Do I have a second? >> I'll second. Mayor >> second by Councilman Outgood. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I pull the same sign. >> On to the tax levy storm water discussion. >> Who's gets to start this? Paul or Darcy? >> You're real. >> Good evening, mayor and council. Before you tonight, we have the we're going to discuss the preliminary tax levy. We're going to have a little presentation on storm water. There's some changes. Um, and then water and sewer rates. I do want to point out that I threw this in the packet. My name was on the agenda report and I forgot to I should have put their names. They worked very hard on this. So, it wasn't all me. So, little history for everybody or how the city works is we have we work under fund accounting. So we have different funds in the we have governmental funds, we have enterprise funds and we have these other couple little funds off that we also use under the governmental funds. We have the general fund which is our general operating budget. Our debt service that we have two debt service those are for the police public works building and the city hall fire station debt service. We have a special revenue fund which is police forfeite. We have capital improvements which there's building, there's capital equipment, there's streets, parks, and gambling under there. Um the enterprise funds, there's water, sewer, liquor, storm water. Storm water has been treated as an enterprise fund since the beginning because we ch all of those charge a fee. Then we have a couple other funds. The EDA is considered a special revenue fund, but it's it's kind of special in that it's considered a component unit of the city because it has its own board and it can make some decisions. When we do our financial reporting, it is brought it it's part of our financial statements, but it's a separate column over there as a component unit. And then there's an escrow fund which is all dep uh deposit money say from a developer comes in and wants to do a project or something they have to give us an escrow we hold that money in escrow funds in financial reporting that escrow fund is brought up and added to the general fund just because it's all these deposit monies. So that's where they put it. So, moving forward, council has decided that you're going to go with the storm water and do a levy instead of a fee. That means that storm water is going to move out of enterprise fund and into a capital improvement fund for 2026. So, that's moving that over. >> I say something, Dorson. >> Yep. >> That fee is at $60 a year that you get to slip in the mail and you said, "What in the heck is this for again?" So that's that won't those statements won't be going out any longer. It cost money to do it. The postage to do it. A lot of people just didn't want to pay it and was added to their taxes anyway. So that fee will disappear. You will no longer get that $60 notes in your mail. We're going to put in the general uh the storm water fund so to speak. So >> just for clarification, >> that's money saving. We're trying to save money. So >> just for clarification, it isn't 60 anymore. >> Well, that's I'm sorry. Just >> just saying. >> Yep. >> Sorry. So moving then this slide is showing you the ones highlighted in the yellowy orange are the ones that actually get a tax levy. Okay. Um you'll see gambling is crossed off down there in the capital. It does not get any money from levy. That is strictly the 10% we get from the pole tab associations in the city. So, where are we sitting on the proposed levy? For the general fund, which is the general operating, our proposed levy for next year is $4,300,000. This is pays for city council, pays for administration, police, fire, public works, community development, all of those general things. Um the other thing there is there's another $50,000 and this is going to be handled through the general fund is this tax abatement that we have with Vista Prairie. This was approved a couple years ago. That's how they got their funding to come in here is we have a 10-year agreement to abate. And what that means is they have to pay their taxes and then they prove to us that they paid their taxes and we give them back their city taxes for 10 years. It's a max of $200,000 a year and there's a max of like $1.9 million that we give back to them. And so we have to levy that because we're giving it back to them. Um we have two debt service funds. We have the one for the police public works building and for 2026 the levy is $310,000. Now um in the bond documents that dictates our what our levy that gives us the authority to levy that stuff. Um they kind of go up and down. And so in the city of St. Francis, we've tried to even that out. So that is why when we come down to the resolutions, we'll change one of them is to change the debt service levies from what the bond documents say to that annualized equal payment that we trying we're trying to keep it at. Um the police public works building the final levy will be in 2035 with fi final payment in 2036. You always levy a year in advance of your debt service payment. Then we have the city hall fire station and the levy for 2026 will be $790,000 and there the final levy is $2,52 with a final payment in 2015. Then we have our capital improvement funds and we did you know back in July or yeah July we talked about our CIP. So all of these funds were in there. There's 50,000 for building improvements which is more like a maintenance issue. It's like for the the city fire station city hall the police public works building they you know that one's a little bit older. We have to replace a roof. we have to do any other maintenance on it. We're trying to build up some funds to handle that in the future. Uh capital equipment is all of our, you know, fire trucks, our police, uh vehicles, our public works vehicles, all of that is in there and that's a 410,000 proposed levy. Uh street improvements, we started many years ago that we took away special assessments. We're levying for that now. that's proposed at 720,000. Park improvements, we that's been a new one in the last couple years. We want to do more work with our parks. We've had that as a number one, you know, we're way up there on requests from the public. So, we have 250,000 as a proposed levy there. We're, you know, we already are in the works for redoing some of the warming house. So um and then now that storm water is the new one there whicho with a proposed levy of 300,000. >> Darcy, can I ask a question? So these amounts that you're giving us just so I understand and the public does too. Those amounts you're giving us that's just for one year next year. >> Yep. >> So I I just wanted to be clear they're big numbers and Yep. Okay. So this slide will show you what we levied in 2025 and our total in 2025 was $6,185,000 and in 26 it will be 7,180,000 which is an increase of $995,000 and that's 16.9%. But if we take off that 300,000 for the storm water because we're moving that from a fee to storm water, you're looking at that it would be $695,000 increase and that's a little over 11%. So it's very comparable to the increase that 25 had. Okay. So then you then once you've set your levy and that's the max you're going to get that or the city is going to get next year, you have to calculate the tax rate. So the first step that you do is you take that preliminary levy and you have to remove fiscal disparities. And if you I've said this in my other presentation, fiscal disparities started back in the 70s sometime I think it was. It's for the seven county metro area. Any commercial and industrial new value that comes on goes in part of it goes into a pot that it's taxed at a different rate. And so we will put in money plus the seven metro county area. They then spread out those funds to all the seven county metro area. We next year are scheduled to get1,169,310 from that. So you take that off of our levy. So the that equals our spreadable levy which is 6 million $10,690. Okay. The next step this is is the tax. You have to calculate the tax capacity value. It is 10,511,533 for the city of St. Francis right now. You take and you reduce that by what we have to contribute to fiscal disparities and another there's another little one that we have to remove its joint value and that gets down to your adjusted tax capacity. So that's 10 million55,412. that tax capacity value is determined how >> um each property goes through where you have your market value and then you have your um you there's an amount excluded if you're under you know it goes through this calculation and then that comes down to an amount and then that amount is taken times 1% and then it that's your tax capacity on your home. It all starts with the estimated market value. Okay. >> Yep. And you'll see it when I get farther. Um it there's a uh slide that shows going from market value down to tax capacity in there. So you've calculated th those two things. I don't do it. The county does it. I did it here. But so we have the spreadable levy of $6,10,690. You divide it by that tax capacity that you just calculated and you come up with the tax rate right now is 56.776. And these can change. They they they're not final till they're final next year. They'll change a little bit, but this is fairly close. Okay. So, that's where we're going to stop on that for right now. I'm going to hand it off to Paul because we were requested to give a presentation on what is storm water and stuff like that. So, I'll let him take over. >> Uh, mayor and councel, just for a little clarification this evening, what is uh storm sewer? Um, a lot of times it's misunderstood. We have sanitary sewer in the city and we also have storm sewer in the city. This slide shows what MS4 actually stands for. M's for municipal and it's a separate storm sewer system. It there it's a completely different animal than sanitary or sanitary sewer which we'll be discussing later on this evening. Uh storm water can be defined as anything that comes out of the sky. So, a thunderstorm, a snowstorm, um, anything that collects or sits or gets dispersed from, uh, streets, uh, parking lots, any impermeable surface. If you can imagine if we didn't have storm sewer and our street had nowhere to get rid of that water, just imagine what a lake it would be all the time, uh, you know, within the city. The next slide shows an idea of what storm sewer, the top picture is what storm sewer would essentially look like underneath the asphalt and then what sanitary would look like. They're completely different animals. Storm sewer takes the water from the environment. Sanitary takes it from the homes and businesses. A lot of times they are they are confused because storm sewer has manholes. It actually says storm sewer on it there. A lot of times they're in the same place under the road. Um it it can be very confusing a lot of times. The the catch is storm sewer is different once you're out out of the sewer water district. Once you're out of the sewer water district, it can be a swale, a ditch, a culvert, plastic or or galvanized. Um so that's why storm water is actually citywide. uh the entire city whether you're in Kurban guttery or not um if you get rain on your place you're part of the storm sewer system uh part of our MS4 permit what we've done is increase the the maintenance on the storm sewer program here in city the city of St. Francis. Um, as we progress through our MS4 permit, which is enforced by the MPCA, the the the main driving force is the MPCA wants you to continue to evolve it, continue to improve, and that's what we're doing. One of the things that is very very storm sewer is very very visual. Uh, if if you'll see us work on a storm pond, storm water pond, uh, it's quite incredible. Um, a lot of people are are are not familiar with what their money is going to. That's about as visual as you get when we come in and clean out a pond. Um, this money goes to uh several other projects as well. This is just what's inside of the city. We also have all the culverts and the different programs and the different things we've worked on outside of the actual uh curb and gutter. These are some of the projects that we've done just recently in the last four years. This year's unique. Uh, a significant amount of our storm water funds actually went to the actual storm water that in in Woodbmine here that actually didn't have storm sewer in this area. Uh, center of the city. Uh, it does now. Uh, that was about $100,000 that we used. We also had a culvert go bad out on 241st to the north. That's also storm water funds were also used for it. Um, we also had a project on a cobalt this year, a small project, but we had some flooding and we got that corrected by using the storm water funds. What we have here on this list is what we're doing now with those storm water funds. As we evolve, that list is going to grow and MPCA can change it on our permit as well. So, we're constantly evolving and and again, what MPCA has directed us uh get better at our storm water program in the city. As we move forward, they'll continue to tighten things up and we got to continue to stay with them. If we don't, we'll we'll be in a terrible mess. These last slides are just to show the council the different types of projects that and this isn't anywhere near this. In fact, this is out on the this is out on the west side. Um what was happening here this ditch was wasn't water wasn't flowing. It was actually creating problems with the road. The road was the gravel road next to it was becoming soft and we ended up spending I think it was two weeks working on this road after we cleaned the ditch. No issues. It corrected the entire problem. So that's is some of these other some other examples. This was the Dellwood Trail project. Uh the the river is considered part of the storm water. Uh it was eroding. So, working with with the county and and with several different organizations, we were able to use some of the storm water money on on this particular project and it you can actually see it if you stand on the bridge and look to the south. This is a major project. You can actually see it as you look to the south. And then of course, um we have several of them in the city uh outside of the uh the the water and sanitary district. And there's the one on 238th we did this year and the one on 241st this year. And how do we know? Uh for example, this one on 241st grading the road. The grater fell in. The culvert was a little over 50 years old and the grater's heavy and it usually tests out culverts quite well. Uh so it was an emergency and we ended up replacing this that one this year. So we do have emergencies that come up. It's rare. It typically we can plan with storm water. So, thank you Darcy. >> So, >> excuse me before you go. Can we ask ask any questions on storm water? Maybe. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. >> Um, how much has the state been involved? How much more has the state been involved in the last 5 to 10 years on what you require for budgeted money? I mean, I know back in the day they when the storm water first came out, you know, people were saying, "Well, just water runs down the gut gutter and goes into the the rivers and streams, aren't they putting more requirements on as far as measuring silk ponds and doing other things?" And >> Yes. So, so I mentioned that as they tighten up our MS4 permit, that's what's happening. They're they're they're increasing their level of attention to detail, so to speak, and then they're giving us levels of what they want us to do. So it it continually evolves. It's it it's never ending. That's what the MPCA will do. >> So it requires more manpower, more hours, more logging, more paperwork. >> Yes, sir. And we do as of right now, we log every hour on I have I have all of it on paper as to what we spend in the city uh relate directly related to storm water work >> and there's penalties and stuff involved if you don't get this stuff done. I imagine if they can >> I would imagine eventually it'll come to that. right now. Um, we're we're on the edge of it and we're staying ahead of it. So, at this point, I'm not concerned about penalties. >> And I wouldn't I would hope not. I know you guys are on top of it. >> All right. That that that's all I have. Thank you. Any other questions for Paul? >> Okay. >> Okay. So, moving forward. Um, where to we set the we are looking to set the preliminary levy tonight. we have to do it um because it has to be sent into the county by September 30th. That's a requirement the state has put on us. Um then in November, the county will print those uh proposed tax notices. Some people will use the old term of truth and taxation. Um, so they'll get those and then we'll have a public hearing December 1st and then we'll set the final levy and at that point the levy can't go up except for extenduating circumstances. And then by the end of December, we then have to verify the final levy to the county and then submit to the state what our different levies, how we progressed, and what our hearing dates and stuff were. So estimated tax bill. The mayor uh had seen uh articles that Shakape does a taxpayer receipt program and had requested that I kind of look into it. I did. It would cost $3,000 for that one little program per year. Well, I came up with this and hopefully this will, you know, show you what you wanted to see. But you can see up there that where we talked about that estimated market value that's at 260. This that property would get $23,150 excluded. Okay. So, um it gets up to an amount in the 500,000s, I think, and then you've lost all your exclusion. So when they did that a few years ago, what that happened what happened was that kind of pushed taxes up on commercial industrial because they they uh exemp excluded so much on the residential properties. So then you get that taxable value of $236,850 and you take that times 1% and that's your tax capacity and that's what you take times that tax rate that we calculated earlier. So this property in city taxes only would is estimated 100 1,100,000 $1,416. They are then it is broken down below like for city council they're paying $78 for police $344 and 96 cents and then you get down to you know even the capital improvements and everything else. That's how their tax bill kind of breaks down to us >> per year. per year, residential property only, city taxes only. Any questions? >> Just remind the audience too at the end of our packet, which you can see online as well, she goes from 260 all the way up to 500. >> I I did 200,000 to 600,000 and $10,000 increments. >> Um, and they I know we have some copies of those in the back. We printed off some copies and if council's okay with it, we're going to put that on the website also in the spotlight where so that they can find it. They can get if you look at your estimated market value, you can kind of judge where that is at. If you're okay with that, >> absolutely. >> The only question is this is great. This I do like this. >> Is there any way of putting 2025 next to it? Yes. >> To show the 16%. >> Right. I mean, it just just be interest to see a comparison from the previous year. I If it's too much work, tell me. I I just >> I could Yeah, I would have to go through it and and add that column, but I could do that. >> I just I would I don't know. I just find that helpful because I mean I could go back and find my 2025 payable, but I I don't have the breakdown like like this. >> Like this. >> Yep. I can do that. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> So, right now I'm kind of leaving I I I'm stopping here for questions, comments. I am going to ask you to do to approve the levies here. So, I don't know if you want public input on the levy portion right now. >> I personally think so, but yes, I know all the risk. >> I will leave it up to you. Well, just so that people understand too, right now we're setting the preliminary levy, >> which we can always go down, we can't go up from it, but this is the max that we be at for the year. >> Oh, I'm sorry. So, right now we're setting the the preliminary levy, which is it's at this point it's the max that you can go. Um, we can't go any lower when we set the final levy or we we can go lower, we can't go higher when we set the final levy at the end of the year. So, just so people understand, if there is changes, sometimes there's changes. It's usually not reflected on the paperwork you get from the county if I remember right, but I could be wrong there. >> I thought cuz don't you get you get the statement or whatever and it's >> I think it says 25 and 26. >> Okay. >> I think >> but the preliminary levy is the the highest we can go for the year. Basically, we set that and then if we have more discussion throughout the year here, um, it can go down, but it can't go any higher. That's all I wanted. >> So, I don't you guys okay with opening up? >> So, anybody from the public who would listen to speak right now, all we're addressing right now is the general tax levy. We're not talking about water or sewer. We are talking about storm water as part of this one, but storm water and the general levy. Anybody wishing to speak, just come forward. State your name and address. Anybody come forward. Thank you. >> Hi, my name is Alex Hendendrick. I live at 23663 Undercliff Street. Uh my question is just when we're taking this into account, how are we accounting for new properties that are coming in? I know there's a new development by my neighborhood. There's a new senior living complex coming in. Is there any kind of estimate factored into this that takes into account the additional tax revenue that's expected for the upcoming year? >> So, when we set the levy, that's the max that we get. If we get new properties, what that does is it um might take up some of that uh tax levy from other properties. Uh it that's in the estimated market value down to the tax capacity. So yes, that estimated market value does include anything that had a value before July 1st of last year, not 2020. They're they're from July 1st of 2025. So you get no sorry 2024. You get your value set at that point. You get that notice in March and then that's what determines your value for 2026. >> Okay? It's kind of a long drawn out process. If more properties come on in that, you know, it doesn't give us any more money and that's already in the estimated market value and tax capacity if that makes sense. >> Yep. Thank you. >> Can I say something Mercy? Yep. But it will add to the users need needed on our sewer and freshwater and sewer. Those will be the hookup fees and the what they call whack and sack the water hookup and the sewer hookup. Those will hopefully stabilize and which we're very hopeful the new new users will help stabilize the cost of sewer and water down the road. >> Hi Tina Carol 23045 ambassador. So speaking of what you the question you you were just um posed. So you're saying it's not bringing in new money when say if some new development comes in. So where does where do those taxes go then? That's what I'm I guess I was kind of confused on how you explain that. >> So I don't know if this made sense. I kind of made reference to Mark one day and I said say you're making a cake. Okay. you have a set amount of icing. That's our levy. If the cake is this small, the there's going to be more icing on every piece. That means your levy you're going to pay more of the levy. If your cake is this big, you're going to have a lighter frosting on it and so you're going to pay less in taxes. You don't really I don't think your taxes are ever going to go down. >> That's what I'm saying. So, you're getting extra money, but our taxes aren't going down. If new housing comes in, you're collecting taxes. >> If you could drop 300 new homes in next year and our levy didn't go up as high, you could see a drop, but I don't think we're going to drop 300, 400 new homes in in a year. >> Okay. What about the the new 19 homes that they're looking at building down on Ambassador? >> They will help. They'll be part of our estimated market value, but that takes time. So remember that time frame was it had to be built by and uh fully built by July 1st of last year 2024 for it to affect 2026 estimated market values. >> Okay. Uh I still I guess I'm still confused but whatever. >> Goofy because they're behind basically on the values there, >> right? >> It takes a while for it to work through >> kind of equal out. But now with this less fiscal disparities received, can you explain that a little bit more? I'm kind of confused exactly what that is and why that is taken off of everybody's taxes. I don't know exactly what it is. >> So fiscal disparities was put in in the 70s and it takes I think it's 40% of any new commercial and industrial value for all of the seven county metro area. Okay. So when they put in the Mall of America and that value hit, we saw some of our revenues come from there. It isn't all just St. Francis residents, >> right? >> But we also have commercial and industrial new growth. And so we also put into that pot, but we get out a lot more than what we put in. Some cities put in more than what they get out >> and that money just goes into the general fund. Well, it it's just taken off of our spreadable levy and so yes, we get it comes from taxes and so it comes as part of our tax settlement and you spread it just like your regular taxes. It just doesn't come from all come from our residents. >> Okay. Thank you. Mhm. >> Michael Powell 23045 Ambassador Boulevard Northwest. We've got a question. Um you said about a few hundred to make a difference in population to make taxes a little better, give or take. I get it. What do we get for the $200,000 a year that we got at a levy for Vista down there? I They call it a senior living, but it's only like 15% senior living and the rest of his independent living. We're paying $200,000 to pay their tax bill. What benefit do we get as a city? we got the benefit of that property being built here and they had told us at the time if I remember right that it that's one of the factors that they needed for them to come in here that was part of their financing package plus we got we're getting them as water and sewer residents >> so we save 20 bucks on water and spend $100 a month in taxes I mean is that >> that >> I mean >> I'm not in agreement with it either Mike, I think you know that. But it's it's a long term that so after 10 years then or less or less. >> But see, we keep running into this. I mean, we've got this beautiful building here that's for a town of 8,000 people >> and those levies keep getting put on us and we just want more apartment buildings, but we if we give them the breaks, how are we going to get the benefit? I mean, if it's like uh like the tiff that was 20-y year tiff or whatever, then I mean, I'm gonna be 70 years old. I'm not going to much care. I'm going to be in the vista at the apartments down there. I mean, so I mean, how is that benefiting us? It's just easy to give the money away. How many apartment buildings do we've got to put in this town so where it balances out where we don't have to have more fire, more police, and uh schools? I mean, if we put in all these apartment buildings, who's going to pay for these teachers in the schools? Our teachers make what about 10 grand less than the rest of the county? I mean, what do we get? I mean, to give them just so we can say we've got a building down there. If we're not getting any benefit from it, why are we keep doing it? I mean, that's an awful lot of money at $200,000 a year. I mean, man, you've debated this quite a bit, and I can't get an answer from anybody. What are we going to get from it? I mean, we all I mean, we all work for our money. Everyone on this council and behind me, >> and it's I think it's a it's a debatable perception thing, too, because it's it's again, like you say, well, you save 10 bucks on your water bill, but you get this. And I have no idea what those numbers are. Um, but it's it's the long-term benefit that you're looking at, too, when you do these things. And that's where the tiff comes in. That's where um which was voted down. Um that's where the abatement came in. And I was here when the abatement was voted for, and I did vote for it. Um to me I heard a lot of residents talking about the senior living facilities that they wanted here for a long long time. Um we've had I don't know how many we've had a lot of development that's been I don't want to say promised but rumored or said they were coming in and almost almost none of it has has come to fruition. Um this is one thing that is finally here. I think that again in 5 to 10 years that's when you're going to see your benefit from it. Um the big benefit of the tax thing now in the meantime, do we have to do something with that? Yes, we do. And it's same thing with the water rates that came through too. When the water rates came through and they spiked, uh we were able to get it down 20% at that time. Um which was great to soften the blow, but we knew by softening that blow too. Come 2023, we're going to have to look at increasing those rates. Um if we didn't get the development that we were looking at, right, we had Darcy did the numbers. She did a very good job figuring out what numbers were needed. we didn't hit those numbers. Um, Oak Grove came in and joined our system which significantly helped us as far as being able to wait to to make these raises on the water rates. So, there's it's a balancing act that we play which is not fun. Um, increasing taxes is not anything anybody here wants to do. Like you say, we pay them. We work for our money. Uh but for the benefit, it's it's a prospective benefit is is this long-term benefit going to benefit us enough to say yes, let's do the abatement. And at the time, I felt that it was and I voted for it. And that's the abatement. The tiff, again, too, it's it's questionable. It's debatable. It depends on how you feel. Where is that benefit coming from? But you gave the discounter. We're paying $200,000 for that senior living. Senior living goes from $4,000 a month to $12,000 a month that we're charging our seniors. then we get clipped on it on our taxes. And I mean, and I'm not throwing this out there. I've got family in this stuff right now. This ain't no joke. >> I get it. >> I mean, so I mean, >> if you guys are going to be do this, and I know you guys weren't all there when all this happened. I mean, I know all of you weren't here for this, but we keep doing we've got the $12 million for this. We've got the $80,000 for the uh the redo on the the grass and all that. and that we got $80,000 cutting down trees that we didn't get. >> How much money do you think we should be throwing at this stuff? >> Well, and a lot of things, too, that we're not taking account for that. It's I don't think it's talked about enough, unfortunately, but um before Feldman was here, um and I don't know exactly what year we did it, but there was there was never a building maintenance plan to maintain the buildings. It was build the buildings and then when they need something, we got to figure out what the hell to do, right? That's not a great way to to operate a city in my opinion. Um, so we have a building maintenance fund now, we have a park fund now. Um, we're doing a lot of things and it's all at once, which is hard for everybody. And it's obviously with the economy going the way it went over the last few years, it's probably terrible timing, you could argue, but it's something that we planned to do leading up to this that we have to we've been kind of been playing catch-up in my opinion. Um you can deal like if you look at the county the county uh representative there was a representative used to say we got 0% increase on our taxes brag brag brag brag well guess what now you're getting hit with I don't know what is it 24 I don't remember what the county was the the hike but it was it was a significant hike as opposed to incremental hikes and it's same with previously with the water rates um we didn't raise the water rates incrementally up until uh what 2017 well 16 I think it was when they said they're going to build the facility. Now you're getting hit with an 85% 45% increase in your water and sewer rates. Um, so we can do nothing again with stuff like that, but then at some point in time, you got to pay the piper. And I think incrementally is a lot easier to digest for people. And that's kind of where that comes in. But I I don't disagree with you as far as supplementing private business. Um, >> let me give you an example. I'm from Illinois. That's where I originally from. A $350,000 house in Beer, Illinois is $7,000 a month or a year in taxes. Why does that happen? This here. Okay. I moved away from that to get away from that. And then we were doing it here. Yes, it's smaller. I mean, like I told you with the water bill, I'll pay the extra 50 bucks. Leave my taxes alone. I mean, because if you look at the long term of that, that we've got to do by law. We've got to have water and we've got to have it purified. We don't have to like it, but it's >> the way it is. We've got to pay for our police and our fire. We don't like to pay the money, but we love the services when we need it. >> And and we've debated online, too. And a lot of that comes with, like I say, it's not I think we have different viewpoints, which we can agree to disagree, and that's all right there. But when you come with development and growth, and I'm not saying I want apartments on every block, whatever. But without enough without the cake getting bigger to spread that levy thinner, that's that's the issue we come into. So without and and more increases when costs go up >> and the same amount of people are there to pay those costs, those costs rise. Um when there's more people there, they don't rise as much. >> That's 120 complex sitting there in the north of Ambassador. And if that's not doing nothing for 10 years, we're paying the 200 grand. So by the time that they start paying into it, I mean, and that's just one instance. You guys made it sound like that if they built that building behind my house, that was the holy grail. That was going to save our water bill. >> No, but it did affect that. It's it was an injection into the system. >> Yeah. >> Well, everything's an injection, but we've got 120 in putting any money into it. >> Yep. >> I mean, so if they're not putting money into it, why would they want to put money into it? And then why would the next one want to? >> That Well, that's a different story, too. that comes down to financial institutions. It gets a lot more it's more muddy than it is clear for us to just explain it um as simple as it could be, as simple as it should be. Um I think a lot of times too, people have ideas. They're like, "Why don't you just do this?" And and I've done the same thing, right? Why don't we just do this? Well, you can't do that because this, this, and this. There's reasons why things aren't as simple as they should be. And I think sometimes that's by design, which is unfortunate. Um but it's not It's it's not anything that we're like I say, we're not excited here to say this is what your taxes are going to be. This is what your water rate's going to be. Um I know you're upset about the the the apartment and saying it's the holy grail. You know, that's the the thing said >> we had the numbers >> our budget will be easier now that we uh we know that you're willing to pay more for water instead of having those apartments there. >> No, >> I was at the meeting. You can you can watch it. It's recorded. Well, I don't know. I don't know exactly. So, it was >> I said what I said is you need to be okay with your water bill. >> I was okay with the water bill, but I just keep hearing I pay $40 a month to have my truck washed. I mean, so to save $40 on my water bill, that doesn't bother me. But we keep wanting to put buildings up and give tiffs or tax breaks for 10 years and then you're hitting my pocket where I don't want it to be hit. I will pay my taxes for my law enforcement, for my fire, and for the city. I mean, we all need it. We all use it. I expect to pay taxes. I'm not looking for a free ride. But know who is looking for a reide? All these people that want to put in these 120 units in in our city. If they want to pay the bill money like we do and pay the percentage of taxes we do, then it's a different sale. I mean, that that's my argument. I mean, I'm not worried about the water bill. Like I said, I I mean, I drink more Mountain Dew than that water bill went up. >> Yeah. No, it's and it's and it's hard to explain, I guess, the way the I don't know. To me, it's more of the financial institutions and getting the backing to be able to build it for the city to get that benefit eventually. Um, 20 years is a long time. That one again, it's I totally understand that one, but it's you have to weigh the you have to weigh the pluses and minus to everything and that's what we do here. And again, not everybody was here when the abatement came through for Vista. >> And and I I I respect that. I know not all you guys were here for the this here and um and I get that apartment there. I don't know how many of you guys were involved, but I imagine that's been in the work for a few years. So, >> be respectful of gentleman speaking, please. >> And I think too it's it's to to Sarah's credit too what she was saying is that if we like you say you want you basically what you just said or what what I heard and I don't I don't want taxes go up any higher than they have to, right? I have to pay them too. >> Um but I think too what I heard was basically it's if that water bill goes up if costs of because costs always rise, right? go down. >> Um, >> you didn't you didn't want the tiff, you didn't want the apartment. We didn't do that. So, if if that that was directly now water should have been a separate issue, but it was directly affected by that. So, we had that kind of talked about at the same time and I don't remember the exact numbers in front of me what they were compared to what they would be with or without. Um, it was like 5% to 25%. I don't know if I'm even >> don't quote me on that because I don't remember exactly what they were. But it was it was a significant enough increase for me to want to say, you know what, part of the reason I'm sitting here is because when that wastewater facility got in, we got no answers. Everybody's upset about that. So, keeping the keeping St. Francis affordable is the idea. Now, everybody here is going to say, "Well, what the hell are you doing then because it's not affordable now?" And I can understand where you're coming from. And that's that's part of the struggle that we have every time we meet is to see what what are we going to deal with, what do we have to deal with, what is put being put on us by the MPCA. Um, we talked about chlorides, all that fun stuff with the water. >> I deal with that at work. I mean, we've got our own issues over there with them. I mean, I understand that part, >> but I mean, I just want to know. I mean, and and it's getting redundant. I'll sit down in a second, but we can't just keep saying that we can build and it's going to save our city when we're giving them $2 million tax breaks. I mean, because we've got to pay that when they bring in kids and stuff like that as we live in apartments like I grew up in an apartment when I was a kid. They got to go to these schools and we all know the way I mean, look at this building. What are they going to do if we have to build another school? >> I mean, I think they're already >> I mean that that's where we've got to control it. I mean, I I don't like taxes any more than anybody in here, but we've got to draw lines somewhere. Yes, things are going to go up, and I finally got you to say that online. Yes, everything went up. Gas went up, food went up. Yes, our water's going to go up, and our taxes are going to go up. >> Absolutely. >> But we don't have to throw ourselves in the fire giving this stuff away. >> Can I also add something to this that we haven't touched on the ancillary positives of this? Right now, I think they have 28 individuals, maybe close to 30 total residents that'll come into 125 bed unit. So, the individual units are $2,800 up to, like you said, probably 4,000 for memory. There's some grandma and grandpas that got to stay in town and their family is here. The families don't have to travel to see them. These people also that have moved in here either came from a surrounding community or this community. So, they've chosen to stay, excuse me, so they can be closer to their family. also created about I think approximately 53 to 55 jobs. Now some of them don't all pay the same and stuff but again some of those people are coming here from our community. They'll help bolster the grocery situation and the services needed and whatnot. And again we look at a situation too where the fire department is now going to be taxed a little more a tax meaning labor-wise because there'll be some medical calls and stuff to that building stuff. But you know it's like Joe said it's a tough situation but if we didn't do it it would still be a prairie right now. And sure, everybody's taxes will probably stabilize somewhat, but again in in a and I'm the one who voted for eight years rather than 10 years as far as this abatement goes. The shorter the better as I was concerned. They could easily take it to Ianti or somewhere else rather than here. But it's now it was a $35 million project and it was 42 when they actually broke ground. So in 8 years the taxable value of that building is going to be quite a bit more and then we'll see the benefits of it. But again to sit and do nothing, we can certainly do that and this town could probably die and Kings County market prices will go up because not as much the volume. It's all about volume. So again, we can sit >> already talking just in uh going with Bethl the the what it was recommended that two more full-time employees. So I mean just that would just >> it's only recommendation. That's not the case. I understand it's a recommend and I use the word recommendation, >> but if we continue to keep building like that, we have to look at the unintended consequences of the money that follows it. >> And that's why you memory care is not $4,000. It's about $9,000 a month minimum because >> I know the entry fee is 2,800 for the independent living though. >> That's independent living. That's a completely different ball game. >> Okay. But you were talking you were starting 3500. So, >> but the independent living that's 80% of that building is independent living. There's like 10 percent that's memory care and then there's 10% that's assisted living or something. >> I think it's 75, 35 and 25 something like that. >> But I mean it's still that kind of money. I mean they make fortune and we're paying so they don't have to. >> I mean and that's >> I think I think you know I share a lot of your sentiments. So >> but and just one last thing and it's got nothing to do with anything we're just talking about. I'm hearing impaired. I can only hear out of one ear. Can we get something system here so we can hear you guys? Because in the back I've heard about every tenth word. >> I mean that's all. But thank you guys for listening. I mean I appreciate all of it. >> Thank you. >> Mike Roger. Uh 2770 232nd lane. somewhere somehow we need to make change. Um because if we don't create some revenue in this town, we're going to be right back here in 3 years having the same meeting. Um can you guys tell me what the whacking sack was on Vista Prairie? Any clue? How about the town houses that are going to come in in the P&Z development? And has that all been factored in on what our storm water or our water and sewer rates are going to be? I would never ever jeopardize the safety of any one of these individuals in this town, whether it being fire or police. And these guys deserve a raise every year. And the only way we're going to give them a raise every year is either to raise the taxes or to start creating revenue. >> Is it true that we sold city hall for 600,000, Mr. Mayor? >> Yes. >> Was there an offer on that for 620? >> Yes. >> Well, why didn't we take the 620? >> Comes down to what's the better fit for St. Francis? >> 20 grand. So So let me back up a second. Did you did you know did do you know both parties? One of them was a one of them was one of them was a contributing person who's been in this community for a long time started their business went from basically two employees to about 50 employees. >> So you you had mentioned in the past you wanted each department to come up and cut money but yet we throw it away. The whacking sack on these apartments would have been close to a million dollars. That would have. So, let me explain. The whacking sack is what we charge per hookup for water and sewer. But I'm not just saying it's there. >> Water water access charge the sewer access charge. So, when they hook up, that's what it's whacking. >> So, you take um was it sock sock center that just got that big business in there? We we ain't promoting anything in this town. We don't have we had AutoZone, Dollar General. If we don't change things in this town, County Market will pack up and leave. Walmart did it. So, don't think for a minute that these big businesses will not leave here if we keep taxing the hell out of them and not some way find a way to create some revenue. There was talks that we were going to have a a city uh dispensary in town. Do we even know how much that would have made? it it if it ain't going to happen here, it's going to happen in in East Bethl, Bethl, wherever. The dispensaries are here no matter what. Um, how much THC drinks are sold at the liquor store every month. Do we have a number on that? >> Yeah, but he's not here. >> 10 grand, 20 grand. Do we have ballpark figure? >> I think it's in the 10 to 15. >> Yeah. So, let's take that out and that's 120 grand a year. Now, if we would have brought that dispensary in, whether you like it or not, whether we like it or not, that's us, everybody in this community, whether we like it or not, there's going to be changes that have to be made that we don't like. And we're just going to have to figure out as a community, how do we get these changes? I mean, if we don't want to raise the taxes, fine. I got a snowblower, Paul, all taken care of in front of my place. You know, I could patch a road down there, too, if that's what it boils down to. We have to start making good decisions again. And I'm not saying we we lost perspective somewhere. Um, Steve Steve was very passionate at what he did and and very brash, but he's seen the future. We lost that future, folks. Let's get it back. Let's start developing. Let's let's form a task force and figure out how the hell we can get some development in here to bring a to to to well that that may we might have to bring that in that >> agree to get >> right right that's that's fine and that's what it's all about but let's get a tax force and and and bring a uh business park up here um maybe it's time we sell that land over there in Athens to pay for some of this water and sewer increase that we got going on >> different funds but >> also then we got bioolids we got to do some of our bioolids which we're currently allowed to spread on the property which is a small savings >> you know you were at the same meeting I was Kevin we can only spread so many bio solids on that land as it is now anyways so next year we maybe not sell be able to spread bioolids on that land then We're still sitting there with that land. Not on Well, that's Athens. It's not even on our tax base. That was a crappy deal that was done by our past administration that we took it up the shorts on. All of us in this room took it up on the shorts on. Um it it those are decisions that we got to stop making, you know, and I'm all about the JP, you know. Yeah. Um, my old neighbor lives in Oak um, Oak Grove there on the ponds. Her house burned down last week. She almost lost her kid. Her and her neighbors broke into the house to get it. Now, our fire department is a hell of a lot closer than Oak Groves. The house is lost. I'm sure you guys could have been there a hell of a lot faster than, you know, those are things that we have to start looking at that to team up with the other communities and start saving us some money. I I'm all for developing a task force. I'll sit right next to Tina and Mike and we'll hash it out. We'll figure something out. That's all I got. Mr. >> He did ask a question about Mr. Bur. Darcy has an answer for you. I got a question for you. >> You asked about the wacken sack on Vista Puri. >> Yes. >> So that was paid in 2024. There is $232,000 that went into water and there was 325,000 that went into sewer. >> So So now you drugg me back up here. Let me ask a question. In the tax abatement, is there a clause in there saying that if it's sold or they refinance it comes off the tax abatement? >> I believe so. >> Right. So now with the refinancing that's going to h So what we failed to do is Tina is what we failed to do is we failed to ask them what is the average tax abatement? What is the average tiff money? We didn't ask that. So most of them are like it was 20 years but most of them are like seven like uh tiff money with the interest rates right now if they would have built that building and the interest rates dropped back down to 3% and they were paying five don't you think they would have refinanced probably then it comes back off and goes back on the tax scales. We failed to ask that question as a community and that's what we need to start asking. What is the average tax abatement? What is the average tiff money? >> One other question. >> Look at look at the Minnesota Viking stadium. That was tiff money, too. That got paid off 10 years early. >> There's one other question. Forgive me. Just a question that I still haven't got the answer to. What did we spend behind subway acquiring the five lots? >> Say that again. What did we sp what did the city spend acquiring and knocking down the buildings for the five lots behind subway? What's the estimated? >> There was only one building back there. >> What? Okay. So, what did what did the what did the city spend buying those five lots and knocking down the building? >> I I think what we bought that building for Well, I can't quite remember, but it was probably around $20 and some thousand. >> Rough estimate for all five parcels was $750,000 and we sold it for $5,000. >> Mr. Mayor, >> we had that piece of property listed for $1 for two, three years. Where were you? You should have bought it. >> We shouldn't be in the real estate business. Period. >> You should have bought it. That all not all that money came from the city. Some of that tiff uh the EDA money came from the county. >> I'd like to see a breakdown cuz I have yet to see it. >> Well, then look, it's there. Go back and look. Mr. Mayor, don't make me get on the computer. All right. I'm not that bright, but I can figure it out. >> Thanks, Michael. >> Yep. >> Are you the president of the EDA? >> I am president. >> And you're not computer savvy. You should have that information. I'm sorry, but >> Tina, I got to keep it I got to keep it up to one person for I >> I just had one quick question. >> Okay. So, Joe, you were you and Mike had some stuff you were talking about. Just wanted to say it kind of concerns me when you say that you have not been able to find what the costs are. I don't sorry I kind of got lost there when when uh he was talking but you and Mike were Mike Powell were talking and you said well yeah we've gone through back and forth but unfortunately I can't find out what those costs are. I don't remember the conversation. I'd have to go back because like I say, this mic kind of threw me for a loop here. But it concerns me when you're a council member and you can't find the costs of things and the breakdowns on things. >> I'm not sure what you're referencing to be honest with you. >> You remember what we were talking about, Mike? You two were talking about something. But anyway, I'd have to go back, but either way, it that's concerning. >> Thanks, T. Anybody else? Okay. So, we're looking for >> So, the first thing that we need to do is there's two resolutions that council has to approve. Um, the first one is to adjust that debt service levy like I talked earlier about and then the next one is the preliminary levy and setting the hearing dates. So, I have the first resolution up on the screen if you want to take it from there. So, does anybody want council here want to weigh in? Do we want to take turns or anybody want does anybody got anything they want to weigh in on here? >> Nothing. >> Joe, Amy, >> I don't have anything. >> Sarah, Kevin, >> I appreciate everybody coming out. I mean, we put a sign out there. We try to make people involved. We've been I've been doing this for six and a half years, and this is the biggest crowd I've seen in a long time. And I'm really proud that you showed up. Um, Again, from the bottom of my heart, I can say that we've done tried to do the best prudent job possible with anything that came before us. And we've beded out, you know, to the nth degree. Didn't do anything willy-nilly. I'm a taxpayer here also. I live on uh on the east side of town there. Um so I see my tax bill as well, and I'm just as concerned when it goes up 250, 300, $400. Um I truly believe I voted for this building. I believed in the building. I we had 28 people show up to our open house at the two buildings that we did tore that the building we sold and the building that we tore down to build this building. We had 28 people. We put notices out there and we talked about it and um I truly believe it's the right thing to do. Our neighbors to the east are going to build one for 14 million plus. Um and their costs are probably going to go higher. It's going to be much smaller building and not as efficient building and they don't have anything near the commercial base and stuff that we have or the our populations are similar. But the long story short is I still believe in what we're doing up here and I mean you can easily vote us out when it's time. You could have showed up at other meetings and given us you know what for and we'd be happy to take it and listen to you and and our our phones and our emails have always been open. So never feel like you haven't been heard. You just got to talk to us more. I mean, somebody accused me a couple of months back about, you know, not having any faith in our citizens. My faith is was always, you know, always there and today it's been restored. So, I I'm glad you came. Uh, the cost of everything does go up. I mean, we talk about cost of living raises for our employees and whatnot. Everything is happens to be that magical 3% 3% 3%. Do you and I get 3%. My wife on our government pension the other day says she got a letter is 1.125%. That's her increase for her pension. So, I know where you're coming from. Um, I don't know what more I can say other than, you know, we're doing the very best we have with what's in front of us and we do spend your money wisely and we take it very very seriously. Um, you can either believe me or not, but um, we are doing the best we can. When when I look at this back, Darcy, if you went back to a certain screen, overall it's 245,000 more. Our budget's gone up 245,000 more than the year before, not including that 300,000 for storm water. So 245,000. Again, I don't like it. I don't want to do it. Uh, you know, we've asked all the department heads, you know, can you help us? What what can be shaved or cut back? But again, cost of living goes up. Union wages are going up. Um, paper, the electricity, everything's going up. And we're living the same thing as a city, as a big machine, just like you guys are at your homes. And I do at my own home. So, I'm um, you know, we're doing the best we can. And we really are. That's all I have. >> Thank you, Kevin. My thoughts remain the same as even in the work session. I >> We have a budget proposed here and it's exactly what I asked for. It's basically everything st obviously the costs are going up, but everything stays the same in the city with the incre with the increases. And my my feeling hasn't changed on this. I'm probably okay passing it tonight, but I can again I asked and I haven't seen it yet. I've asked for some shared pain because my taxes just from the city of St. Francis for each of the last three years, just the city taxes has gone up 16% each year for the last three years. And I say that's not sustainable. And am I asking for a zero increase in taxes? Absolutely not. Of course, there's going to be increases in taxes. Our costs all go up. I get that, >> but I I don't feel that it's fair to keep everything on the same level at the city level. Everybody stays at the same sting level, same same budget. And I I think staff did a great job. I'm not picking on staff here at all because what they're proposing is is what it costs them to keep their department the same as it is right now. And that's exactly what I asked them to do. So, I'm not saying there's any fault there. But what I am saying is instead of basically 11% increase, maybe we got to take this a step back one or two% from our levy and and share the pain. However that is, if we can't find one department to chew a chunk of it away, maybe we have to take a little bit from reserve, I don't know. But all I'm saying is for the city to go year after year after year with 16% increases is not it's not the answer. And I I understand that. We call it we call it we incorrectly call it cuts. It's not a cut. It's still increasing but let's just say we increased it 10%. That's a 10% increase. >> Yes. It would the result might be some cuts from department budgets. But it's not a cut. A cut. What is a cut then? When when do you really when are we going to see a reduction in taxes? Never. I'm asking to share the pain. And so I'm prepared tonight to go ahead and and approve this for now, but I'm telling you when November December comes. I'm I'm not on board still. So that's my two cents. >> Are you going to tell staff what they need to do to for you to get on board? >> As we discussed in the work session, Joel, I don't feel that's my responsibility, but I'm happy to join them in that discussion if it discussion. Happy to. It's not it's not my job as mayor to go down the nitty-gritty line by line from this budget and say that it's it's things I've said a million times before and we continue to do it. We put up a f we put up a fence here to hide the HVAC unit. I don't know that's $5 to $8,000. We build $72,000 dog parks. We put in $55,000 fire. That's that's the that's the kind of stuff I'm talking about. I'm not talking about cutting the police police department or fire department. I'm talking about what I consider the extras. And Joel, you you and I had a good conversation about this, and I agree with you. The city did too much at one time. >> We we we basically have two mortgages now. And if you have two mortgages at your home, you're you're going to be making some cuts somewhere. You better be. Unless you're rolling in the in the dole. And that's why I'm saying the city, we got two mortgages. Then we go ahead and start funding parks to the tune of $400, $200,000 a year. You can't do that all at one time. And I'm not ask again, I understand taxes are going to increase. I'm not asking for a zero increase. I'm not asking for a super small increase. I'm asking for a shared shared sacrifice. So that's that's where I'm s. >> Well, do I have a motion to approve resolution 202544, adjusting the tax levy for bonded indebtedness? I'll make that motion, Mr. Mayor. >> Motion by Councilman Muar. Do I have a second? >> I'll second. Mayor >> second by Councilman Robinson. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> Oppose the same sign. Resolution passes. On to the resolution 202545 providing the preliminary approval of a proposed 2026 tax levy and setting budget public hearing date. Do I have a motion? >> I'll make that motion. >> Motion by council dog. Do I have a second? I'll second >> second by Councilman Neil. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> Oppos same sign. On to the water and sewer rate discussion. >> Darcy pass this over. >> Tonight. Yes. Uh the discussion will be two pieces. Uh the first is uh our water sewer uh supervisor speaking about the the water sewer infrastructure in the city. a little overview, a little some history and then the second will be a cost analysis um driven by Darcy's discussion. So >> okay, good evening mayor and >> uh for this portion of this presentation I am going to go over topics in regards to our water and wastewater infrastructure. Um our infrastructure is obviously uh what it is now is obviously what it wasn't at one time. Uh we have certainly grown over the last 50 years. Uh the picture that you see right here is the infrastructure that was installed in 1973. The water and sewer primarily ran north and south on Highway 47 proceeding east to the river and included a small portion of Bridge Street to the east. Uh the three little blocks that you see down at the bottom, that was our three cell pond system and I believe at that time we had a 25,000galon water tank. Moving forward, uh this is currently what we have today. Our water and sewer system encompasses a service area of roughly four square miles. Um, pipe sizes for both water and sewer range in size anywhere from 16 to 80 18 in uh in diameter. The St. Francis utility infrastructure is comprised of our water treatment plant uh over 1 1.9 million gallons of storage with the water tower and the clear well. We have over 650 gate valves, 410 hydrants, and roughly about 30 miles of water made. Our wastewater uh treatment system is comprised of our wastewater treatment plant, eight lift stations, and roughly 24 miles of sanitary main. With our infrastructure, it is prudent that we do do address deficiencies within our system. Uh those those deficiencies are usually caused by many factors whether the age and the size of the pipe timing of a project, pipe material all factor in to when it needs to be replaced and or rehab. Public works director, streets and parks supervisor and myself meet continuously throughout the year to discuss the current state and condition of our infrastructure. Uh we do also meet with our engineering team and bring them our our findings at which time we start to put pencil to paper and start to create a plan on what we are going to do to address those deficiencies. Usually at that time that's about when we will um come up with two different classifications on a project. It's either going to be a rehabilitation or it's going to be a reconstruct. Well, did I move? Nope, I didn't. Okay, good. Uh an example of a reconstruct would be currently what we did this year with Woodbine. That was a replacement of the water man and the apparatuses attached to it. A rehabilitation would be what happened on 233rd and 229th. That would uh the water man was not touched. The the gate valve boxes were replaced though. And if anybody is wondering what a gate valve box is, that allows us access to the isolation valve 7 ft in the ground so we can shut the water off in case of an emergency. Um, moving on. So this tool here is what we what we utilize to determine the age of the developments and the infrastructure that it serves. Um, as you can see, we have six different age classifications. Uh, our oldest system, our oldest pipe work in the ground at this date is still about 53 years old. Um but after we we utilize this map in conjunction with the meetings that our staff has internally and with our engineering team to start planning for either expansion andor the replacement or rehabilitation of product uh projects. After all of that information is gathered, this is what we have. This is our proposed five-year CIP plan for road and utility projects. Uh you can see multiple different colors there all indicating that project specific. Uh on the west and the very far east side of that those are proposed to be mill and overlays. Those would just be ex uh exclusively rehab projects meaning that we would do mostly gate valve work there. The utility age did not does not justify the complete replacement of the pipe at that time. Uh but it is prudent that we do inspect the gate valve condition prior to the milling overlay to make sure that we're not going to cause a problem 3 to four years down the road as far as any leaking or anything of that nature. Uh there's other projects in there. Most some of these in the middle we have taken care of this year with the rehabs. And then the red cross down by that yellow line on Rum River Boulevard. That is the Woodbine 229th lane project. Uh you'll also see realigning projects that we have proposed um going forward. All of this is within this next five years. Moving on to the water treatment facility and distribution system. block diagrams that you guys see below represent some facts and figures pertaining to our water system. Uh the four blocks that I would like to draw your attention to are the one on the lower left corner that is the water treatment plant roof in 2028. That roof is um scheduled for replacement at the tune of $180,000. The bottom block is the water tower. The water tower was constructed in 2001. We do have a service maintenance agreement with a contractor that provides maintenance and service on that water tower and periodically roughly depending on upon the weather on the exterior and the condition of the paint on the inside they have to be repainted. Next year it is scheduled to have a touchup paint job, not a complete tarp and sand blasting. Um, we do have to pay for that service obviously and on a yearly basis that is roughly around $47,000. Uh, that is simply because none of the staff that we have are obviously qualified for tank maintenance. Um, the three high service well uh three high service pumps and the wells, they are on a 10-year revolving cycle to be pulled from service and completely rehabbed. that rehab is to prevent complete um destruction of that apparatus in the event of a big-time failure which we do not want. The cost difference is because of the length of the pipe. The wells are obviously a lot longer than the high service pumps. The high service pumps are at the water treatment plant. The well the the wells are next to the water tower. When those are each pulled from service, the drop pipe, the shafts, all the gears, bearings, motors are completely gone through and put back into service. A large project that we are planning for and proposing is the water treatment filter media rehab and/or replacement. Each of our four filters that we have are 360 square ft for a total coverage of,440 square ft. The question may be asked what is what are the wa the filters at the water treatment plant and the media. The water treatment filters are the treatment. Without them there would be no need for the water treatment plant. The filters are comprised of two different types of media. One is anththerite, one is green sand. They do serve two different functions. The green the green sand is for ion removal and the an or the the anthraite is for taste and odor control. Um both medias per MDH and AW AWA guidelines suggest replacement at about 15 to 20 years. That depends on the service life and how much water and production have been used on those filters. um it's because of this that we need to replace it. A couple factors that play into that is the surface size of the media. Once that media starts to break down in size, it loses its removal efficiencies. Um it's a big job. Each filter is going to be taken down roughly 1 to 3 days. That media will then be removed and replaced. Um, and then it will just sequentially go down until all four filters are complete. Uh, the media, I don't know if this is lucky or not, but it is manufactured in Wisconsin. The cost of the media alone and the shipping is estimated to be about $26,000. Paul, the public horse director, and myself have been working with our environmental engineers at them, they estimate estimate that the complete rehab and rehabilitation of those filters could cost about $800,000. Again, that is the cost to remove and install the new filter media, all the air piping or any unforeseen unknowns within that filter media and the the filters. Moving on to the wastewater treatment plant and the collection system. The waste the wastewater uh treatment collection system is comprised of roughly 24 miles of pipe and we break that down into five ass or asset districts. We maintain the sanitary mains by a process called jetting and televising. That's on a 10-year cycle. Jetting happens for 5 years and then the following five years jetting and televising happen concurrently. One of the propo one of the proposed projects that we're looking at is a 5-year replacement plan on five of five five of our lift station panels. They are over 20 years old, starting to show their age, and the size of the panels are not indicative of the new equipment that we have available for us today. So, we are looking at replacing five of those panels. costs of those panels are about $60,000 each, but that includes the cost of electrician, um the panel, the new panel equipment that would be installed, and if the duration of that list station being down is long enough, that would also cover the vac truck to cover us while that lift station is down. At the wastewater treatment plant, I don't know if a lot of people know, but we are regul regulated by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. We operate and maintain with our MPEDES permit that is issued every five years. One thing I would like to note is our permit is currently out for renewal as we speak. I have not heard anything back yet, nor is Paul. This is a process though that usually takes quite a long time to do. They have to go through a lot of data and decipher through that. Uh we are technically considered a class A minor facility. The wastewater treatment plant of all of our facilities has certainly the most equipment. We have over 40 pieces of equipment, VFDs that ensure operational treatment down there. Um, it operates 24/7 365 uh just simply because of automation. But that does not mean that we have no staff down there. Our staff still is down there for upwards of six to eight hours a day, whether that is doing labs and or any other general maintenance that is required. Currently, we are technically in year eight of our 20-year design. There's a lot of influencing factors that can either lengthen or shorten that one being flow and or loading. The wastewater treatment plant was designed on two parameters, loading and flow. The more that we have that would shorten the less or if we maintain we will make the 20 years. There it is. Uh these diagram blocks here do list some of the equipment that we have down there. Uh this is the equipment that we maintain either on a monthly, semi-yearly basis. Uh the one block down at the bottom you'll see is the UV system. That's one of the CIP items that we've already completed in 2020 2021 that will be coming back up. The problem with the UV system, although it is very automated and a very slick uh piece of equipment that we have, is that it is fairly expensive to maintain. The bulbs that we need, all 120 of them cost roughly $61,000. And the ballast to control the bulbs is about $76,000. Again, that's about every 5 years. Technically, it's on an hourly um aotment, however long the bulbs run. Typically, they they can go for about 14,000 hours in between changes. Uh but we can't wait that long because if we do, they'll lose their efficiency and will not be able to disinfect the wastewater, which would put us into a violation. Obviously, here's some more equipment that we're looking at in this next year, 5year cycle as far as a replacement. um the aation diffusers, that's what diffuses the oxygen in the irration basins at the wastewater treatment plant. The aation basins do all of the treatment uh work, if you will. Um I mentioned the UV bulbs and ballast, the backwash pump that is on the same cycle as the high service pump and the wells. It's a 10-year rotation. Uh it is completely taken out of service. There's two of them. they are rehabbed uh completely and then put back into service. We do have our central processing units or CPUs. Each one of those need to be replaced at each building at the wastewater plant just simply because they're no longer going to be able to support updates and modern uh technology. Um like the aerration basins, our bioolids, bioolid tanks also have diffusers and they will need to be replaced. Two items though that I did want to talk about that are not in the CIP that we do use our on andm to cover are is the bioolids processing. Um we do have a service contract with a Minnesota company. They come here, they mobilize, they come up, set up their equipment, they process our liquid bioolids to a solid, and then that is then applied on our one of our five permitted sites that we have, and then they handle all of the paperwork and permitting that goes with that. The other one is feric chloride. It is actually a chemical that we use for the addition of phosphorus removal and settling of our solids. And that like most commodities in the last 5 years has been very volatile as far as the cost per gallon. Uh last year though that did uh reach I believe $90,000 in cost or $90,000. So um moving on to chlorize. This is a topic that obviously we have discussed for a few years. Uh that being chlorides and what to do with it. Um staff is aware that there is a pending issue and that issue would be if we start to exceed our chloride limit in our MPDS permit. The MPCA assigns us limits for all kinds of different things that we are supposed to remove. And our limit for chloride specifically is 354 milligrams per liter. Currently at this time, we're at about 305 milligrams per liter with not much room to spare. Uh we have brainstormed and we think we've come up with three viable options. Uh in 2025, staff proposed and council approved a softener water softener rebate pro program. That program would be available to residents uh to essentially switch out their old inefficient timebased softeners for more modern ondemand high efficiency softeners. The hope would be that that would level off and or reduce the chloride level uh that is leaving the facility. Um there are drawbacks to that. Uh the one drawback being that a water softener only has a peak prof uh performance efficiency for about 10 years. Option two would be asking essentially for the citizens for help on this. A less expensive approach would be to have them optimize their own softener and adjust the hardness set point down to 10 mg per liter. that would still leave some hardness should be palatable and acceptable. But the one benefit or two benefits of leaving some hardness is one if you do have copper piping in your house, the hardness will actually provide a protective coating. The other is the long-term savings of salt usage from the regeneration process of the softener. It's the regeneration process that is contributing to the high chlorides. The third option is probably one that nobody wants to discuss because it's certainly the most expensive. So, in all of these discussions that we've had with our envir Oh, thanks Darcy. With our environmental engineer, um, one of the options would be to um, start planning for more of a permanent solution if chlorides continue to rise. Two of the options would be a lime softening facility or a reverse osmosis facility. After meeting with our environmental engineers, it was determined that a reverse osmosis or an RO system would be best suited for St. Francis. One would be the couple reasons would one is the cost. Lime softening is a lot more entailed in depth treatment, but an an RO system would fit on the available property. that's still available at the current site of the water treatment plant. Um, how would this help with chlorides? Well, a reverse osmosis system would remove the hardness causing chemicals, um, calcium and magnesium. Um, if you don't have the hardness in your water, you don't essentially need the water softener. And by eliminating the water softener, you are essentially eliminating the chlorides. Like I mentioned though, this is probably the most this is the most expensive option. Uh as of right now, moderate estimates project this to cost anywhere from 10 to 20 million for adding this treatment at the current water treatment facility. There would be ongoing additional costs though because of the RO membranes would need to be replaced every so often. >> I ask a question. >> Yes. How many gallons per how many gallons does it take to make RO g one gallon of RO on a home situation? I thought the old the old adage was six gallons of water wasted for one gallon of RO water. Yeah, there would be some wasting and we haven't necessarily delved into that yet. Uh but what I will say is the RORO system would not be capable of meeting our capacity at our water treatment plant. what we would be doing is blending the water that we currently produce through the RO system. So in a sense we would actually be providing a softer water but certainly not completely removed of all the hardness. Um and that like I said that serves two functions. We're actually we add a a polymer currently right now to protect the plumbing in town and our city distribution system. But that's what the hardness would also do in conjunction with that. And I'm the next slide. Obviously, as everybody in this room can probably attest, the rising cost of goods and commodities. Um, in 2017, the cost to replace both the water treatment plant and the wastewater treatment plant was estimated at $664,000. Fast forward eight years, those same roofs cost $1.1 million to replace. That's an increase of over $500,000. On a little bit smaller scale, in 2019 during our water meter replacement program, the water meter and the miu that sits on the exterior of the house was $300. Today, we can't get either one of them for less than $465. And obviously with any other commodity that we use at both the water treatment plant and the wastewater treatment plant and in our systems, the volatility the last few years has just been all over the place. So um and with that I will turn it back over to Darcy. >> Some questions. >> Yeah. Yeah. Uh so I know you guys do a very capable job and Paul's been in his position for a couple years. surprises, financial surprises or disposal surprises. What have you seen? I mean, you brought some of this to our attention in the last six months and we're now bringing it to everyone's attention. What surprises have you had um that maybe previous U administrators didn't know about or estimated too low on items? >> I would the the the one big surprise would be the filter media. Um, I think that while we planned for it, we never knew exactly how in-depth it was going to be. And at the time that we started to plan for it, obviously the cost was nowhere near of what it is today. >> That wasn't a concern at that time because you were worried about you had a whole schedule of things in front of you and that was down the line and so many railroad cars down the line. >> Yeah, we were here right we were in year 10 of the facility. So I dare say that well it was you know we got 10 years to go. That certainly wasn't necessarily our mindset but uh you know we did earmark money or we did put money aside for it but obviously with everything else it escalated uh in the infrastructure world and um that was probably the biggest surprise that we had. Yeah. If it wasn't for some of these things, would would we be having this discussion now as far as a a major impact on our costs and whatnot or the these things were impactful enough that it's coming to light and we're talking about it. >> Yeah. >> I guess I'm saying would it be business as usual if some of again costs are going up >> but like you say the media replacement the media costs have skyrocketed. I mean >> out of this world. >> Yeah. I I don't know. It's hard to say. Mayor and council, it it's difficult. We we've flushed out so much in the last three years. Um it took a new set of eyes to look at everything too, right? Somebody else walks in the room, they see it differently than everyone else, right? After having several years of this, you know, the the the public works director. Um well, a couple years with the hardly was a public works director there. Uh coming in and taking another look at it, I believe we flushed all surprises. Um but the media was a big one. Uh, initially it was earmarked for $60,000. After we we went out, hired an engineer and to get a a a good price or a fair price on it, $800,000, that's a big deal. And that yes, that's going to cause problems with the rates. Um, I can't speak to as business as usual, though. >> I wasn't trying to put anybody on the spot. I was just trying to emphasize the fact that unforeseen >> like, oh crap, you know, here we go. >> Well, that was a moment. That was a moment. Um, but that's what we're here to do. We're here to flush that stuff out >> and we're going to continue doing so. >> So, >> um, that's all I had. Thank you. And you've done a really fine job and I appreciate the visual. I'm a simple guy with simple needs. You guys did a really awesome job on this stuff. >> Thank you. And there's a lot here. Just so the public knows, this is all online. It's on the city website in the in the packet. So we have to pay for all of this that he wants to do. Unfortunately, what that is going to mean is there will be I'm proposing uh increases in the water and sewer rates. Um in 2026, the water rates, the base and the usage would go up 25%. And then the sewer base and usage would go up 5%. There would be no change to whack and sac rate now at this point. And that would mean that doesn't mean that there's a 30% increase in the rates. That is I mean the 30% in your bill. That is just the rates. Um the next year I would we're looking at 15% on the water and then 20% on sewer. And the rates are listed here below. So how does that affect somebody? This is what I calculate to be you the monthly billings in 26 and 27. And you can see that means a 13% increase in 26 for utility bill if you stay at the same usage. and a roughly an 18% increase in a bill if in 27. How did I get there? So before I propose or I did these rates um you take these lines the orange line on both graphs are your recommended cash balance. that is, you know, we can't get down to zero cash balance because we need money to function, but it's 40% of next year's operating cost just to give us a room to breathe to make sure that we're we have money for our our uh bills, our normal bills. It's uh next year's debt uh debt service. It's next year's capital. So all of these things that he's talking about in the capital have gone into, hey, we need to generate the money and we've been trying really hard throughout the city to pay cash for a lot of these projects. We don't want to sell bonds and have an interest cost on top of that. Um, so all of that goes in here. Um, and that's what generates what I propose is a rate increase. Now, if we could throw, like I said before on the taxes, even if we could throw 200, 300 new homes in here like that, we'd have whack and sack on those two those new homes. We'd have the base fees, we'd have the you, you know, if they were all in the water and sewer, that would stabilize the rates. We we need to generate that's how we generate more revenue you know either by increasing the amount of people on there or raising the rates there and we have to pay for what we need to provide in the water system. So that's how that all came about. We've had several meetings on it. Um and I guess I will leave it up to if there's any questions on that. This is not going to be uh anything that you need to vote on tonight. This will be part of your fee schedule that comes later in the year. So, if you have any questions or comments, >> I do Mayor Cool. That covers >> um Parish. How many users are on the line system now that are using freshwater? >> I believe it's around 8,870 [Music] connections. >> 1870. What's the capacity of the is there a capacity calculation? What are you capable of get? How many users? I guess on the sewer side I ask that on the sewer side >> roughly right now we have as far as capacity goes we have roughly room for I believe 1,400 more service connections. Now obviously flow and loading could either decrease or increase that. So, but currently as of as of our numbers right now after our capacity review that we just had, we are currently at about 1,400 service connections. >> Okay. And now you've seen you've analyzed you dug deep and found lot some of these problems or potential problems. Is this the worst case scenario? Do you see did it cause you to look and audit all your stuff at your at your fingertips and say, are we looking ahead, you know, in 20 2030? Do we need so and so? I mean, worst case scenario, have you looked up on here's a thread, now the sweater's coming off, >> right? We we do we we we we try and utilize every resource that we have to look into the future. Obviously, though, we are re regulated by the state agencies, Minnesota Department of Health and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. All they although they are somewhat forthcoming with what's coming around the bend, >> they're not always willing to share. Um, as I made mention about our permit, they might have more restrictive limits imposed in there on other constituents that we remove or other parameters. So, what I mentioned as far as our chlorides 10 minutes ago, they might actually say and part of this chloride compliance plan, you must now meet this limit. So, you know, but as far as anything else, we do the best that we can with what the information that we have. Uh, all right. And then, Darcy, a couple months back, you gave us other, not that makes anybody feel any dang better, but you gave us other city comparisons as far as where we rank currently and uh on our water rates and whatnot. I thought you had some some other comparisons. >> Done that for a couple years. Did you do that? >> Mayor, council, public works did um a list where we >> Yes, Mayor Council, we were we were the third top. >> Okay. And >> those were comparable cities, just for clarification. >> That's right. Myself. Yes, sir. >> Again, like like I said, nothing that's going to make anybody feel any better, but at least you know it we're we're we're working within the same models that the other cities. They're getting the same obligations put on them as we are. And so we're trying to adjust and maneuver as best as possible. It'd be interesting if we could post those online at some point if with Darcy's help or whatever if you guys again for a reference point. It it it's interesting reading anyway. It's not like you know we're going to blow off the top of the charts, but I mean other cities are going through the same thing and they're having to adjust accordingly. So that's that's all I have. Thank you. >> I don't have any questions. >> Um just one question. um the media that needs to be replaced. Does that need to be replaced in two years? >> I think that's 10. I think it's scheduled for 2028. >> Okay. And you mentioned that. Well, every all the costs are going up, but did you say the media cost is going up too? Is it possible to purchase it now and store it or is it not? >> We we really don't have the room to store it. It would actually come in those large bags that you see uh sometimes sand and gravel delivered in. And I think right now they're estimating five flatbed. >> Okay. >> That would deliver that. >> Okay. I just thought if everything's going up and it's three years out. >> Yes. >> I don't know if the media is still good at that point. I mean like it um >> Well, so that's and that's the other thing. So you would Yes, you would have that. But one of the treatment aids that we have up the water treatment plant is sodium peraganate. That's what helps keep the green sand regenerated. One of the media types that we would purchase. If it is not in the direct contact with that sodium permaganite, it essentially degrades I guess for lack of a better term. So >> that makes sense. >> Like the reason though. I like that. >> Well, and I wanted to say too that um well Kevin and I um got to go and do a tour of the water treatment plant and the store and it was it was very interesting. Um, I don't know if anybody else is interested, but um, it was very interesting and you you all do a lot of good work for us and >> thank you. >> Um, I I I left there thinking, "Oh, wow. You know, it this is this is really on point." So, thank you for that. >> You're welcome. Thank you. >> I don't really have any questions. Uh, one I want to address Tina quick. Um, the your disappointment was from me not knowing what the water rates were with or without the apartment. >> All right. Thank you. >> So, that hit me. I thought I'd share that. Anyway, >> um yeah, I mean I guess I'm I'm thankful that everybody that came out came out. Um I hope you do still I don't know how much talk to your neighbors. I hope you I hope all this stuff I mean these are crazy numbers. This is what we have to look at the cost associated with the stipulations put on the city. And as ugly as it is, this is this is the reality of it. So I do appreciate you guys staying here this long. um those that could um I hope you learned something from it as well. It's it's not a fun situation to be in. Um but I don't have any questions and I appreciate your guys' work. >> Thanks Jo. >> Mr. Mayor, if I may, if if anybody out there would like a tour of the facilities that can that can be certainly arranged so you could start to put a picture to what we went over this evening. Um Paul and I'd be more than happy to show off the facilities. So, >> thank you. >> Yeah, >> Darcy, I just have one quick question. Why did we not increase lack and sack at all in this? >> I want to say that we proposed it and uh a couple years ago and it wasn't it was told that they were too high. >> No, mayor council. So, again, this kind of goes back to state statute. We need the rates to pay for today's expenses. Wacken sack is collected for tomorrow. So that's your expansion, that's your new pipe, that's your um you know that would have been some of the replacement up 47, but it's it's not for your day-to-day maintenance. So if we we could look at that. However, then you're coming back to to the developers and then being high already, we risk development not moving forward to help pay the rates for the expenses today. It's kind of a circle that we get in. >> I get the price sensitivity sensitivity part of it. I I can appreciate that, but I just I think it's like anything though, if you keep it at zero, I guess I'm not sure why we would keep it why wouldn't we increase it by 1% for immediate replacement in three years or whatever else. I I just think I just think that's seems odd that we wouldn't increase that even marginally. because to keep it at zero as we're as we're talking with everything else, keep it at zero, we're it's going to get us in trouble when we have to do big replacements down the road. So, I I don't know what that number would be, but I' I'm just saying I think there should be a minimal increase to the whacken sack as well. >> I think that's the balancing act, too, though, like with development and whatnot. When we talk about, you know, giving breaks, not giving breaks, all that kind of stuff, it's similar to where I can build a development here in St. Francis or I can go over here to to Iani where the rates are lower. My bang for my buck's better here. So, I'm going to go elsewhere. Um I think that's where some of that comes in. But >> and mayor and council mayor, so the other thing with Back Sack is we would need an engineers uh review because that is something that we have to show on the back side that we need much like our park dedication. um when it comes to those fees that are guided by statute, we have to have the justification. So, we would need to work with Hawinson Anderson in order to make an adjustment um justifiable. So, >> but when do when do we ever increase it then? I mean, do do we do comparisons to other cities? Wacken Sack. I mean, what >> we have increased it because it was what 2400 I think we started with >> Wacken Sack. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So we would we would need to go back and work with Hawkins and Anderson to look at where those numbers need to be and that's when we would make an increase. So we could have we could start that conversation, but that's not affecting the rates, >> right? I get that. I get that. I just I'm just saying it seems odd to me. Everything we're talking about, nothing stays at zero >> and that staying at zero doesn't make sense to me. So >> different process, but we can look at that. >> Okay, that's all I got. Um, anybody else? Any other questions? I want to piggyback on what these guys said here. It's fantastic to see you all here because I get so tired. You know this about me. I I can't stand the social media banter. It's just 75% of it's garbage and the fact that you came here and paid attention and and stuck through this and watched this. Thank Thank you. I It's very much appreciated. >> So, do we got you don't need anything else at this time? >> This will be on your fee schedule that's coming up. um October, November, >> we'll and it will go through the two readings and then take 30 days after publication. So as soon as that's done, then we would send over to the utility billing company to change the rates. >> Thank you, Dorsy. >> At this point, the meeting's open to the public again. Uh so feel free to come up. you state your name, address, and again I I just encourage you to come up just the one time and try and keep it short in timely manner. So, >> but anybody want to come up and speak? >> This is actually nothing bad. >> We can take it. >> It's okay. Tina Tina Carol 23045 Ambassador Boulevard. Um, as you guys all saw, how many people came? Part of me thinks tonight had a lot to do with that sign that's out there. I would encourage you guys to continue to utilize that for planning commission meetings, for city council meetings just to remind people because there's not really a big place out there. People aren't going out to the website. People aren't going anywhere to just see, okay, when is this meeting? Putting it out there, I think, had a big impact on people coming. So it's just a suggestion >> just for your information that was Mr. Robinson's idea. Mayor help. >> Thank you very much and they and they paid for it. So it wasn't something that So if we want to keep doing that again we can't keep asking the council to pay for so that owned it. >> No no >> but it's just a suggestion. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else? >> All right. Seeing none on to council member reports. Uh Joe, >> uh let's see. I was part of the work session, uh that we did. Um trying to think of what else. I don't think there's a lot else. Uh engaged with the community online, which is always fun. Um I we get in some spirited debates. We get some information out there. Um we hear other people's points of view, so that's always good. Um but other than that, I don't have anything else to report. >> Thanks, Joel. Keaney. Um I don't really have a report um except I went to the work session meeting as well, but I just wanted to to say something about some of the events that have happened in the past few weeks here. Um and earlier this summer um not here. Um the it's just something that's and I spoke with Sarah about it too. Um something that's just very disturbing to all of us. um just the violence for politicians and people speaking their mind and their belief and and just the violence that has been against them. Um it's just it's really been bothering me. But the second part of it, which is really a different issue for me, but it's it is kind of similar, is was it three weeks ago um at Annunciation Catholic School, there was another yet another school shooting and I um this is this is something that has been um bothering me for a long time. Um in April of 1999, I lived in Littleton, Colorado. I grew up here. I moved there for a job for four years and I lived one mile from Coline High School and where whereas I didn't know anyone there um I watched how that school shooting affected the town of Littleton and it it just it was it was just very difficult to watch. And since then, there's been dozens, literally dozens and hundreds of school shootings in our country. And I the one thing that rings true for me is that literally all mostly all of the shooters have either been students or former students or people that know the building and the security and schedule of the building. And I have been to this council before I was on it as well as the school board several times asking for the return of the school resource officer. And the school resource officer there used to be two and I believe they were uh St. Francis employees and the school board paid for some or all of their salary. And at some it was eight or nine years ago, I'm not sure. um they removed the school resource officers out of the budget and I was at the meeting and there was many other people at the meeting and they removed one school resource officer and then maybe the next year removed the next one and I recall um at a city council meeting shortly after that um the city said well maybe we can pay for half of this is just this part's just my memory, maybe we can pay for half of the salary to to keep that school resource officer there. And it was it was not approved um by the school. And I I'm not naive enough to think that a school resource officer is going to be in the exact right moment at the exact right time. That's never going to happen. But the fact that the students know that there isn't one and the fact that the students know that there isn't maybe metal detectors at the doors is the reason that our schools are such soft targets. and you go to a sporting event and there's metal detectors and there's security and you or or any event like that and we don't do the same for our children and I it's it's something that keeps me up at night and I know that we the police have done the the best job that they can to to cover the schools whenever they they call but I I think that we as a community need to find a way to make our our kids safer and it's it's our largest building with largest amount of population during the day or any time of of the day and I I just don't think that we can afford to pretend that it can't happen here. And I would like to see something done about it. maybe a security task force made up with maybe some of us, somebody some people from the schools, somebody from the community to come up with ways to make our schools safer. And of course that would include returning a school resource officer. Um that costs money. Um but I think that we just can't afford to pretend it won't happen here because it will. And it's it it is something that I lose sleep over and I I would I would be very interested in being on the committee or the task force or whatever um you know with with um the police chief as well. And I don't know how anybody else feels about spending time on that. Um but that's what I would like to see happen. >> I don't know if you have or haven't, but I would encourage you to talk to the school board about that because that'd be their jurisdiction to be able to authorize that. >> Absolutely. I meant to say including them. I meant to say that. Of course. >> I would I I'm sure Todd's had many conversations with them. I I don't I'm just curious, Todd, what do you think a task force makes sense here? What What What's the >> Yeah, I I don't have a lot of conversations with the school board, per se. I guess it's it's more frequent conversations with the superintendent. Um and I was just assuming get back to the board, but we do have a very good relationship with school personnel. We do have conversations and um the SRO has been brought up from time to time. Um, I know that there's a lot of people in favor of returning that program. Um, and it comes down to budgeting, right? So, those are the conversations that they're going to have to have on the on the board end. You know, task force, uh, if I can be in assistance in any way, uh, along with some other personnel from the school and city to get this back, then I'm all for it. So, >> thank you. >> Just so you know, back in the day, what was it? 35,000 per first per per officer per year and they cut it down to one and then they were waffling and but yeah, we've talked about it many time and I agree with you wholeheartedly. >> Oh, thank you. >> Wholeheartedly. And I mean even now if it's 200,000, what percent of their budget is $200,000 a year? That's the question to ask. And what's the return on investment of the 200,000 if they have I mean they build relationships with the kids in school. the network, the tentacles are much farther than just a somebody walking around with a gun and a badge. >> Absolutely. >> So Kathleen, you want to come up real quick? >> Starder Circle in St. Francis. Along this line, I just want to mention there is a memorial service for retire or a I'll just read it. It is with greatest sadness that we share the passing of retired police officer Sherry Hamburg Anderson, age 70, who left us on September 2nd, 2025. Officer Hamburg served our community with distinction from February 95 to December08. She will always be remembered for her warm laughter, radiant smile. Known for her nurturing yet nononsense approach, Officer Hamburg embodied the spirit of a motherly protector, dedicated herself wholeheartedly to serving the residents of Anoka. She does have a memorial service coming up at um and I uh Washurn McCree on the um 25th I believe it is. But I just want to say that I witnessed her personally. I worked at the school and my kids attended while she was there and it was very reassuring to see her squad parked there. It was reassuring to see her at the information desk or just talking with the kids. I reiterate what you say about um just the students knowing that there's someone there >> was such a visual and uh if we can find money for excuse me salt or anything else we can find money for bringing our resources back to our children our most precious resource. Thanks. >> Thanks. >> Anything else you need? >> No. Thank you >> Sarah. >> Um I attended the work session. Um, I did have a few phone calls and a couple emails concerning the meeting tonight. So, I thank the residents who reached out to me. I did go to the farmers market on Wednesday. That's wrapping up, right? This our last week coming up or do we have two left? >> So, we have two left. So, if you haven't gotten there yet, please go to the park and check out the farmers market. >> Um, I am I'm a huge advocate for the SRO's. I stood up and made myself very loud letting them know that we uh thought that was an important thing. Um I think looking at the costs again everything's going up so we're going to have to pay for it. I think one thing we do need to consider is if the school says because I have a feeling they're going to say we just don't there's no wiggle room in our budget. their budget is just as chaotic as ours is. Um, is that something then that you would like us to try to fully fund in order to get them back in? If the school says no, I and I'm not saying I'm opposed to that. I'm just asking where we're at on that. >> Well, I'm not sure where I would go with that, but I think we should have a group of people to to put that together in a conversation. >> That's where I was going with what I said. >> Yeah. I'm just wondering, you know, kind of feeling out with with budgets because that that truly is that's the reason they got rid of them is they just said, >> you know, we can't cut a teacher when we can cut an S or can't cut two more teachers when we can cut cut an SRO. Um I I think the district is aware of the council's feeling on SRO's as well as the general public. It's again, do we get rid of teachers or do we keep the SRO, which is a horrible decision to have to make? It's awful. But I agree, our our students, you know, we we have to think about that every time we walk in here, too. Not them, but it could happen. >> You just have to be very vigilant. And I am 100% on board with getting an SO back. That would be great, >> sir. Thank you, Kelly. >> Chief, that poses a question. Um, do you currently when you converse with the superintendent, whatnot, are there any contingency plans and for an active situation or do I mean even though there's nobody on site, do you have have you talked about drills or >> we we do train annually. Um, we with school personnel. We um even this year we had our investigators speak on site for a number of hours, a lot of staff at the middle school and just discussing certain situations and >> good >> um and the one of the latest conversations I just had with superintendent. We want to have more meetings um for the new teachers and new principles and things like that on on um a lot of questions revolving around when do we call what should we be calling for. So we want to keep those discussions ongoing as well. So, um I would say the communication is good between us and the schools. We do share a lot of information. Um you know, things we get from the BCA and just notices throughout from the c, you know, throughout the country. I I make sure that they get to the school district as well. So, um we're not shy about sharing information. We're not shi shy about having discussions. Um, you know, most of the school personnel knows our response protocol right now, but like I said, I do want to have keep having those meetings just to update new personnel and things like that so there's no gray area or reluctancy on when they should call. So, >> yeah. All right. Thank you. Um, I just want to remind everybody, um, I'll be going to the attending the planning zoning meeting this Wednesday 17th and then please, please, please recycling September 20th this Saturday. be there. Be square. Um, everything. No furniture. What is it, Paul? What's What's a no? Bring. What don't you want? And what do we want? >> Just generally something at this one. No, there's no oil. Um, >> metal. >> Metal. Yep. Yep. >> Appliances. >> Appliances. >> Okay. And there is a fee for some of these items, but again, time to clean it up and get it out of your way so you can have a more clear for winter time. Still >> that's all I have, sir. >> Thanks, Kevin. Can you on a note real quickly, September 22nd, which is next Monday, everybody remember at 5:30 we've got interviews for the development director position. Uh attended the work session. We had another uh Bridge Street Extension meeting with the school district and a lot of good discussion. I I agree with Todd. I think we've got a good relationship with the school district and these discussions will continue on. Whether they bear fruit or not, we'll find out. So, also had a meeting with Paul and Darcy with the city of Oak Grove talking about sewer and water rates because their users are honor system as well. I thought that was a good discussion. Kevin and I met with the uh Northshore developer Matt about the >> what what he's what he's thinking behind the subway property right now. So, he's got he's going to go back to the he's got several plans. He's going to go back to and develop some more and come back to us soon. So, we'll we'll see more on that. And that's all I've got. So, anybody else? Anything else? >> Highway 47. Anything we can I know we just throw darts every time, but at least we're letting people know that we're you're working on it diligently. You've done a great job so far. And anything cooking down the road or timeline? >> Yep. So, mayor council, within the next couple weeks, we should see teams out that are doing soil testing along the highway. We're still on track for a 2027 construction. Um, and by the end of this year, we should have our design and environmental phases done. So, it's making progress, but a lot of it is behind the scenes research data. Crash tests are done, the traffic counts are done, preliminary designs are rough. Um, so we still have conversations of right of way and easements, the soil testing, and then some of the uh major groups that are allowed to comment on on the design, we're still waiting for those as well. So, we're making progress, but we'll get there. >> Appreciate the update. I know Slow and Steady wins the race, but uh also I want to say the Baptist Church, whoever they hired as a contractor, oh my goodness, that is one good-look building. And they have a really fast and efficient and clean site. Very nice. addition there. >> Thank you, Kate. >> So, do I have a motion to adjurnn? >> Make that motion, Mr. >> Motion by Councilman Muar. Do I have a second? >> I'll second it. >> Council Councilman Fis, all those in favor signify by saying I. I pull the same sign. Meeting is adjourned at 8:37 p.m.