Well, actually like so the the I don't do you call it curving yet? It's just like a gutter. Yep. That's curve. Yeah. But like my driveway is like that much farther down. And so it makes it interesting going over it with the motorcycle. Yes. call to order the regular city council meeting on Monday, April 21st, 2025. Please rise for the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Roll call, please. Jenny, Mayor Bogle, here. Council members Mubower here. Bonis here. Edvig here. Robinson here. On to approval of the agenda. Do I have approval? for the agenda tonight. I'll make that motion. Mayor by Councilman Robinson. Do I have a second? Is this where we would pull an item from the consent agenda? Is that next? Okay. I'll second. Second by Councilman Muar. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Pull the same sign on to consent agenda. And I know we've got a request to pull item G and talk about that separately. Anybody anything else that they want to talk about separately? So, do I have a motion to approve A through F and H? That motion. Motion by uh Councilman Udvig. I have a second. A second. Second by Councilman Honis. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. All the same sign. A through F and H pass. On to G. Uh, who would like to go first on G? Anybody? Um, well, this item with the relief association. Um, I guess I'm kind of concerned because for a few things. Um the money for the fire relief association was meant to go to the retirement account for the firefighters. Um and I I don't think it's right that the city is going to accept $22,000 when it was meant to go to the firefighters retirement account. It's really the only retirement money that the firefighters get. Um, and I I just don't understand why we would want it. Um, I see that um the request is for $10,000 for the city to use to offset the furniture for this building. Um, I don't understand. If we didn't have $10,000 to buy furniture for this building, we shouldn't have built the building. Um, it says $10,000 for the city of St. Francis purchased turnout gear for firefighters and $2,100 to purchase equipment purchases. If we don't have money in our budget for those items for the firefighters, I I guess I don't know where to go from there. Um those items, equipment and um turnout gear should be in our budget. We should plan for that for replacements as needed. I I don't understand why we would be asking the firefighters to take money out of their retirement account to purchase city assets. Um uh that's kind of where I'm at. Few other notes here. Um it just and a few other things too. How I thought we talked last time when we talked about donations um that the city can only do fundraisers for certain things and if the fire relief association isn't there to do fundraisers, do we have a different nonprofit profit that we're able to do fundraisers for the city? Because there was only a few things the League of Minnesota City said that we could do fundraisers for. So, I'm kind of concerned about that. um you know, and what is Bethl doing with their fire relief association money? Um that's a big unknown to me anyway. I don't know what they're doing with it. Um they probably had the same problem. I'm just wondering um was the fire relief association, the nonprofit, was it closed properly? Did we hire an attorney? Did we hire a CPA to make sure that we did filed all the taxes and the appropriate Is it a separate entity? It is a separate entity. Yeah. So, we as a city wouldn't be doing any of that. No, we wouldn't. But it it it really does get intermingled um in in ways that I probably don't have time to to explain right now, but I just I'm it's a very large deposit. It's a very large donation, I should say, and it just seems out of the norm. And the the email that we have here from from Dave is that that we requested $10,000 from the firefighters relief association. And I just I mean when when we built the public works building and the police station, did we ask the police and public works employees to take money out of their their retirement account to buy furniture? I'm guessing we probably didn't. Um, and I think that first and foremost as a city, we should be providing all the equipment, all the safety equipment that is needed for the firefighters. And if we're not doing that, that's that's a pretty big concern to me. And if I mean, I'm I'm certain we didn't ask any other department to take money out of their relief association money, I'm sorry, their retirement money to to buy city assets. I don't I don't understand this at all. And it's nice that they want to donate money, but I I just don't think it's it's the place for it. Once it gets donated to the city, it's it's it's basically taxpayer dollars at that point. And I I just don't feel comfortable with that. Um the money that is in there was done by fundraisers for the from the firefighters. And I I saw over the years many letters asking people for donations and it said all over those letters, this money is for the firefighters rel uh retirement association and their relief and now to just give it to the city. It just seems it it just seems disingenuous to me and I don't feel comfortable with it. Thanks. Um Dave, you want just just for clarification purposes, real do you want to talk about the when they went from the firefighter relief to the city to the SVF pension fund. So that transition happened back in 2016. Prior to that, relief associations managed two separate accounts. One is called the special fund, which to council member Fonis' point is where the retirement dollars are stored. The second account is the general fund. So when they switched their funds over to SVF, they transferred all of the retirement dollars over to their retirement accounts. The general fund cannot be used for retirement expenses. The general fund is for fundraising that they can purchase equipment from that if they had a gambling operation. Those were that's where those dollars would go. The two ways that the retirement gets funded is through an elective city contribution which we do and through the fire state aid which is allocated to every city. That's how the retirement piece gets funded. This cannot go into their retirement accounts and was not designed to go into their retirement accounts. The relief association to council member Bubau's point is a third party entity. They have chosen to dissolve. They have chosen where to send the money. This isn't the fire chief. This is the city administrator. This is where the membership has decided that they want the money to go. It's not a question of whether or not we have enough funds to cover turnout gear. That's where they decided the money to go. So that that's kind of where it's at from my perspective is they told us that they were done, that they wanted to donate the funds. This is where the membership voted that those funds go to. That's why it's in front of you today. And I I can't speak to police or public works on and they traditionally wouldn't have a mechanism anyway. It's not apples to apples the way retirements are set up. I don't think either, right? Anybody else, Kevin, or I got a question. Yeah. Could they have spent the money anywhere they want to given it to children of the poor or there's certain requirements that they can donate to? It has to be a nonprofit and I believe there's a couple other entities that they can donate to, but it's pretty specific on who they can donate it to or what type of organization they can donate it to. And how are the board members put in place that voted on this and then decided to dissolve and then donate? So, this was a membership driven. So, it wasn't just only the board, it was the majority of the membership that had voted to just be done with this. So, okay. Um, they haven't really been active for a number of years. Um, I think they looked at it as more of a liability and again they just got to the point where they're just they wanted to be done. So they weren't co coerced or cajol in any way that hey we really need to hand out here because I know the city has the funds for that because you know that's why we're we do what we do. Correct. And the board members are here. So if you that's all I have mayor. Thanks sir. So I just I just have a question where it says for the fitness for the new facility p who requested the per the donation that came through the city administrator. Okay. [Music] Jordan got anything else? Um not really. I think Dave kind of answered my questions. I think I'm trying to put this the best way I can. I guess I think the the way that this was presented um by council member Fannis, you put a lot of assumptions in there and a lot of it, the way I took it, the way you were saying it sounded like you were making a lot of claims that aren't good. Um didn't look good for the city. It sounded like like we don't have the fund, like we don't budget properly, we don't do this, we don't do that. We're trying to take from our retirement from from our firefighters. And I don't believe that any member of staff would ever consider that. Um, and that that it bothers me. Okay. It bothers me too. So, um, but I don't like I again that's you answered most of my questions, Dave. I don't think I have another question. And I think it to me it was more of did we solicit these um the retirement question which you answered already. Um obviously they're not apples to apples. So it's when you talk about other departments it's the fire department is very unique in the way it's set up. Um we get to hear about that often when we talk about how many employees are there um things like that. So that that's all I have. Mhm. Oh, well, to answer that, it bothers me too that it was, you know, the way I said it is the way I see it and I I probably know more than than some of you about the history of the fire relief association. In fact, my husband is here today and and wanted to speak about it. Um, the the money in that account at Village Bank traditionally did go towards the investment prior to your arrival, Dave. um they would they would do fundraising, it would be in there and then whenever they got 10 or $12,000, they would send it to the investment. That's that's what it is is what happened with that money. And since they switched to PARA, um none of the money ever got sent over after that point. And I feel that we need to look out for our people. Um and we do we do we need to look out. We never let anybody down here. What What was that? We never let any of our employees down here. Well, I just feel like that money was intended for the retirement. And I understand that you don't agree with me on that um aspect, but I believe that the firefighters don't really get retirement like other like full-time people get and they don't get health insurance and they don't get a lot of things that other employees get. What about the consensus of the board members who are voted on by the the firefighters themselves who agreed to do all this and put their trust in them and so so here we are. Well, and I understand that and I understand that there's three board members here and they they want to give the money, but I just don't I don't feel comfortable with it and I wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't speak up when I see something that isn't that isn't that I don't feel is right. Um, a lot of that money was donated um and no people knew that it was going to go to the firefighter relief association and here we are doing other things. We we the board members decided they voted they they're doing the will of their people. That's the way I see it or that that's the way it was explained and we didn't do anything wrong. I wasn't invited to those meetings. Yeah. No. And and you know I understand that that they chose that. I understand that. Um, but I should be respected though is what I'm s getting at. I understand that too. I'm just saying I don't feel comfortable with it. I believe that money should have gone to the retirement and that's what was happening prior to your arrival Dave and it it just it just sat there and you know if if the money goes to the retirement at parah um doesn't that mean that you can raise their yearly amount um you know if you're x over x% funded um and that that that is for them and and so you know and maybe some of the members that would have voted on that maybe they don't understand how that works. You know, they're, you know, maybe some of them are new firefighters and maybe some of them are old firefighters, but they don't they maybe they don't understand how that would benefit them. And I just I I want the best for them. Um, and I think that as a city and a department head, that's what we should be that's what we should be doing. And I I I just I feel like that money should go there. That's that's my opinion about it. And I think that that that's where the money was intended to go. And I don't feel comfortable taking $22,000 of money that I feel should go to the to the firefighters retirement for for you for you three and anybody else. Um when we we don't need them. We don't need the money to buy furniture and gear. We have that money in our budget. We should. If we don't, we should. If in fact, and I'm I don't know anything about the relief association. I got to pretend to. Um I'm taking people's information as I get it. Um if in fact what Dave is saying is true is this cannot go to their retirement based on how those funds are set up. And if that's the case, then it can't go to the retirement regardless. So no matter how much we feel that it should, it can't from what I understand. So, and just to clarify some things, too, is it's not that things weren't budgeted for or we don't have the money for it. When anybody makes a donation to the city, it helps to offset some of the costs to the taxpayers if we accept a donation from anybody for any reason. So, it's again to me it was the way it was presented, it sounded as if we were trying to be underhanded and take from our firefighters and that that that's not at all what's going on. Um, if the members voted to donate, then that's the members wishes of what they want to do with their dollars. And if it can't go to the retirement, then it can't go to the parent. So, I don't understand. I mean, no matter how strongly we feel that, it doesn't matter. Well, he's saying that it can't go to the retirement account. But I if if the bylaws said that it did go to the, you know, it they you know, it's been disbanded for such a long time. You can't if you follow some bylaws and not others, it it just doesn't it doesn't feel right. And and so I that that is where the money went prior to Dave's arrival. And so I don't see how it just all of a sudden can't go there when that's where the money was intended to go. Um, and whether the bylaws are right or wrong or the members are Well, it sounds like something took place in 2016 that changed a lot of things and there's a lot of a lot of things that I definitely do not understand. Um, and I get more confused the more we talk about it. Um, and I would assume that that would be a legal question for the relief association to have their attorneys hash out if and when before they came this far. I don't know. I mean, because it's if it's not a city entity, we wouldn't use our city attorney because that's taxpayer dollar. Again, it's it's more muddier than it was before we started for me. But it it sounds like it can't go there for whatever reason. And I that's I'm uh I spoke with I spoke with Amy about this a little bit before beforehand and I'm just I'm just going to be honest and tell you right now where I'm where I fall. I'm going to follow on the request of the board to donate the money. However, my my only I spoke with Kate and our attorney today about this. This this is where this is where donations and charity stuff gets real murky and muddy. So like going forward, I'm looking more about going forward, you know, if the fire department has a fundraiser for pancake breakfast fundraiser. Now, now we get real, it's not falling under the relief associate anymore. So I don't know how you it gets real murky. So I I'm requesting that we have either a work session or at one of our regular meetings another discussion more again about donations and and and requests for donations kind of thing because it it's gets real gray and murky. And so going forward, I because I could see to to her point a little bit, I could see if somebody comes to pancake breakfast five years ago that they probably thought they were given to the firefighter relief fund towards the retirement. It just probably did. But but even though some of the funds were probably going towards the other budget for ongoing fundraising, but that that's why it gets real gray and muddy right away. So but I I that's that's all I've really got. I I don't know. Like I said, I'm going to vote to accept a donation and I respect your decision if you'd vote otherwise. And I don't know, I feel like we're ready to vote, but if somebody wants share more, feel free. Anybody else? I just want to say one more thing. I just I honestly just want what's best for the firefighters and as a city, we need to look out for our people. And I feel that buying equipment with something that I feel should have gone somewhere else isn't the right thing. And whether it was meant to happen that way or somebody asked for it or not, I I just don't think that's right. And it's a it's a large donation. And of course, I appreciate that, but I I just feel like it should stay with the firefighter relief association and into the retirement account. That's where I feel and I think that we should raise their their yearly amount that they get after they retire. I feel like it should go to them. I'm looking out for them. I don't want to be looking like I'm the bad person that I'm accusing somebody of doing something wrong, but I don't feel it is right that we are taking money that I feel that should go to the retirement, the only retirement they really get and using it for city assets. How can we do that though if we're told it cannot go to that? How can how can we don't where do we I mean he's telling us it can't it's not he's telling this he's telling us that and I'm I'm taking you at your word but was there was there a time when we could have done that not as it sits in the current definition of their account as a general fund. So, as I stated in the beginning, when a relief association was managing the funds directly, which means they were taking the state aid money, they were responsible for managing the firefighters pension accounts. All of that money got deposited into the special fund. That is for the retirement. You have two uses for a special fund to fund the retirement and you can pay some board salaries out of your special fund. Your general fund is if you are collecting dues, if you're fundraising or had other streams of income such as charitable gambling which could not be intermingled with your special fund for retirement. So yes, council member Fonis the special fund went to the retirement continues to be funded by a city elective contribution and the fire state aid money. This is the general fund. According to the state auditor, we are not allowed to distribute donation money into a retirement vehicle for individual benefit. I know it's it's super confusing. It it it is and in all fairness. Right. Right. It is super confusing and there's a lot of complexities to it. I assure you the team has worked through all of this. How close was the vote? Was a vote like I mean was it like two people saying no and or was it like a good majority? Yeah. Okay. So I mean that's that's where I stand is it's it's they're asking us to approve what they decided. They're not they're not we didn't we didn't come up with this. They did. So I I'm not sure why. I mean, if if there was one member who didn't like it and and if they didn't understand, it's it's like if you're in a union and you don't understand a vote, it's on those members to figure it out. It's not on the board. I mean, they if somebody came to them, they're going to educate them on what it means. They're going to educate them. But if you don't understand as a member and you vote anyway, that's kind of on you. And when I'm hearing that the majority of the the vast majority said this is what they want to do. They told us this is what they want to do with the money. I I don't think we're taking anything from anyone. Anybody else? Okay. Do I have a motion to approve uh letter letter G under consent agenda? I'll make that motion. Mayor, so moved by Councilman. Do I have a second? I'll second. May second by Councilman Robinson. All those in favor signify by saying I I oppose the same sign. I for forward the one. It passes. On to meeting open to the public. Please come forward. State your name and address and welcome. Hello. My name is Mike Fiser. I want to know if I uh should address ordinance 346 in the open forum now or wait until you get to it. Uh you you would have to do it now. Do it now. Okay. So again, my name is Mike Fiser. I'm the guy who emailed you guys over the weekend uh along with you, mayor, and I'm the broker working with Rem River Consultants on their journey to acquire their new facility for expansion purposes. The Rem River consultants need to expand and the sale of 23340 Cree Street works perfectly for them. I'm urging the mayor and council to think hard about the sale of the property as if the Rim River consultants are not able to purchase that they'll be forced to expand and look in another city. Now, as I know their offer was not as high as the other, you know, it's still above ask only has a financing contingency and therefore I think the city not only needs to look at the price point of the sale, but also the long-term economic impact of the community. Their use conforms to the city zoning requirements. They employ 36 people. They're active in the community events volunteering. They work here. They live here. They want to stay here. And also, they are willing, if their offer is to be accepted, to lease back the space. There's a uh area there that's for lease that you guys have been using to rent out to the um locals um for the amount of 10,100 during the due diligence period. And uh for these reasons, you know, I feel they're a better buyer and user for the property. And I'd urge you to consider their offer over the other. That's all I have. Anybody else? John. Hello. My name is John Fonis. I live at 23318 Salis Street Northwest. I'm here to uh actually address one of the topics that was on the agenda and all the misinformation that you guys are getting from the fire chief. Um I'm going to give you a little background of what happened, what was going on on the relief association since I was the president of the relief association for several years. Back in the 1970s, the relief association was founded and at that time the city did not contribute any retirement funds. There's no retirement benefits for the firefighters. So they chose we're going to start a relief association. They're going to start doing some fundraising. And of course they made it they opened up two accounts, a general fund and an investment fund, special account. The special account that was where the 2% money from the insurance agents, the premiums of insurance, that's considered 2% money that is donated to for investments. So they ended up getting that that's that money went directly to there. Then they had a general fund that that's where they did their fundraising such to put the money into the investment. They hired an investment company. They started doing fundraising and apparently they started out gambling and doing pull tabs and did very well. And in fact, shortly after that, the city came to them and said, "Hey, can you guys stop selling pull tabs cuz we have the lines that want to do pull tabs and other entities want to do fundraising on that? And if you do so, the city will contribute and they'll match the 2% funds to the relief association to go right directly into the investment." So, they took that offer. They're like, "Okay, we'll just do fundraising. We'll do we'll do pioneer days. We'll do the French tourist breakfast, car washes, whatever." So, and at the time whenever that the general account got about $12,000 or more, that money, the extra money would get switched over to the investment money and that would get deposited and we couldn't touch it anymore. So, we always had about 10 $12,000 to utilize that money to do startup events, you know, to buy all the stuff to to get a a an event going, if you will. Um what happened was Matt Highland became the city administrator and he noticed that these monies were getting sent out matching the 2% money and he looked and searched and couldn't find any documentation for the agreement between the fire relief association and the city. So we stop the city stopped contributing to the fire department. So for two years, we couple years we sat there and renegotiated with the city, the fire relief association to the city and we finally got it to where the city agreed that they would pay $500 per firefighter that was per year. That was a good service. Then we had Joe and Dave, Joe Lawrence and Dave show up to our fire department and they had a complete different idea on how this money should be spent. They came up with ideas. We should buy this, we should buy that. And I was like, "No, that's not what this money is intended for. This money is to intend intended to support our investment and get deposited at such." Um, and as a pre as a president of the relief association at the time, I was like, "That's not going to happen. We're not going to buy equipment or anything like that for the city." So then we went into PAR. Once we went into PAR, we didn't have to have an investment that we we hired an investment company up in Cambridge that did all of our investments. Once we went to PAR, we didn't have to have that anymore. So then we had this huge board. We had a president, vice president, treasurer, secretary, and three trustees. That was considered the board. Well, once we transferred over to PAR, we only needed four four board members. Unfortunately, at that time, I was voted out as a president and or a board member. I find it kind of interesting that that happened. Actually, I was suspended for 45 days because I disagreed with Dave in one of the relief a meeting relief meetings. Shortly after that, Joe became the assistant chief. And in the old fire department, we had two cabinets upstairs that were locked that said fire relief association all over the top of them. Well, Joe decided to cut the locks and go into these cabinets and all that stuff that's in those cabinets were gone. I have no idea from I've I've talked to some people, they still can't find the documents. So, is the the last 30, 40 years of the relief association, is that gone? I don't know. That concerns me that it does. So then what happened is sorry then at that time the captain you know we would the relief association would fund events like uh French toast breakfast we would buy all this the supplies up front we'd put a boot out boot out there and people would donate money well one of the captains started requesting the money for these relief events and And instead of the profits coming back to the relief association, they were getting deposited straight into the general fund on the city. And I questioned, I was like, why why is the relief association funding an event and the money is getting deposited into the city? Again, they they weren't really receptive to me questioning those. Um, on May 8th, we got the relief association got a letter from Kate asking requesting money, $10,000 for for donations for furniture and and such for the building. At the same time, we had a captain that was emailing the board members and getting them all riled up, saying they're no longer recognized by the state because they didn't do their filings. they're not a nonprofit anymore and got them all worked up and in fact apparently she found out that I was no longer or I was still registered through the IRS and the state as the president. So she created some financial and legal documents with my name on it instead of coming to me and saying, "Hey, can we get you to sign them?" She told the board members that she's a notary and that she can have this signed and and be done with it. I sent Kate an email saying, "Hey, this person is filing and making documents without my knowledge. What can we do about this? And what's the city going to do?" And she stated that it's a third party entity. She has nothing to do with it. However, she sent these documents through the city email address. They used she used a city email to send documents out. Um, let's see. She als Kate also told me at that time since I was still listed as the president that they weren't going to take any donations, accept any donations from the relief association until they get all their ducks in a row. And I'm like, great, perfect. So the treasurer at that time who actually was just one of the four board members and actually we only had three including the treasurer. She contacted village bank who the captain was getting her information from and she also contacted parah to find out what should be done. You know we got to do something with this money because we sat on for forever. The treasurer contacted two uh Paris indicated they should contact an attorney. So she did or the treasurer contacted the attorney, two attorneys actually, one of which dealt with bethals. They're prior, they're very knowledgeable in nonprofits and how to close those accounts. and his recommendation was to um refile with the state to get in good standing as a nonprofit and then contact uh a CPA to do the taxes because the taxes have not been done for years. And on January 8th, they had a meeting and one of the firefighters suggested that this captain who created these documents said, "No, this is a done deal. This money is going to the city and that's it." Um, the treasurer resigned shortly after that. She's like, "I don't want to have anything to do with this because my name is not going to be on any of these documents." And so you guys are accepting a donation from an an unregistered nonprofit organization that hasn't filed taxes in several years. Um it just it's disappointing that this certain individual was going to these board members and getting them all riled up over misinformation. She was telling them that they're going to get audited, they're going to get sued, they're going to get all this ever stuff. And in fact, if you call up PAR, which I would ask, you know, one of you guys to do, call up PAR and ask them what should be done. Can this money be transferred over into their investment? Yes, it can because that's what it was intended for. That's what the entire thing, the whole relief association was, was a fundraising mechanism to get money so we could invest it for retirement. And I guess I want to close with I don't benefit from any of this from sitting up here and talking to you guys today. I don't I don't profit from it because my money's is done after my separation date. The only thing I'm looking forward to or forward is for the future firefighters that decide to retire. I mean this if he was fiduciarially responsible he could get in there and talk with Pah and be like raise up the rates of what the what it should be. I think we're at $4,100. They're very vested to the point where they could probably raise it up even more. And that's that's really all I have to say. Thanks John. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next member, just please state your name and the address. Good evening. My name is Amy Benning. Uh 22983 KYA Street Northwest. Um I don't know if this is the appropriate time or place. I hope it is. Um I want to talk about my concerns with Bridge Street. Um I brought my son with me. He's 13. Started on the St. Francis golf team. walks from the middle school to the ponds. Um I'm concerned about his safety. Bridge Street is going to continue to get more populated, especially with um you know potential plans of the city having apartment complexes come in to play. Um but crossing the street from this basically on the north side of Bridge Street where the schools are. once he has to cross that street over to the pond's uh driving range. Uh the speed limit is going up to 55 miles an hour just past the ponds, but people are already um gunning for that 55 mph speed limit. Um we've been just lucky thus far and it's not just my son obviously that's impacted by this, but anybody who wants to walk around in our community. So, I'm just wondering if I can bring that up as something that um should be discussed, planned. Um I also brought an application for the planning committee. So, I'm looking forward to potentially getting on that committee because these are concerns of mine and um I'm I'm proud that I can get up here and speak about it instead of just being part of the problem. I want to be part of the solution. So, thank you. Thank you for sharing and thanks for your interest in stepping forward. Just real just real quick, just in general, are you just asking for like a reduced speed? Is that is that it or um Sorry. Yeah, correct. Yeah, it it's not just the speed limit. I mean, we all know people like to go faster than they should. I mean, technically, I think those roundabouts are about 15 miles an hour. Um I don't think many people do that around there. Um so it's just the whole entire path. Um I know it would be expensive to have more of like a sidewalk, a dedication from say crossing the river all the way up because I mean there really isn't a whole lot of foot traffic probably from say past the high school up towards the pond. So, um, he there is an underground passage, but he said that it's just for, uh, golf carts. So, I'm not really sure if that's the case. Um, don't want them to get hit by a golf cart, too. That could cause some serious injuries andor deaths. So, I guess as just a concerned motherly figure, um, I'm open to just opening up a discussion with community to see how we can make those improvements. as well as 47 is a major concern which I see is on the agenda for tonight as well. Um it bothers me every day that I go into work. Um that 45 mph speed limit starts um before the school is even passed and it's both schools, the church and our elementary school. So I scratched my head thinking who was part of that decision, you know. Um so definitely slowing that that area too. And there's bigger problems as well with that um intersection between um the liquor store and Quick Trip has been quite dangerous. Last year we had a very terrible accident. Um some fatalities as well. Um quite a few in that corridor which is concerning also. Um, and we are growing. So, it's good to look out for the safety of our community members, our students that are passing, you know, crossing those dangerous roads in the afternoon and in the morning when people are so distracted on their phones and, you know, which they're not supposed to be, but um just so many distracted drivers. Um and we can't, you know, obviously we our police force does their best um to stay on top of that, but they're not always in the right spot at the right time when we need them. Um but yeah, that's that's about it. Thanks again. Thanks again. Um just to respond to that quick, too. That's a county road, so you're going to want to email your county representative, too. Absolutely. And that would be Julie Brassad on that side of the river. Cool. So, just a heads up on that. Awesome. No, I appreciate that. Thank you. Anybody else? Okay, meeting open public is closed at this time down to old business, the Highway 47 design discussion. Uh, I just kick this off and I'll kick it to Kate here in one second, but I I I kind of initiated this a little bit because I know previous council had made a decision to go with two roundabouts and two stop lights on Highway 47, but I just wanted to revisit it one time before we proceed any further. I mean, we continue to proceed with it, but do we really want two roundabouts and two stopways? And and it's based what what I'm hearing. I I I'll just say this right up front. I was very skeptical of roundabouts when they came into St. Francis. I would probably say I was on the no side. I've come to accept them and actually kind of like them. I don't say I'm gonna I'm not going to go so far as to say I love them, but I I like them. And you got to slow down then. You got to slow down. Yeah. But uh the reason the reason I I bring it forward and like I said, I'll let Kate go on a little bit more about it, but quickly is there there'll be it'll cost the city of St. Francis more money to go to the two stop lightss rather than four roundabouts. Are we really willing to accept spending more money ongoing maintenance of the stop lights that falls in the city, not in the county, excuse me, not the county, the state. whereas for roundabouts and I was looking through the old information from back when council passed it and mind without any hesitation points out like 24 reasons why roundabouts are better and for for safety and I always hesitate when I talk use the word expert however you got to give give MDOT some value they've been doing this a long time they and and they better know what they're talking about to some degree and so do we really as city want to take on added expense because we know better and my other thought is stop lights do seem safer a little bit when you think about oh all traffic's got to stop but are they because I know what most drivers do well and that crosswalk was there when those two girls got hit too so I mean the lights were supposedly I don't know if they hit the button or not but but most most of the time crosswalk was there but not the lights I know what most people do when they see a yellow light yeah they're actually accelerating They're trying they're trying to beat the light. Instead of slowing down, they're actually going faster. So, I I'm I'm not going to be the spoke in the wheel that stops this process. The council really wants to stick with the with the uh two roundabouts and two stop lightss, but I want to encourage us to think about maybe going back to the four roundabouts. And I don't know, I'm going to throw it to Kate for a second if there more you want to add. I don't Yep. So, mayor and council, just to remind, so we have kicked off the steps for the environmental and design. So that's why it's on the meeting tonight is I need to know right away if we're going to make a change, we would be have we would be able to request an amendment to our $7 million regional solicitation grant. They don't anticipate it would impact the grant and where they would see an anti, you know, some type of an impact as if our project went from 50,000 to 17 or some dramatic shift. Um, however, that is in the hands of Matt Council when we when we request an amendment. Um, I put the two designs in there. So, the one that had the four roundabouts and the one that has the two and two and then the PowerPoint that Mandot had provided with these designs. Really, I'm happy to answer any questions, but it is time is is moving. So we need to know we need to we need to make this commitment um going forward if if you have a preference and change otherwise we will begin um with the final designs for the two lights and two roundabouts. So with that I'm happy to answer any questions regarding the project start um do you and I don't recall exactly who won. I'm assuming it was the one that with the two stop lights, but when we had the uh community engagement, what the favorite pick was? Was it the two lights? I'm thinking it was just because pretty sure it was. So, mayor council, we So, we've done we did a lot of community engagement with our first engineering team. We did two open houses. We did an online survey um and a stakeholder survey. That was in 2019 right after those girls um had their accident on on Person there. Uh there were a lot of calls for both the bridge and the stop lightss and a tunnel and and a tunnel. Yep. We we really explored all um with these designs. So the the original four roundabout design that had been selected back in 2020 um later 2019. That is the first engineering team. Then we went back with the second engineering team and they went further into the crash studies. They did the second design uh with the alternatives. We did the stakeholder meetings at that point where we got the groups together based on each intersection. Um there were some individuals who were supportive of roundabouts or some individuals who were supportive of lights and that was reflective of the businesses that are existing still today except for say Dollar General wasn't there yet or Autozone. Um so there wasn't a lot of of change. Um you know residents pick what they know what they're used to. So resident wise they wanted the bridge and the tunnel but there's an understanding of the roundabouts now too. So well the tunnel just for the public too the the tunnel the water table's too high to even consider that. Um obviously the cost and the amount of space you would need for a bridge to go over it um is immense. and then whether or not people are going to take the time to take that long walk up to the bridge or are they going to cut across. And my point at the time when we were originally talking about that was as a kid I wouldn't bother. I would run across the street. Not saying I was the brightest kid, but that's probably what I would do, right? Um roundabouts are favored a lot by the state. They say that the collisions that do happen are less um lethal uh given that you're the angles and whatnot that you're coming, the speeds that are reduced. Um, I was never really a fan of the lights, but I don't like the roundabouts either, and I don't like any design that I've seen, and I don't know what the answer is. Um, but I think the maintenance, I mean, is a big deal, and I would assume just like the county ones that we would be asked to maintain the the grass in the middle or whatever is there. So, that's all I have. Um, so the I just want to be clear, the two roundabouts would be at Ambassador and at 227th and the lights would be in the middle. Correct. Correct. Just the long and the short of it. The C, you said there's a cost savings if you go with four roundabouts to us. How much is the savings? A million dollars per light plus maintenance. I'd be up for the roundabouts. I've never been a fan of roundabouts and I think but I we're all used to them now and my only concern about roundabouts is pedestrians. Um they do make it a little bit more complicated, but there's two roundabouts in front of the high school and there's a lot of walkers that think they can just walk over and I think we've been okay there so far. So I would I would lean towards the four roundabouts instead of the two and two. Quick question on that too. Uh, sorry, Mark. Um, are we reducing the size of 47 as well during this? Correct. Mayor and council, we would also be doing a road diet. So, it would go from four lanes to two. And that's with either option. Correct. Correct. Correct. Just so people understand. Yep. [Music] Sarah, um the people that I had heard from and I talked to quite a few people, they were they were the two stoplight, two roundabout crew. Um funding is always an issue. Um clearly we're going to have maintenance and it's a cost. Um, but I don't know. I we we went through great lengths to come up with this with this design that we finally agreed on. And throwing it to the side seems like it was a huge waste of time, a huge waste of money, a huge waste of staff, and all these outside sources that we brought in. We brought him in because Mindot and the city could not come to agreement and they came up with a plan we both agreed with. So that's where I'm at. Can I ask one more question? Sure. So how does the um four roundabouts or two and two go along with the talks that we've started again with continuing bridge streets to 47? Does that have any bearing on on this? No. So, mayor and council, that is not considered in any of this. Um, if there was a time where we were to connect to the highway system, we would have to meet their intersection controls at that end. So, that would be part of the extension design, not a part of this. As Person, it would have to meet Person. So, we would be building that leg. So, either way, it would work. It's not It's not like the roundabout's going to be or the light's going to be off or correct. Either way, it would work. We just have to You'd have to make it work. Yeah, correct. You have to make it work. Kevin, um I too like Sarah, I remember where it all started. We had the the aerial maps and whatnot in the public and uh it was a public sentiment and we reentered many times that it was going to cost more a million dollars a light. Um I know somebody in people in the past administration as well was concerned brought up the fact that commerce would change. People would go another route. they would avoid 47 in its entirety. So, long story short, I would vote for the two lights because the people want it. And then with the narrowing of the highway and whatnot, that's supposed to also enhance the slow down portion for the drivers as well. So, I'm I'm still with two lights and two roundies. If we put four roundies in there, I think it'll be like a go-kart track. um you still have kids trying to cross on on a roundabout which is a treacherous situation as you can still attest to down by Super America or Speedway and whatnot. So I know it's more money but I think the people put us here to to answer their call and the call that they asked for that I remember was two and two. I ask you a quick question Kevin. Mhm. So, the the reason I think and I I don't disagree with anything you said other than the fact that I think my my main concern is kind of what happened to the girls in the first place is if somebody's driving down 47 in theory, again, this is theory because they go right over the middle of the roundabout if they aren't paying attention. Um, but seeing that and knowing that it's coming, I would think they'd be more likely to pay more attention to the road um than if there's a light there and they're just used to going that way. I can see more people looking at their phone and just going through the light, not paying attention rather than slowing down for the roundabout, knowing that the roundabout's coming. And that's kind of where I lean towards the safety with the roundabouts. And I agree with you as far as the people decided on the the two stop lightss. Um, again, I don't like any of the designs. I don't for the same reason with pedestrians on the roundabouts. That worries me, too. But that's I just kind of wanted to throw that out there too as far as if if the drivers might pay more attention if they see that the roundabouts are coming. There's signs I'm assuming that are going to say you know type of thing. Um rather than being more complacent with a stoplight assuming that oh it's always green you know the habits that we get into as people um man they closer we get to home they say more accidents happen too probably because we're more comfortable and less you know less aware. So that's that's kind of where I lean towards the roundabouts at this time. Sure. Again, taking in consideration the commercial aspect of it. This is kind of a unique stretch. Um it I think it will um hurt the commercial side of things. People are going to pick a different route entirely and go home. They'll buy their uh groceries and their other sundaries and whatnot elsewhere when they take a different route to go home. So I I agree to disagree with you. Okay. But I understand. I don't want to spend the extra money either. 2 million plus plus the maintenance on top of it. But the grant helps too and then not not we don't have to worry about affecting the grant at all if you stick with it either which is I know I know it's savings and you know the pocketbook stay pocketbook stays safe but even at the the pedestrian portion at Peterson has not been a problem thank god but again the quick drip thing is a big problem. The statistic on that is through the roof as the chief can tell you and we see the Nexoles go out all the time. Accident reenactment blah blah blah. It's uh but that that's my thought anyway. Not my thought. That's what I think the people wanted originally. And again, this is on and on and we we really do ask the public's forgiveness. We do bring this up about every third meeting I think that we have in some form or another. We haven't forgot about it. Like Keith said, it's been uh pushing eight years since this happened originally and brought this to the forefront. So, it's not like we laid down. We had co we had uh legislation changes. We had money issues um from the state helping us out. But again, with the diligence on us, commissioners on us, anything that could delay it. That's all I had. Thanks, Paul. I just got one real quick question for you. Do when maybe Kate would know this, too. I'm not sure who would know it. When did the roundabouts go in on Bridge Street here? roughly what year was that? Anybody? Mayor Council, I believe it was. Yeah. 14. 2014. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. So, I mean, like I said, I'm not it's not like I'm super I'm not going to be upset no matter which way this one goes. I just see the cost savings and I I know how I change. I can name a couple other people by name. I won't name them by name who have changed their mind about roundabouts as they as they've gotten to experience them. And so I just kind of feel that some of when when previous council made it, I was probably going to be I'd probably one of you be one of the people would say lights at that time. But now that I've gotten to know the roundabouts better and I know at least two people I can name by name who said, you know what, they're okay. And and so I don't know that they were really fully immersed in roundabouts at the time when this decision was made. So, I'm I'm obviously for the four roundabouts, but I'm not, like I said, I'm not going to be upset if the vote goes the other way. So, well, it sounds like it's going to be your vote. So, what what do we need to do today? Do we have a consensus? We have to we have to have a consens consensus today, Mayor Council. Correct. I need I need an understanding of what to go back and tell the state start the amendment process and our engineers are already starting to plan the drawings. So is this just a consensus vote then here or what to just stay the same or staff direction? Yeah, it' be motion and second direct staff one way or the other. Okay. Any anybody else in other discussion? Okay. Do I have a motion to do something to I how do I want to phrase this motion to highway 47 design discussion to change the design that we're going to present to four roundabouts. Do I have a motion on that? I'll make that motion. Motion by Councilman Thonis. Do I have a second? I'll second. Second by Counciloman Neil Bowerer. All those in favor signify by saying I. I we'll pull the same sign. No. No. Three to two. Motion passes. Two. I don't want to hear anything about budget for a while. No. No. No. On to accepting bids and awarding contract. Oh, excuse me. I'm jumping ahead. On to new business, uh the sale of the city-owned property. Kate, yeah, mayor and council, before you tonight is the process for the city to sale real, uh property. There is the requirements to declare it surplus in your resolution. There is this process is done by ordinance. We received two purchase agreements. It was selected the highest offer. Um with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. start. I don't know if I want to ask any questions to be honest with you. Um, this whole ending process frustrated me. Uh, so I spoke with the lower bidder. Um, he called me, I don't know, two hours before the meeting or less than two hours before the meeting and mentioned some things about they were willing to rent out the community space and said it was part of the original bid. Um, all that stuff. Do we do we know if that's because I asked him I said so did this come in after you got out bid or like what's going on there part of the original bid which doesn't really make sense why you would bid an extra I don't know none of it all this stuff is like it doesn't make sense to me a lot of it it's frustrating um so can we do we know if that was the case was that part of the original bid that we're going to offer 600 and then throw in an extra $10,100 for whatever reason. I mean, I didn't see anything like that. So, mayor and council, for the city to lease space is a very complicated legal issue. Okay. That would be something we could consider, but it is not a guarantee as we would want. I mean, with insurance and everything else, do you suppose the the purchaser could use that space as rental space, but to to lease it to the city to be rental space would be extremely complicated. Okay. And I don't even know if that's was the intent, but do we know if that was part of the original bid or not? Mayor Council, we did not review that second um purchase agreement in full one. it needs to go to a commercial purchase agreement, but we had selected at our meeting uh the Monday prior to go with the highest bid. Okay. And then um I guess this is more of a Dave question. Do in this situation you kind of have a blind bid so to speak um to people put in their bids. You get their best biggest and best bid um and then one of those entities decides to change their bid at any given point. How does that typically work as far as this process? Um, it follows the process that the city lays out. Um, and these are purchase agreements. It's the sale of property. So, council's got discretion on who you want to go with. Okay. I'm just confused on because I I think like we have to go with the lowest responsible bidder when it comes to this is this is not a a a bid situation. And this is your the city is deciding to potentially sell property and the council is the policym body that decides who to sell that property to. Okay, that's all I have. I'm just going to jump in real quick just for one second just so everybody knows. So I I was I was one of the four when we reviewed the bids, but this is my own fault. I freely admit this. You know, it's it was presented as what's the word? best and highest highest highest and best. So I made certain assumptions at that at that time that well it wasn't said that we have to take the highest but that's that's how I took it even though that's wrong and I now understand the highest and best means from the purchasers not not what we have to accept. So I I spoke with Dave about that today. So, I just want to I'll continue on. I just want to make that clear. So, Amy, I don't have any questions, Sarah. I don't have any questions, Kevin. I don't have any questions. Um, I'm just going to let you know kind of where I am on this and then we'll vote while somebody questions. Initially, I was for the highest and the only Oh, and I I got to make two clarifications because I did receive a phone call on this, too, just so everybody knows because I know it's been kicked around in different emails today or whatever else. Both buyers are somewhat local. So, I guess is what I want to say. The uh one happens to be in St. Francis, one has happened to be in Bethle. So, it's not like we're talking about some completely outside entity. The only reason I'm going to lean towards the lower one is simply because it's more of a known entity to me than the unknown. So, that's that's the only reason I'm going that way. One one I know one there's a lot of questions that I don't know. So got to use our discretion and and vote how however we feel on it. So any any other discussion hearing? None. Well, uh do I have a motion or is this correct me again on this one? We got to we had a question. Sorry. Yep. Go ahead, Jill. Sorry. Um I was trying to process it. So the bids again, uh the bids have changed, so to speak. So if you're going with the lower bid, are you going with the lower bid? Like he wanted he wanted an option to match it is what he told me. I'm unaware of that. So there's like I don't I don't understand like it's all muddy at this point. Mayor and Castle. So, just to put this in perspective, if you are not going with what staff has recommended in these documents, we need to step completely out because legal needs to review the purchase agreement. Okay? It has not been reviewed by legal. We are already aware of concerns that need to be like processed through that process. So this either needs to move forward as is or it needs to be pulled off and we start completely over with uh the legal aspects updating documents and then we'd come back with the resolution and ordinance for that other author. Yep. So should we have a discussion about consensus before we move forward then or do we just make a motion to see if it fails or what? May I say something? I don't think the bid should be changed at all. What they bid is what they bid. The decision should be made is do we sell it to which entity? I think it's disrespectful to somebody wants up the we're not playing poker here. You're selling a building. I agree. It was it was highest and best. So I agree what left calendar said. I agree. But I think we just vote on it. I mean it doesn't change anything. We just vote on it and if it fails then we go go to Dave. Well, whatever the motions made is fine. I'm just curious. I was trying make make the motions see if they pass or fail. Yep. depending upon that direct staff accordingly. So, do I have a motion to approve? Is this a motion roll call vote here? So, there's going to be two votes. First one is a resolution that is voice vote. Second one is ordinance. That is roll call. Gotcha. Do I have a motion to approve resolution 2025-9? I'll make that motion, Mr. So moved by Councilman Newire. Do I have a second? I'll second that one. Vogle. Uh, all those in favor signify by saying I I oppose the same sign. I So it passes four or four to one. That just made it surplus property. Correct. That is correct. So now we got to do the sale to RNR Capital. Correct. Do I have So I This is not a motion. It's just a roll call vote straight on it. Be motion and second and then roll. Okay. Do I have a motion for ordinance 346 authorizing the sale of city surplus property to RNR Capital Investments? I'll make that motion, Mr. Mayor. So moved by Councilman Muower. Second. I'll second it. Second by Councilman Fis. All those in favor of uh excuse me. Roll call vote. Mayor Vogel, no. Council member Vaness, no. Neil Bower, Ive I Robinson, no. So the ordinance fails. So now we've got a direct city as to how to proceed. We need a motion to um Yes, you would do a motion and second to direct staff and whatever you want us to do to go back uh either to reopen process or to negotiate with the other entity. I don't know how how do people want to proceed with this? I'm open to whatever. How we how do we direct staff at this point? Well, it's an ordinance. You're going to need four to one either way, right at the end of the day. Um, I guess I would make a motion to direct staff to uh explore the other entity or fill out paperwork. I don't know what the hell you want agreement. Bridges agreement. I think two questions here. Um, does the council want us want staff to go back and reopen the process or does the council want to direct staff to ne negotiate with the other entity? I would make a motion to negotiate with the other entity. And please name the other entity for the record. Uh, Rum River Consultants. I have a second. I'll second it. Second. Discussion. All those in favor signify by saying I. I I I sorry poll the same sign. No. No. Three to two. So now we're on to accepting bids and awarding contract for 2025 street reconstruction project resolution 2025-20. This is Craig. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the council, bids were opened on April 8th for this project. A total of eight bids were received. The low bidder was North Valley Incorporated at 1,23,53852. The engineer's estimate for this project was 1,343,34. This project includes the reconstruction of Woodbine Street and 229th Lane, including the street and the water man, the re the construction of a new city-owned parking lot off of Woodbine and the street surface improvements and some water man improvements on 237th Avenue and 229th Avenue. As part of a project addendum, staff received pricing for improvements needed in the liquor store parking lot. The improvements include replacing 37 feet of broken concrete curb and gutter and constructing a new concrete curb and gutter and storm sewer system along the north parking boundary of the parking lot. Now that the uh parcel north of there is completed, this project will be financed with municipal state aid funds and local funds. These funds are available and appropriate for this project. Uh with that, I would be glad to answer any questions you might have. Another end here. Kevin, I have no questions. Mayor Sarah, I don't have any questions either. Amy, me neither. You have nothing. I have no questions either. So, do I have a motion to approve resolution 2025-20? I'll make the motion. Slow moved by Councilman. Do I have a second? I'll second it. Second by Councilman Fis. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Pull the same sign. Resolution passes. On to Patriot Parkway. Final plat submission. Submittal extension resolution 2025-21. [Music] May council, tonight we have a final extension request for Petri Parkway. Um the city in conjunction with First Baptist Church planted the site so that it was shovel ready for development. The site has not been sold yet. Therefore, an extension is needed. Staff recommends approval of the extension. The action to be considered is to approve the one-year extension of Patriot Parkway at submitt. Jessica. Uh, start with Sarah. I don't have any questions. Amy, I don't have any questions. Joe, Kevin, no questions. Mayor, I have no questions either. So, do I have a motion to approve resolution 2025-21 extending the final plant submittal deadline for the Patriot Parkway development? I'll make that motion. Mr. Mayor, motion by Councilman Mueller. Do I have a second? I'll second. Second by Councilman Odig. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. I. Pull the same sign. Resolution passes. Uh, meeting open to the public. Anybody wish to speak at this time? Seeing none, on to the reports. Police department report. Mayor Council, before you is the first quarter report from the police department. Uh, and after navigating through an interesting year last year with a bunch of personnel changes, uh, including hiring officer, a records clerk, uh, promoting investigator and administrative assistant, uh, it was kind of nice to get back to a little bit of normal this year, um, and had full staff and and be ready to go. Uh, the first few months, uh, we're always busy in planning, uh, community engagement events. Uh we uh department staff and community members began the year planning for all of our community engagement events uh the department will host or participate in throughout the year. Uh the events uh have become so important and vital uh to us maintaining our positive working relationship with the public. Uh and we look forward to a full schedule of events coming uh throughout the year. Uh officers were busy during the quarter generating 1,944 incident offenses uh which is an increase over the first quarter of last year. This included 25 group A offenses including assaults, burglary, narcotics, fraud, theft and damage to property reports. Also 25 group B offenses which includes DWIs, disorderly conduct, trespassing offenses, etc. And those are the basic again crimes that need to be reported to the FBI for their annual uniform crime report. All the other call types are categorized under what's called all all other offenses. Uh this typically falls under the group B offenses and include uh incidents such as medicals, vehicle accidents, animal complaints, noise complaints, welfare checks. A lot of our more numerous types, more regular types of calls fall under that. All other offenses and there were 1,226 of those calls during the quarter. Uh officers performed 668 traffic stops throughout the quarter, issued 92 citations, and 47 cases were referred over to investigations. Officers and staff completed 263 hours of training uh during the quarter, which included EVOC or emergency vehicle operators course, crimes motivated by bias, evidence collections and forensics, mobile field force, and contraband training to name a few of them. So, police department staff, uh, they're doing a outstanding job. Again, it's nice to be back at full staff and and working on all cylinders over there. Uh, they're staying very busy. Um, and at the same time, we're still working toward the implementation of moving to our Axon camera systems here early summer. And I hope to have an update for you on that on my next quarterly report. And at the same time, we're continuing to work towards that uh K9 program implementation early. So, that is the quarter in a nutshell. And I can answer any questions you have. Chief Haley. Oh, I don't have any questions. Okay, Joel. Uh, no questions. Uh, great job. Appreciate everything that you doing. Kevin, uh, no questions. Just want to say a good report. I really enjoyed the part about more education with citations. I know other uh, communities that have their monthly sheriff's reports and their big complaint is citation, citation, speed, right? you know, the community members driving through, they're driving through work, they got kids. Again, safety first and foremost no matter what. But you guys take the time and I think it comes from the top down. As I said before, education before citation and citations are needed and they are a good enforcement. But, uh, I think our citizens appreciate that. So, common sense prevails. Sarah, I don't have any questions either. great report and it's fun to see the flyers for all the upcoming events and to start getting excited about that. They're all going to start rolling out here pretty soon and it's every year the bud gets bigger and better and it's it's really a great time for it just it speaks volume again for people to come out and meet our officers so that when they need them they have to show up at their house they have some level of level of comfort and that speaks well uh good report uh just one quick question and then one followup or whatever. Just real quick, do does the police respond to every medical call? Um, we So, we get dispatched every medical call, some some of the lower priority calls to keep our officers available, especially if we only have two on at the time. We will defer some of those to the fire department or Alina themselves. Um, but based on some of the some of the delays with Alina, we rely more on the fire department to relieve us of some of those types of calls so we can stay available because once we're committed to those types of calls, we need to stay there until we're either relieved by Alina or fire. So, thank you. And then just lastly, I'm just going to make the on the bash plug for your uh citizens academy. Citizens Academy. I I can't encourage people enough. It's not it's not that much time. So to the public, it's it's a it's a great it's a great program. Get to know your your police department and get to know how they function. So for sure applications are accepted no later than May 1st. May 1st. Okay. Do you have a lot signed up? Um I checked with investigator about a week ago and he had I I believe one. So that was about a week ago. So um I haven't checked with him since but Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chief. On to the I believe back up again. Fire report. Chief Schmidt. Mayor and council for your review is the monthly report for the month of March for the fire department. Uh on the course of the month of March, we ran 85 incidents on on the month with an average and route time of 7 minutes and 33 seconds. An average at scene time of 13 minutes and 6 seconds. That's a little bit above our goal of 10 minutes. Um, but as you'll see on a later page, we did respond to 10 mutual aids on the month, which usually elongates our response time depending on which city we're going to. Um, the chart below is our breakdown of incidences as we found them after dispatch, 50 medicals, 11 canceled, four building fires, and the list goes on. And below that is the distribution of calls by station or duty officer. Our dispatch codes are on the header of the first page. We ran uh our distribution between fire and EMS is on the right hand side. We're showing a pro projected increase in volume on the year of 11.6%. And we're averaging for the month of March 2.83 responses per day. On the last page, it show or the next page, it shows our incident count by the hour of day. Um we're really starting to see that noon to 100 p.m. become a real consistent call time for us. Um, we highlighted some of that in the upcoming newsletter article for the community as well. And our busiest day remains Friday, which isn't entirely uncommon. Our firefighter responses by day of week. You see our dip on Tuesday. Uh, not quite sure why it dipped so much on Tuesday, but that's one of the trends that we're starting to keep track of with our software as well. And our average firefighters by by hour of day. As you can see, that 5 to six o'clock time when people are coming home from work, we said seem to have an increase in firefighters showing up for calls. We had 29 fire runs on the month, 56 EMS. Our average onseen time for an event was 38 minutes 33 seconds. We did experience $6,000 in total fire loss on the month. 3,000 in content, 3,000 in property. One was the Kerry Street apartment that I sent to council notification out and the second one was a grass fire that I sent to council notification out that started ultimately started a shed on fire at that incident as well. So that's where those dollar losses come from. a little bit short on our goals for turnout time and time to arrival at 47 and 44 respectively. And as I stated earlier, we did give mutual aid 10 times on the month. You can see the breakdown which city we were responding to. Four to East Bethl, two to Andover, two to Nan, and two to Oak Grove. And we also received five mutual aids on the month, primarily for grass fires at the uh apartment fire call as well. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. Joel, uh, no questions. Again, thank the staff. Appreciate everything you guys do. Yes, sir. Kevin, no questions. Good report. I really like the new layout. Um, do I have a question? I do have one question on that glucometer that used to show up in how's that going? I know there's several individuals that require that. We still get a a fair amount of active use. So, one of the challenges that we're working on is, as you've heard me lament, our our new software isn't really good at picking up those aggregate individual interventions. So, we're building that program as part of our ecosystem to try and pick it up a little bit better, but I would say we're still averaging 12 to 14 uses of our glucometer. That's been pretty average. And of any of those parties involved, are the family members more or less involved than they were a year or two? Had some community outreach, so to speak, and some education, etc., helping out. It's really hard to say. You know, it it we will see high utilizers, if you will. One will move out and another will move in. we may not see somebody for a while and then they'll start to spike up their run volume because they may be dealing with another illness or injury that's contributing to their primary issues. So, it does wax and wayne. We do still have a couple high utilizers in the community. Um, they have evolved over the last 18 months that we're seeing different high utilizers. Um, but by and large, I would say it's been pretty stable. Okay. Yeah, that's all. Thank you. Very good. You're welcome, sir. Sure. I don't have any questions. Great report. I too like the the layout. I appreciate recup. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks for the report. Can I echo Sarah here? I kind of at first I wasn't sure when I saw this report format, but I getting getting used to it. I'm actually liking it. So, mayor, can I ask a question? You certainly can. I wonder if we can go back and address uh the new business. A Joe kind of threw me a curveball with asking about upping bids and changing PO or purchase orders and can you recap on what we uh we moved to sell? That was a consensus. Then on the resolution, we declared disposal. Correct. And then on C, who do we sell it to? We didn't sell it. We didn't sell it. We didn't sell it. So that's that's I was going to ask you to talk to you after the meeting because I was confused on Let's talk about it now. Um, so what we did was we agreed three to two to renegotiate which not really I don't know if it's really renegotiate other than drawing up the paperwork so to speak with Rent River Consultants over we denied the RNR or yeah we're looking at going with our local person now because it was originally a suggestion by council which or not by staff Okay. I don't know why we were why we had to go back and renegotiate. I I think because the well the papers are drawn up and ready to go to accept the bid, I think, as staff. So, if we would have we were going to either approve it or not. If we deny it, then there's nothing to go forward with because we didn't have it on the agenda with a purchase agreement and all the paperwork and legal stuff filled up. I didn't know the blanks were filled in accordingly. So, yeah, I'm sorry. I was a little confused there as fast as we went and between resolution and ordinance. I didn't want to make sure our vote counted for something. So yeah. All right. Thank you. I got squirreled up in there as well, Kevin. So it's good good to ask the questions. On to uh council member reports. I think we're up to Kevin. You want to start? Uh I'll be attending the Jaylick meeting this Wednesday with the chief. Um it's always informative. It's a it's a large group of the EM EMT, the emergency responders, as well as police and fire. It's uh very educational for an outsider like me. I enjoy going to it. So I also attended the attended the planning and zod meeting last week. We had a full house. It was neat to see citizens come up and rise up and talk about what was on their minds. I wish we saw more of that instead of the last minute, but again people are busy. Life gets busy, sports and kids, etc. So I understand it. Um also be attending a fire meeting as we inch inch forward to the merger with Bethl as far as taking over their fire services. I'll be attending that meeting on Wednesday as well. So other than that, it's still fun to be here. I enjoyed the hell out of it. Thanks, Kevin. Sarah, I don't really have anything to report, but I agree, Kevin. This ride is great. Amy, never a dull moment. Um, I don't uh I attended the planning and zoning meeting as well, and I wrote down a lot of notes as to what people said. I really liked that the whole the whole place was full. It was every chair was taken, and a handful of people were in the back. Um, and I I got to jot it down. 15 people spoke. Um, and like I said, I took notes. Um, and whenever this comes back up on the agenda, I can I'll I'll read all my notes of of what was said. But, um, I love that people people actually spoke. And, um, the general consensus was that they didn't want the apartment building here. Um, that was the general consensus of it. So, I don't know if you all can go back and read the minutes. Um, on YouTube. It's on YouTube. Yep. And so, that's good. So, I was I was happy that people come out cuz everybody says, "Oh, I don't know what's going on." And and then they don't come and they don't know what's going on. So, I was happy about that. That was the It's the only thing I had to report to. Excuse me, Joel. I watched the PNZ meeting on YouTube. Um, I was going to try to make it and then I didn't and I was like, "Oh crap." But then I watched it on YouTube. Um, the only thing I ask for people, I guess, when it comes to some of this stuff is I'm gonna say something pretty unpopular, but it is what it is. I guess for me, is we we have to when we're bringing up points as to why you don't want something. Um, for me, and this is speaking just for me, not for anybody else here, but come with facts and real concerns. There was definitely some set at the P&Z meeting. Some of them were fear things of what if this happens, what if that happens, what what's going to happen here. And the only problem with a lot of that stuff is it's I equate it to like the media stuff, right? Where the media is saying, you know, if this person gets elected president, the world's going to end type of thing. And it's like that's not going to happen, right? So definitely there's obviously legit concerns and I do appreciate everybody that did participate. I don't mean to diminish anybody that said anything. I think it's awesome that everybody that did step up spoke. Uh kind of like what Kevin said, I wish we had more involvement with more issues. Uh the more information we have leading up to any of these things, um the more time you can put in to to view the meetings or check in from time to time, I mean, it it helps us represent you better. Amen. Um with with having information. So, but yeah, that's all I have for now. Thanks, Joe. Uh, could be a busy week for me as well. Anybody who's available tomorrow, I think it's 4 to 6 p.m. is winning with cops over at Tasty Pizza. That's tomorrow. Uh, Wednesday with Kevin and Chief, I'll be attending the St. Francis Bethl ongoing discussion. And then on Thursday, we have an Elco County Fire Protection Council that chief and I attending. I might be I also attended the planning and zoning meeting. And I'm just echo everything you guys said. I'm just glad people showed up. It's that it it tells me I I'm so much prefer that over social media. It's not even close. So, I appreciate that. And last, we uh had a meeting on Saturday here at city hall with Kate and our uh lobbyist and Senator Andrews. And I I think it went extremely well and just getting to go Senator Andrews and sharing our concerns with the Highway 47 project. I think he very much on board and in our corner on this. The kind of sad news, it's not necessarily sad news is most cities when they attempt for this extra funding to get this project going, they fail. And it's you get kind of put on a waiting list, but it's not like the first one goes off and you move up a notch. It doesn't work that way. But they're estimating, they're guessing they're going to have roughly $1 billion in bonding. It's just a wild guess. There's 30 more days to go in the session, but there's three billion in requests out there. So, where we're going to end up on this, have no idea. But the positive takeaway for me was number one is it was a very good meeting with Senator Andrews. I appreciate him so much taking a couple hours of his time. And number two is I'm very encouraged. I got to meet one of our lobbyists, Alex. And I'm telling you, I don't think we could have hired a better lobbying firm because I know we all swallowed hard when we had to hire the lobbying firm to try and get us the funds for Highway 47, but I I definitely think we hired the right team and they really know what they're talking about. So, that's all I've got. Uh any anybody anything else hearing? None. Do I have a motion to adjurnn? I'll make a motion, Mayor. So moved by Councilman Robinson. Do I have a second? I'll second it. Second by Councilman Fonis. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Pull the same sign.