don't, as Trish mentioned, want to distort the data. No, thank you. I appreciate that. That's uh any other comments or questions? I mean, I'll just throw a comment on on that. The attrition is an expensive problem. It has a has a leveraged effect on it. One, um you employees leave for a reason. A big part of it is pay. Staying on top of that is essential. And then what I mean by leveraging is that um you have this interim period that takes place after you have staff leave that the rest of the staff is now covering that work. It always takes longer to hire than anybody ever imagines and then they have to come in at a higher level than what you replaced. Uh and then that creates a burnout situation for the existing staff having to cover during that period of time. So, um it really does behoove us to stay right on target even if we have to push that a little bit. Um and I I think it's no secret on us as council to see just how much of a contribution that we're getting from our staff. Um, I I think it's also no secret that I I like to think that I'm one of their biggest advocates because of everything I mentioned and the value ad that the citizens just don't see that they're getting out of this team and that cohesiveness is very important for us to maintain. Uh I I'm I'm roundly supportive of having this concept put out so that we can just keep the service level because you know another thing that was talked about here is that we have made budget because we've been light on people. Um and that's um good good stewards of the uh taxpayers resources but it's also come at the expense of those who are serving us. So we we should be wise about how how we approach this particular aspect because it's a big payoff. Well stated. I think also what we're doing with the proposed benchmark communities and adding the new is it five here um makes a lot of sense. I mean these are growing cities um and we're a growth city. I mean, if you looked at us 10 years ago versus today, it's night and day with how we are as a as a community. So, I think it's it's great and it gives us a great view holistically from the benchmark perspective. And the spotlight is also I mean, I think of Excelsure, we have a lot more commonality with Excelsure than we think, but their population is 2400 people, 2500 people, but it's just some of that downtown aspect like you brought up, Miss Hardy. So, yeah. Thank you. Is this the right time to ask about the comprehensive plan budget of $250,000 over three years or is that later on? Um Dana has a comment. I I can I can just add some additional context and then Trish can jump in if that's all right. Um do you have a specific question? Well, I'm just curious. Do we know what the 2040 plan cost? How much was that? So roughly $200,000 over the three years. 90,000ish. But um yeah, I'd have to look at the exact numbers, but we did compare we did compare it with an inflationary factor. Well, that was my I guess I don't not necessarily concern, but I was expecting it to be a lot less just based on the number of people that lived here then and inflation and everything else. Um do we think that's an accurate number or do we think it's high? Do we think it's low? Or do you think we're going to come in with that? So I I can kind of So this is I kind of anticipated where you were going, council member Patterson, acting mayor, members of the council. Um there will be an opportunity and of course with preliminary budget, we want to provide you the information based on what we've done in the past um on what it would take to do for this particular thing to kind of follow the same process we did last year or the last round. um and where you're where you would have cost savings opportunities so to reduce that number would be within your community engagement. So um but there's a trade-off, right? Your comp plan should be based on community engagement, property owner engagement. Um and and so we can take some of that on internally, but that means that there are other things that won't happen because we've got a small team. um it if we pull them too much from the uh their day-to-day stuff, we would only be focusing on that statutory stuff. So, the 60-day, 100, 20-day clocks as our primary focus because I think it's important to make sure that our comp plan reflects what the community wants. The best way to do that is through engagement and propert community engagement, but also property engagement. That's where most of that cost is coming from. Also, there are so many technical requirements that are part of the comprehensive plan that there to be able to unpack that and address all the technical te technical requirements of the plan. Generally, cities hire experts um so expert consultants to help us draft and make sure we're drafting our comp plan in a way that meets the met council's requirements. Um so that's another key piece of that. Um and so could we take some of that work on? Yes. Um but that would certainly impact our ability to um that would slow other things down. So there's certainly a cost savings opportunity there. Um but it would come at the expense of something else. There's trade-offs is all that we're we're trying to share. Service levels will drop if we if we take too much on. Now this also assumes that a consultant would be um driving most of that process for us. Um we only had one staff at the time. um we've got three on our team now, but there's also a lot more growth and things happening. So, we do anticipate that we will be involved and engaged. Um just not necessarily taking the lead at the numbers that you're looking at today. as we get into max tax, as we get into um the system statements will actually be released in September when we better understand those technical requirements. We can refine and we'll likely refine that down. Um but this would be what we would recommend for maximum tax until we have greater information. Just when I was going through the packet, I see, you know, tens of thousands of dollars for certain things and then it's 250,000 for this. I'm like, seems like a lot, but and that is over Council Member Patterson, acting mayor. Um, that is over a three-year period. Um, and we would certainly be refining that each year. So, and if you were to put it in one levy and you didn't spend it all as a project, you could assign that fund balance next year and reduce it for the following year as well. Um, so just a couple of things to note. Can I ask follow um I'm remembering last year that we pushed off the parks uh planning and I think we said we were going to do it while we did like combining one. So that is taking into account also that yes adding the parks portion to the comp plan. Yes, good point. Yeah, great point. Thanks. Rookie questions. So thanks. So comparing our 2025 tax levy to the new benchmark communities, you can see here that Victoria is hovering in the lower end of the pack at just under the 9 million mark for this year with our market cities levies ranging between about 5 million to 26 million. So um as you can see by this chart, there are several cities that are between that 9 to 13 million. um range which does include Victoria. So preliminary uh property tax projection um numbers come from Carver County in June. So these numbers can and will change before we get to the max level budget. And we have not received any fiscal disparity numbers for 26 yet either. Um, so right now in our projections, we're um anticipating that just to stay the same as last year. And um for the public's benefit, fiscal disparities has mandatory participation and it's set by state statute. It's a revenue sharing program that applies to cities in the Twin Cities metro area and on the Iron Range. and it's meant to support a regional approach to development, equalizing the distribution of fiscal resources and reducing competition for commercial and industrial development. So that's just kind of a side note, but um getting back to this um slide, the medium home value um has increased by 5% for 26. Our construction value has also increased and we're budgeting that we will have 144 new home permits in 2026. This number takes a 5-year average into consideration, but we also look at trends and the number of new plots. In 2024, we came in over budget for our new homes at 205 and we have 144 budgeted for 2025. And currently through the end of May, we had 65 new permits issued, which puts us at slightly above budget for year today. An increase or decrease to individuals property tax bill will largely depend on the individual change in their properties value. As stated in the last slide, the median home value in Victoria will increase 5% or $27,400. Our focus is on the budget and the city levy because that is what the city can control. County assessor assigns values to homes and the state legislature sets the property tax rates. As Victoria is a growing city with new home and commercial construction, an important question is how much of the increase the levy is offset by new tax base. We can estimate about how much new construction will provide in property tax next year. So with the 118 million of new construction valuation will come online that will come online in 25 that will provide approximately $383,000 in new taxes in 2026. This leaves about $452,000 of the total tax levy increase to be spread among the other property owners that existed last year. So, the total tax levy increase is currently at $835,000. Victoria's tax base is largely residential and there currently doesn't exist a significant commercial and industrial base. But as this chart can show um you'll see that residential values for existing and new construction continues to increase at 9.2% combined. Commercial and industrial values increased about 11 and a half% and the addition of the apartment building permits issued last year shows new construction increase of 55 and a half% with the current apartment's value increasing just 2.2%. Any questions about the budget process that we talked a little bit about the benchmark cities um but other questions about property valuations before we move on to the preliminary budget numbers I think we can press on. Yep. So this chart shows the revenues projected for 2026 compared to 2025. Taxes and franchise fees are the largest source of revenue for the city and make up more than 85% of the total revenue of $9.3 million. The reason our revenue for taxes and franchise fees is lower than 25, but our levy is still increasing is because of the debt service levy for the fire station which um came online for 26 at about $1.4 million. Uh as you can see, licenses and permits include businesses and non-b businessiness licenses, including liquor licenses, building permits. Um, again, we're budgeting for 144 new home permits in 26, which is the same number as 25, but the average building permit cost has increased over 25. So, it does um increase the revenue slightly. um intergovernmental revenues. Those include police aid, state and county grants. Uh charges for services include our um cell company and tenor rentals, planning and development fees and plan check fees for building permits. And then the other revenues uh make up uh fines um and investment earnings by 3%. Uh most of the decrease is due to the decrease in the transfers line, specifically the long-term street maintenance fund, which we'll look at on the next slide. Um but as you may recall, we did a large year-end transfer um for 2024 of approximately a million dollars um which allowed us to reduce this year's transfer and levy. Uh, parks and recreation is increasing because of a onetime spend of $50,000 to repair the Holy Family High School tennis courts, $50,000 in trail repairs, and $75,000 for an addition added um full-time employee for parks programming. Um, public works is increasing to add a full-time employee to their streets department, which would be about $75,000. Public safety is increasing primarily due to inflation and contractual services costs. General government um is increasing due to wage and benefits increases along with community survey and the 2050 comp plan study that was discussed. I'm going to give you much more detail on these increases and those budget pressures um in an upcoming slide. the plan transfers. Um, as mentioned previously, the transfer for the long-term street maintenance fund was able to be reduced due to that prior year-end transfer. The capital's facility is being reduced because of the design of the new fire station being completed and that was being funded out of that um capital facilities fund. and then the other um funds are remaining fairly flat. When we consider the changes in both the revenues and expenditures, we come up with a levy change. So the levy is the city's operating budget. that it reflects how much we need to operate the city providing services um such as police, fire, street maintenance, snow plowing, parks, and also includes paying off debt. An increase in the levy of 9.3% doesn't mean that people's taxes change 9.3%. But only calculates the difference in the amount that we needed for 2025 comparing to 2026. What does a 9.3% increase in the city's levy mean for your property tax bill? This chart shows a comparison from what the 2025 taxes to 2026 tax rate um which is determined by the total taxable market value of the city. So the value is taken by 1% and then that amount is multiplied by the tax rate. Um I rounded to the nearest dollar um on this chart, but you can kind of see um what your taxes would be um given the val approximate value of of a home from 300,000 up to $1.5 million. Can you go back to that slide just quickly? Sure. Um, so for the median value, expect an annual increase of between $100$140 a year roughly. For the median value, it the median value comes in at about $1,800, which I'll show in the next slide where I divided it by to get a monthly um amount for that med. Perfect. Thank you. Yeah. So that medium value of home of 1831 um here's how it would spread out. So it comes to $158 a month. So roughly $1,800. Um so this kind of gives you an idea of what um that breakdown is by um those types of services that the city provides. So thinking about um some of the other bills that you might have as a homeowner, cell phone, internet, cable, highlight TV, electric bill um is $14.75 a month a good value to have for streets um to be in good repair and cloud um trails um that connect you to other places is uh 51.25 a month which includes the debt service for the new fire station. a good value to ensure our community is safe and someone responds when you call 911. This is just a different way of thinking about property taxes and um what services and value you get from from paying those property taxes. As you can see here, we're looking at a fairly steady levy over the next couple of years. And this is due to changes that the council made during the budget season last year. So let's take a quick look back at what we did last year to level out the projected levy. So this slide was from last year's pres preliminary um budget presentation and um we had projected approximately a 25% levy increase through 26. So, um, to avoid that large peak, the council made the decision to transfer an additional $400,000 into the long-term street maintenance fund to reduce the transfer in 26. Um, which is noted on our next slide, showing that the levy then moved um from 7.49% in 25 to 12.47. So we raised that levy for 25 um so that in 26 the levy would go from 24.68 to about 15%. Now, this has provided to be a good decision um from the council. Then then after having that 2024 year end transfer, in addition to making that decision, um we've been able to get it down to the 9.3 where we're at um in this today's budget discussion. So the budget 2026 budget pressures as I mentioned um previously um I wanted to go through these in a little bit more detail. So the first three items in the 26 budget pressures are related to employees and staffing. So, um, again, a cola for employees with the opportunity to earn up to 3% merit on their anniversary going above and beyond is being proposed. This increase will keep the wages within the middle of our comparable market cities. Uh, we don't get our benefit quotes until after max tax in October, so we're including an estimated 9% increase in benefits. Excuse me. The addition of two full-time employees in April um of 26 includes the addition of a public works street position and a park programmer. I do have separate slides to give you more information on those positions. Um a community survey is planned for 26. Our last one was done in 2022. Um and that is a cost of approximately $23,000. We're replacing the Auburn boardwalk through an agreement with the watershed district who's financing the construction over a five-year period. So those payments are about 43,000 um per year. And then trail maintenance needs are higher next year, which I'll show some examples of planned trail resurfacing on the next slide. The Holy Family tennis courts need resurfacing. um and the city partners um with them um for the maintenance of those ports. Um again, we talked a little more in depth about the 2050 comprehensive plan um being a $250,000 over three year um expense. 2026 is the first year of the debt service payment for the new fire station at approximately 1.4 4 million. And then the total of $1 million transfer from the general fund to the long-term street maintenance fund is for funding the various transportation projects, including overlays um and design work for the various um arborum area transportation projects. As mentioned previously, the trail maintenance needs for next year will be higher than previous years and have budgeted $50,000 to complete the Duck Trail and Woods Drive trails. We're hoping to get the 78th in Anthony Way and the 86th in Zoella done this year with interest earnings that we have earned from our ARPA funds. We have approximately $36,000 um in interest earnings that we would be able to spend on working on some of that trail work. We do still need to get quotes on the repairs to determine what we can accomplish with those available funds included in the budget pressures. Um we're proposing to add a public works street position. This position will give the ability to reallocate workloads more effectively resulting in cost-saving opportunities and operational efficiencies. We can reduce contracted services for asphalting after water main breaks. Um be more proactive to assess conditions of trails and sidewalks and ensure more timely repairs and maintenance. Um, we would be able to reduce the black top contracted services by leveraging city-owned equipment and doing those repairs inhouse. And we would like to be able to respond more timely to complaints about the growing number of maturing trees in the city that have become a problem in residents yards and for sidewalks. There currently has been an increase in city outlaw issues as well that we need staff to address to become more proactive doing inspections and maintenance. The public works department has been collecting data analysis through the use of GIS and would like to have the ability to increase um that through having someone in this position. And having a streets position that could assist with traffic control during uh utility repair projects would allow utility staff to work on the actual repairs. Having staff to assist our engineering department with mill and overlay projects will save the city money by reducing the hours of higher cost contracted staffing. The second full-time position we're proposing is a new parks programmer. So over the past two years, the parks department has been operating with reduced programming levels with the majority of recreation programming being conducted through contractors. So to better align recreation programming with community needs and enhance park and trail utilization, council may wish to consider adding a parks programming position. This would be an increase in service levels over where we are today. but would also represent getting back to where we've been historically for service levels related to recreation programs and services. The additional employee would provide the opportunity to bring in new revenue through adding feebased classes and events. This past year, we've spent a lot of time leaning into what it means to be the city of lakes and parks. We believe this position would help support the mission of being the city of lakes and parks by enhancing the city's identity through highquality innovative programs that connect residents to lakes, parks, and natural spaces. helps position the city as a destination for recreation and outdoor experiences, boosting community pride and regional appeal and ensure the parks and recreation system continues to evolve as the population grows in a way that reflects the city's brand and core values. We would promote active lifestyles and wellness, contributing to better public health and social well-being outcomes and increased utilization of our city parks. Looking at future budget pressures, um they include growth to maintain current service levels to a greater number of people, long-term facility needs, funding the maintenance of increasing numbers of parks and trails. These next few years include funding of street projects and highway 5 improvements. And lastly, the compost site, which the next slide will give examples issues related to that service. As you can see in the chart, the past five years, the costs have increased by 400%. In 2020, we had the compost site closed except for two events that year. The 247 availability to the site had not only increased the cost by 400% but has resulted in illegal dumping on the site. Oil, garbage, tires, large trees, wire, propane tanks, among other items have been left for staff to dispose of at an additional cost to taxpayers. Most recently, a fire was discovered by the compost hauler, which could have caused significant property damage to the shed, which contains public works and other equipment. Threats of violence to staff attempting to monitor the site has forced us to gate off the site, only being open on the weekends. While this has reduced misuse of the site, it hasn't mitigated that entirely. The unstaffed remote location of the site has significant challenges and prevents us from protecting the property without fencing around the area. Council may wish to discuss whether you want to continue to offer this service and if there is a desire to continue to provide the service to residents. You may want to discuss potential options to enhance safety for staff and community members properly using the site as well as cost mitigation strategies. And some of those options could be installing a better barrier to the site and continue to keep the site locked during the weekday. While this has been effective here recently, staff do utilize the site for equipment and day-to-day operations, which does slow us down, but is certainly manageable. We could also consider transitioning back to seasonal collection events that are staffed given these challenges. long term. A couple of questions for council related to um such as does council wish to keep the $40,000 in the preliminary budget to continue to provide composting services. Council uh feedback, comments, questions on this area. I know it's been discussed a lot and I've got some comments on it as well, but I'd love to hear from the team on thoughts. I mean, yeah, Mayor Pro, we absolutely had a lot of dialogue in this. I continue to maintain that this is valuable service to the city of Victoria. Um, understanding that we have had some challenges in here. Um, you know, one of the potential things is we might want to consider having uh the county sheriff deputy when they have some extra sitting time to just park themselves over at the entrance of the gate to kind of send a reminder that, hey, if you're coming in here, you better come in here for a reason. Um, that's a potential solution that we should examine. Um but yeah, I mean this is a valuable service until you know we know that sort of we're going to need at some point to address what will happen to that area when we do redevelop. And so I I think that it's appropriate for us to keep this $40,000 in there. Um, I'm I'm actually in the in the overall budget number uh the 9.3% uh of putting another $54,000 into that number so that we can have things like this be addressed. Um I I think that we might be a little bit light on some of our other budget pressures. Uh, for instance, the Holy Family court reconstruction. Pickle ball seems to be an onfire topic that we never have enough space right now. We might want to consider in that reconstruction, dedicating a couple of those courts to pickle ball. What is that? What does that mean costwise? Um, we should explore that because these are services that seem at least for now in high demand. um in some of the other places that you know one one thing that was like unexpected was the boardwalk reconstruction. This a phenomenal time to even though it's got pressure to get that done. We have a willing partner to come in and offset that. Uh we haven't had it budgeted, this is a golden opportunity for take advantage of that. It's added pressure. We can take some of that pressure off by lifting out, you know, the this $54,000 number that I have in mind. Um, we've also made some, you know, ideas and thoughts about how we want to deal with the the dugouts either over at Lions Park or even Detown Park. That's a pressure that we talked about that I I don't see as something that's in here. And then, you know, just lastly, um, if we can do something that doesn't cause a lot of pain now to get ahead of our debt service levies, um, they're coming. They're going to be expensive. We've made, as Trish pointed out, some great progress on that forward drop and anything that we can do to move in that space, I think, is is a great thing for us to do. So, I would say Trish, maybe we give consideration to putting another uh $54,000 in the budget uh as an increase to bring us to like 9.9 instead of 9.3 uh and use that as a way to get it. I mean, maybe it's not getting ahead, but it's perhaps trying to catch up. I mean, um, certainly when we move the equipment out of the public workshed that's now over to the firehouse after the new ones be constructed, I I mean, it's virtually certain that we're going to have some unanticipated costs with that. You know, I think we're in a good spot where um, we should be thinking about these kind of things at this time when we're having these preliminary discussions. Appreciate the comments. Um, council, other comments? I'm curious how you came up with the $54,000. Uh, well, I'm going to take the a tear a page out of our uh what we'll see in the signs on uh for quick trip later tonight. Uh, you know, we don't want 10.00 maybe 9.9. It looks a whole lot better than that. So, if I take the previous year's budget, I take 9.9% of that and take that amount and and X all for uh where we where we land, that's where the $54,000 comes from. I I do have some comments on the on the um yardways uh area and things, but Miss Hardy had some comments. I know. Oh, thank thank you. I just wanna to answer council member Ivansk's uh question or um comment about um our deputies and using their time. I just want to note for the council and then anybody who's watching us this evening that our deputies have been actually um sitting at that site and they've had some interactions both positive and not so positive. Great. Thanks with um with people there. So they have been involved and engaged with us um on this and so I've been very pleased with that. Um, they've even followed people that they have seen with trailers full of stuff to the site and have engaged with them at that point too, asking about where they're coming from, where do they live. Um, and so they are doing everything that they can to assist us in managing um, this site. So, um, I just did want to note that it's a great idea and um, and our deputies have been very much willing to assist us with those efforts. So, thank you. appre appreciate that. I Council Member Roberts, did you have something as well? Yeah. Uh I mean, I guess I would just say I mean I think we should take this opportunity now, right? That I agree that it's a a good service for for our residents. Um but I also think we should let this summer play out a little bit and see how the changes that we've made um impact that site. Right. So if it if you know I know we've have some barriers up there along you know uh in the some of large tree trunks and such to keep them from driving around but I guess I you know if we're still seeing people finding their way somehow through there um and dumping stuff I think that's probably you know there's only so much we can do right so that might change my opinion on things but if this seems to reduce it down quite a bit um and you know, obviously not having interactions. I understand that it's inconvenient for some of our residents to not have it open during the week, but um I think it's better than paying double what we should be spending in uh in uh yard waste costs. So, um I I I think I would like to see I I'm fine keeping the 40,000 in there for now with the right to as talk about this um before we have to make an ultimate decision and say like okay what have we seen and by that time most of the summer and at least some of the leave uh you know dumping will be done. So, um I think we'll have a better idea of if what we've done to this point has helped and if there's some even minor other things, whether it's more cameras, better cameras, whatever, can help uh even better. So, but I'm I'm fine keeping it in there for now, but I I'd like to wait and see how these changes that we've made impact the site because if if it ends up not helping and they're finding ways in there still, then I I'm not sure I think it's worth it. And I mean, in in if that in that case, right, so for having information, you know, I know we've talked about how there is um a site in Chaki, right? like is it worth seeing how much it would cost? You know, I don't know if they would allow it, right? But obviously, we'd be subsidizing that, but we're paying a lot here. So, what would that cost be? And is it a better use of our money than paying this? It probably isn't. It probably will be very expensive, but at least having that number to see, okay, if if we're still paying, you know, how muchever money this, we might as well pay it and not deal with all the garbage and harassment that our staff is getting, I guess. So, just just as a as an option, right? Like maybe it's not a good option, but at least we have the numbers and and the, you know, to make an informed decision. I I think as a whole, um, couple things. I think one, the change from going to weekends I think has helped. Um, initially I heard from residents and there was some people upset, but then when they heard why we made the change, they completely understood and they said, "Okay, this is a change that had to be made and it is great that we're able to keep it open." So, just that's what I've heard from from residents around. Um, I I still I'm in agreement. I I think keeping that in the budget makes a lot of sense. Um, you know, we talk seasonal things like that. Maybe there's some other things to look at. I think as long as you let the residents know and keep them aware of the changes and why, I think for the most part, they will understand that. And to Chad Chad's point, maybe there is other alternatives um with other areas. I'm not sure, but this is a this is a pretty big benefit for our residents still in my opinion. I'm all for keeping it at this point till it gets to be too much, but um yeah, for this year, 40,000 in the budget, I think it's fine. Any other comments? Uh no, I think that we're very well aligned on this. So, uh I think it's great to be able to offer this to our citiz. Thank you, acting mayor, members of the council. Just before you get into the rest of your discussion, I just want to um lay out a couple of things um as you were all discussing and in thinking about um potentially um Council Member Yansky's idea of maybe um you know, looking ahead or trying to address some of these other things to get us closer to that still under 10, but that 9.9% mark. Um, I didn't see headnod, so I don't know if there's support for that, but as you're noodling that, um, I just want to also throw out there that, you know, this is our preliminary projections. Um, things are still coming in. We're very early in the process. So, we do anticipate some changes. The direction that you give us here today will certainly help us in preparation for a maximum tax. As you know, with maximum tax levy, we can always go down from there, but we can't go up. Um, so it's really great to be having these conversations, thoughtful conversations about um those services and and um what we should be considering. I will say that I had um a couple meetings hot off the press. I didn't have a chance to connect with um Trish yet on this. Um but we do know um that there will likely be a fairly significant increase for Southwest Transit um to provide that subsidy. Right now, we um are subsidizing rides at $12 per ride. Um what I learned today is that uh part of the the questions that we've come up that we've heard is well could they could the rider share in the increase to help offset? Um so if the rider is paying $4 or $5, I can't remember which it is per ride, um could they pay $6 or $7 to help um share in that increase? Um and the answer is no. Um they are uh regulated and are only able to offer where they have to max out at a certain so that was a new piece of information for me. Um and as that um as that continues to um to play out. I do anticipate that we'll probably see a pretty sizable increase in Southwest Transit. Um so we'll probably be having a policy discussion on that as more information comes available. Um, and then of course, um, as Trish covered, but just to say here too, um, some of those, uh, ongoing commitments that we've had, for example, uh, we pay a levy to, um, the, um, uh, Lake Minnetonka water conservation district and, uh, or the conservation district and, uh, there was a levy increase uh, that we just learned about after publication of this packet. So, we'll have to get that amount in there. We we won't get our healthc care numbers for um benefits until we usually get that late like in November um October, November. So, um we'll we'll definitely want to leave some wiggle room to make changes um and then those fiscal disparity numbers come in late. So, these are just a couple of examples of where we want to be nimble enough that we can respond to that but still be within kind of the target of where you want to go. And of course, as Trish noted, our department directors uh will continue to um be looking for those cost-saving opportunities um and uh and those efficiencies and reduce um where we can throughout this process. So, we'll continue to do that and bring information back to you along the way. Um regarding Southwest Transit, that's the prime service, right? That that is the prime service. Did they not reduce where they went last year already. So, they're reducing and now increasing their costs. And can you remind me what they red I because I know we had discussions about Yeah. Do if you remember off the top of your head. So what they did was really focus. So, their ridership has really evolved um since the pandemic and where their ridership used to be primarily commuters going to the bus station and um being on fixed routes. And that has um not necessarily flip-flop, but a greater percentage of their ridership is now um navigating away from the fixed ride routes and really utilizing the um ondemand services. And that's the prime services. What they have discovered as they are going through and figuring out um just how to they haven't really looked at their formulas. What does it cost to operate? So they have spent the last year and a half um or so really trying to understand their numbers. What does it cost to operate essentially the prime services which is a microtransit. It's not a fixed route. It's on demand. And so the cost of that is roughly $30 per ride. And so if we're paying $12 and I I don't know what the but if it's three four $5 whatever the rider pays that's still about half of what it costs them to act. So they're they're they're at a net loss for every ride that they're doing through Prime right now. And so this is um brand new information for us. We'll be continuing to have conversations with them on what that means um not only for their services, the future of the services, but you know what what that means for our budgets too. Um and so we'll be bringing you um op like more um options and opportunities to discuss both in the near term and long term what that looks like. The other change that they made today driven by the cost of what it what it costs us to operate or what it costs them to operate is um transitioning to the fixed route services. So while they um they did actually add a new fixed route that goes from the southwest junction in Eden Prairie. Um, and then it makes, I think, 16 stops along the 494 corridor as well as the um as well as the airport. And so technically, you could drive your car and park and hop on the bus there and get on that for whatever that cost for that fixed route would be. Or if you didn't have transportation and wanted to use the prime service, that ondemand service, you would pay, we would pay that $12 subsidy, you would pay your rider. You would get to the transit station and then take that route. You wouldn't have to pay the rider wouldn't have to pay extra. That's included. That route, fixed route is included in their ondemand route um if they originate through the ondemand route here. And then the other service, while we no longer provide or pay for the subsidy, the ondemand route for the airport service, in April, I believe it was April, March or April, Southwest Transit did um announce an express bus service. So, you can park at the Eden Prairie Southwest Station um and you can park overnight there in a dedicated area and take the express bus directly to the airport. Um and then they have some extended hours. Uh and I believe that bus leaves roughly every hour within the hours that it operates um for uh a low cost. So again, just like the 494 route with the 16 stops, you could either drive your vehicle there and park and hop the express bus to the airport or you could um take the ondemand originating from Victoria to the um Southwest station and then hop on the express bus from there. So, lots of changes in transit coming. Appreciate that. And to council member Iansky's point, I think you brought up some good points about other services and uh including pickle ball. The other thing I wanted to bring up is uh trails uh parks and trails and I think we have uh uh funds in the budget for that improvement. But I saw those five trail pictures that definitely need assistance and maybe there's others. So I think we just need to keep that in mind as well is are we thinking is that 50 get us to a point that we should be being the city of parks and lakes, parks and trails, excuse me. Um so I just wanted to bring that up as well. But great work from staff in all these areas. I'll thank you. I'll just note um and I believe Trish said it, but just to be clear uh on that um the 50,000 us in those trails in the trails what we're recommending for that budget would need to be a higher amount if you were not to support the use of the interest earnings from the federal ARPA dollars. That's inclusive of that 36 or whatever. So that Yeah. Uh, so that assume so you would have to be closer to that 80,000 mark to get the trails done if you decided to use the interest earnings in a different way. So you have rounding up now roughly $100,000 worth of trail work for um for next year. Thank you. Okay. So, moving on to the next um council discussion. Does council wish to keep the full-time equivalent request for parks in the budget for the max tax levy? And if yes, is there additional information you'd like related to the position? Council comments, questions. I'll comment with uh adding a yes to the roster. Uh I don't need any more information from myself. I I'll just add that um we had a great visit to the rec center as a workshop item. And I I think that if you didn't come away with the overwhelming load that is being shouldered by Jenna in that meeting. You were either not there or asleep. And I I think that this goes a long way in being able to take some of that burden off of her so that she can focus on spending her time managing the the highly complex status quo that she's doing to it. So, um, maybe there's just a little bit more information that needed to answer this question, but for those who are in the community watching, um, you know, council, I think hopefully unanimously has that shares my my view that this can't get done in its current state without expanding our resource needs. Yeah. I mean, I think we're all in agreement, right? I I think we want to see more programming for our parks, right? We don't want to have to outsource everything. We've talked about potential programming for the western development areas, right? So, I think yeah, I think more people the better. So, as a devil's advocate, I agree. I think it should stay in the budget, but if something had to come off, I would feel that this would be the one that would come off. If I had to choose from what we're going to be answering on questions, because I'm assuming the next one's going to be um for uh maintenance, and I've used the term way too many times, but parks and wreck and all of that or the sprinkles on the cupcake. We got to keep water flowing, the streets repaired. We got to keep all of that stuff taken care of. So, if there was a spot, unfortunately, I would probably lean towards this position to be eliminated. However, I do want to keep it in the budget. I do think that's needed and something that we need to do for for the public. I'm in agreement as well about keeping this in the budget. I think it's definitely needed. So, is that you need in that area? And as council member Patterson predicted, my crystal ball out, does council wish to keep the full-time request for the public works in the budget um for max tax levy and also gives is there any additional information that you would like? I'm curious about the GES GIS stuff just from the standpoint of what do we have that skill right now and is that something that would be transferring from more of downtown to public works a combination or um to me it seems like that would be a difficult combination to find somebody who has the GIS capabilities and then the abilities to, you know, fix a sewer line and patch a street. Um, so I guess how do you feel about that? That's a great question. Um, actually we do, um, currently we are GISing a lot of our important infrastructure such as fire hydrants. Um, you know, we have our street signs, um, pretty much, you know, all of our, um, water connections, everything is on GIS. We do currently have, um, one, sometimes two employees that are doing most of the data logging um, in our public works. So, he currently works in our storm water, okay, department. Um, but we would like to extend that further into our streets department and being able to also have that information ready available to those people as they're going out and doing inspections like when was this trail last, you know, over, you know, overlays done. We want all of that information our streets. It could help us to get more into a proactive long-term plan on replacing some of these trails that all went in kind of at the same time. These old developments come up and now they're all finding we're finding that they're aging and having to maintain those and having the records of them on our GIS system. Um, which makes it way more easy to to plan ahead for. So we're leveraging it in some areas. We could leverage it across more areas and be more to your point proactive or predicting when that maintenance needs to occur occur. Okay. Yes. Okay. You also mentioned reducing the reliance on other subcontractors which are obviously going to be more expensive as well. So, it feels to me like there's a possibility for not quite cost savings, but less cost impact where it's not a dollar fordoll tradeoff. Um, I guess was another reason that I made my previous comment. I won't say it again, but um I think this absolutely should be in the budget just with the way things have been expanding and other opportunities that are out there for cost savings with an employee versus using contractors. Yeah. I mean, um, a good example of that is just this spring we had, um, Eric from, he's in our streets department. He has since now moved to our sewer department, but, um, he was using our mill that we, um, somewhat recently purchased and was able to mill up a lot of the trails and do those repairs and and being able to put asphalt on them. So that's just an example of one of the things that we want this position that department to continue to do. And with a department of one, it's it's a little difficult for us to be able to to do all those things in house. Gotcha. Thank you. Yeah, I would be a yes, too. So I'm I'm a yes as well on this one, council member. Yeah. No, unanimous. I mean, I think that it's important that we need to keep the perspective that we need boots on the ground in public works. It's the most visible connection that our residents have with the city. Um, and you know, things like garbage cans not being empty, grass that's not routinely mowed, garbage that's in parks or um, you know, and we also struggle with um, in the development aspect. You've heard me say this before, we're we're not getting enough park space with new developments. We have too many in my opinion. um money in lie of land. Um we're the city of lakes and parks, not the city of lakes and park dedication fees. And in that vein, the parks that we do have are under stress that as new neighborhoods come online, the existing infrastructure gets more use. It wears out quicker. uh and it's seemingly increasingly more expensive every time we have to um put money into it that the costs seem to be almost uh exponential. So having our human resources maintain that and stay on top of it, it's an important thing for us so that we can be preventative. Thank you. Well put. Thank you. Right. Uh, next um item is the community survey and does council support the $23,000 in the preliminary budget to engage um in the consultant um to conduct that survey. Um there's a couple of alternatives listed here um such as reducing it to zero and delaying it one year which would impact the 27 levy. Um another option reduce it to 8,000 and take um it in-house but would not include national benchmarking and statistic stat statistically sound survey. Um or option C eliminate the survey al together. I I think option B in my opinion um would be difficult with where we're at from a staffing perspective. Um, and I think typically these are done every four years. The last one was 2022, right? Yes. I I just think we're at an inflection point in our community and I think it's important to continue to to get feedback uh from the community. So, I don't know if laying the right answer here. I I I'm probably for option A. Oh, excuse me. Just keeping it in. Yeah. Yep. Option not listed. Option not listed. Yes. Now that I look at option A, that's not the option not listed. Rookie question. Is there a way that we can combine or are we already combining the community survey for this with the comprehensive plan 2050 survey or there's no way just based on what we have to do from a state perspective? And yeah, Council Member Patterson, um, acting mayor, members of the council, great question. I there's certainly a little bit of, um, there'll be a little bit of overlap with the comp like with the comp plan engagement that we're going to do, but the comp plan engagement is going to be more on looking to the future and thinking about what do we want to look like in the next 20 years. Um, and then there's a bunch of technical things that fall into that. The community survey, it's been a while since I've looked at it, but it kind of it it gets it's statistically sound, but you get a really good pulse on how are we doing? Are we how are we um the value that you get for the services that you're providing? Um, do you feel safe in your neighborhood? are we responding to emergencies in a timely manner? Um, so it goes way beyond just looking at the future. So there's certainly elements. Um, but it the questions are a little bit broader than what your engagement is going to be on the community on the comprehensive plan. Fair enough. Can you remind me how we right so I'm just remembering the recent one that we did for our parks right so how did I can you remind us how we get how this survey is conducted it this survey in the past yeah council member Roberts acting mayor members of the council yes um so when we did this we last did this survey in 2022 it is statistically sound one of the ways that they do that is use um they'll use landline online information if your cell phone is available. Uh the company that we would engage with or that we did engage with um has access and would continue to reach out and call people um until we hit that magic number. The um they also send out postcards. They send out letters um and so there so people know that it's coming. Uh the city does our own promotion to just let people know that there's an opportunity. Um and then we do a big social media push just to let people know. Um and then there we do open up the survey. So if you are one of the people who were not selected, it's random. Um and so if you were not selected or were not called by the consultant, you still have an opportunity to provide feedback and your um we get the statistically sound feedback, but then we get the overall. So, everybody who responded, whether you were part of the consultants or you grab a link on our website or through our social media, you answer the same questions. Um, and it's just aggregated differently. Do you remember like I'm assuming they the number they want to get to is a certain percentage of the population or correct number. Okay. Don't remember off the top of my head. Just curious. So, um I mean I'm fine keeping this in for now. I mean I think this information is important. Um, I guess it's kind of going the way Christian did with the one that like if there was a thing that we ever had to pull like part of me was like I always has right because like I know it always you know we always say when we get do these you know like again back to the um the parks one that we just recently did right like you look at the numbers and you're like okay we have you know what 12,000 people and only this many people did it and I know where staff always says right Like, but that's great numbers, right? Like, usually we don't, you know, usually cities don't get that great a turnout, but I'm still skeptical sometimes. Maybe it's the private sector versus the, right? Like, but skeptical when you get such a low number, even though it's good for, you know, for a city like those numbers are high for comparables for cities. I'm always skeptical. I'm like, is it really worth the money that you're spending when a such a low number? Do you know what I mean? Like I feel like we get a lot of feedback from people. Like when things are going bad, you obviously hear about it. When less so when things are going good, but I'm like uh I I don't know. I just It's just one of those things where it's hard for me. Like it's a lot of money and I'm like again I have no problem keeping it in for right now, but it's one of those things where I'm like if we ever have to cut somewhere or we need we have to think about that. This is one of those things because I I know it's important to I'm sure it's very important for staff and stuff, but sometimes I'm like, how much are we actually getting out of it when a fairly low percentage of people are actually reaching out and giving us information? I I don't know. It's it's I kind of am on the fence with it a little bit, right? Like, so just my two cents. I mean, I I think I'm landing where Council Member Roberts and Council Member Patterson to a lesser degree that it's of it's valuable to us. If it's a place where we need to, you know, drop something, it's it's it's a safe place. But the I'll say that the benefit as I see to getting national benchmarking is it will allow staff to prioritize what the survey is telling us. They can they can say this is where we put our limited resources because we have data to support why we're making those decisions. And in the absence of the data, then we may not get the best decisions out of it. So I think it's important for us to have that pulse and get that pulse go directly to staff so they can start mobilizing on that and interpreting it so that they can bring us informed decisions to make make hopefully the best possible outcome from that data. Yeah, I I think we're all in agreement on this. I think one of the things that the survey brings is what are the top five things they like and prioritizing it to your point council member whereas sometimes if you hear it ones twoozy you're hearing more than the negative and not the top five. So I think that's a benefit of the survey um and prioritizing it. But I think we're all in agreement that we have to evaluate where we're at with everything else. Thank you. I know we're about out of time. I have two more slides if you're okay with just taking a few extra minutes. Sounds great. I think so. Um, does council support um the recommendation for the updated market cities? I support it. I support it. I do. Yes. And then finally, um, is there council direction to add or cut services or increase reduce the levy? I know we had the feedback from council member about possibly adding in um 54,000. Is there anything? I I feel like we've got some space to um to do that and you know stick with it gives us that in my view the balance between you know being good stewards of resources and you know also being prudent about what are you know what our needs are and and how do you um take care of things in 2026 that um will be either more costly or more difficult. in 2027 to be I mean I don't think it hurts to have more information. So I think giving those options I would agree helpful right y and prioritizing those options decide if which is the best way to go. Yep. Council member Patterson I think you've done a good job. You've given us the baseline for maintaining the services that we need for kind of the service level agreement while it's an unwritten code right now with the with the population. Um, and then allowing us the ability to expand where there should be expansion due to neglect in the past or new things that we're putting together. Um, I wouldn't want to see anything cut at this point in time. Are there any additional items you'd like to consider in the future meetings or what information would be helpful um for your decision making at our upcoming workshops? I personally I think the spotlight cities is a great um area. I think that's fairly new for us. Is it fairly new? So I'd like to see the impact that that's had uh for future meetings. Um because I think that's it sounds like a great step in the process. Um that's one thing that came to my mind. I mean, I think you've hit, you know, you always hit the right notes, right, with the the stuff in the presentation. And I think I think we kind of hit on the things as you went through, right, that maybe a little bit more information or wait and see on things like the the uh waste, right? And so I think I think we have I have I think in my perspective, I have what I need. So this might be some Oh, sorry. So I would just share the my council members positions that I feel like we've got for me enough uh information subject to what we've kind of covered tonight. Council member Person, I'm trying to come up with the best way to word this. So, with the expansion in the city of Victoria and the new homes and the new tax base that's been created, I saw some numbers somewhere. And then I was trying to extrapolate a little bit of what it would have been like if we didn't have those new homes or that new construction over the last year or so. And I think it was something like 5% or something different. Um, and maybe this is an offline topic that we have, but I'd just like to see what it looks like, what it would have looked like as far as the levies concerned if we didn't have that expansion of homes over the past year or two. So, instead of our tax base being whatever 12,000 people, it's only 9,900. Then what would it look like? I think sometimes people need to be hit between the eyes with this is what would happen if we didn't expand our tax base. Me being one of them. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for me tonight, council? For me and for me. Thank you. you have what you need from our standpoint. I do. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. All your feedback's very helpful. Thank you for all your great work. Um, so there are no further items on the workshop agenda this evening. May I have a motion to adjurnn? Motion to adjurnn. Second. All in favor? I I opposed. Thank you. Motion carries. We stand adjourned and will be covered.