[music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Good evening everyone and welcome. I will call to order this Bloomington City Council meeting Monday, March 9th, 2026. This is a study session. We have uh three items on our agenda tonight. Council uh under items two, organizational business. Item 2.1 is a discussion regarding our franchise fees rate. Item 2.2 is a review of our urban forest master plan and item 2.3 is a close item and that'll be a uh an evaluation of our city manager's performance on his first months on the job. Those are our three items on our agenda this evening. Unless there are changes or additions, I would move approval of the agenda tonight. Motion and a second by council member Dalisandro to accept tonight's agenda. Oh, Victor, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Council member Relas to accept tonight's agenda. >> No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries 6. Uh, Council Member Lman not with us yet this evening. Cotton traffic is my guess. We will move on to our agenda item 2.1. This is our franchise fees rate discussion. I think we have Lori Economy Scher. I see Bob Simon's coming up. Julie Long is also on the list, but she might be just coming downstairs from the watershed meeting. Oh, there she is in back. She's laying low. Good evening and welcome. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um, Julie is here to answer questions if we need Julie, but I also wanted to make sure that council's aware that Cat Kudson from Centerpoint is here and Scott Johnson from Excel is here to join us tonight. And so, let's see. For our agenda tonight, we'll just go through these items. The timeline, some history on the franchise fees, status and conditions, and retaining walls. Um financial considerations and discussion and direction. Um as this is just a study item, and we'll move forward on that one. A year ago, we were before the city council for um requesting a franchise fee increase. We had um brought before the council a fixed rate increase and we had looked at um also adding um retaining walls and sustainability to our franchise fee categories. And we had numerous conversations and walkarounds with the council during um from about April through June. And then in July, we had the um public hearing and eventually um the council asked us um postponed adding any rate increases last year and asked us to come back for this year. And so um during that time frame um we looked at a number of different things um with percentage rates and fixed rates. And so before you tonight is the March to July time frame where we'll look at hopefully the rates um and then direction tonight and then um we'll go if we move forward uh we'll create a let's talk page um we'll host an open house and then um depending on where the council wants more direction or more guidance on things we would bring more meetings with the council on behind the scenes before we have our public hearing. We would look to have a public hearing um later this spring and then early fall implementation with that. >> All right. Thank you, Lori. I'll give a little bit information on the history and the status and condition of the work that we've done using franchise fees. A lot of this will look familiar to what was presented last July, but there's some updated information as well. First of all, uh the goal of franchise fees, it was established back in 2015 with the goal to um council show council's commitment to maintaining a sustainable and consistent funding source for a few different components of our pavement management program. It was never intended to fully fund pay fully fund PMP, but we have a few different components that have been included since 2015. This gives you an idea of other cities within Minnesota that use franchise fees. We have there's about a 100 cities in Minnesota that do utilize franchise fees. 61 of which are in the seven county metro and 24 cities in Henipin County that utilize franchise fees. This was information that was pulled later in 2025. A little bit of a history of the franchise fees in Bloomington. As Lori mentioned, back in 2015, December of 2015, city council approved the implementation of franchise fees with the next scheduled increase to be in January of 21. and then every other year after that we began collection of franchise fees in April of 2016 and initially from 2016 till now we used it for overlays seal coats park trail construction and maintenance and rightaway con trail trail construction and maintenance. Then in the summer of 2020 when we initially intended on coming back to do an update for 2021 it was delayed due to co management decided due to co 19 to do a delay until 2022. So we came back in July of 21. Council approved a franchise fee fee increase for 2022. And then we also included uh CIP multimmoal projects at that time. Two years later, we came back in May of 23 with another franchise free increase. And at that time we also included sidewalks and ADA improvements with that update. And then as Lori mentioned back in July, um the uh discussion was postponed until now we're here back to talk with you folks about it. um with the current utilization of franchise fees. This shows our different pavement management program areas and what utilizes franchise fees and what does not. Street reconstruction is the only one on this list that does not utilize franchise fees. We use uh special assessments and uh prop the property tax levy. Um street mill and overlay, street seal coat, trails and parks and rightaway construction and maintenance and also as I mentioned sidewalks were added in 2023 um as a utilization of franchise fees. Um, couple of quick maps to show you. Since 20 2016 when they were implemented, we've sealcoded about 225 miles of streets. Um, using the franchise fees. We have overlaid about 85 miles of streets within Bloomington. Uh, we have uh reconstructed about 9 and a half miles of rideaway trails and sidewalks. As I mentioned, sidewalks were just introduced a few years ago to the program. And three miles of park trails. And I'll get into some more information on what we have upcoming um here in a minute. For overall status and condition, uh for our streets, we have just over 340 miles of streets. Uh these franchise fees helped with our, as I mentioned, our overlay program, um and utilizing the maintenance of these streets. Um we're doing we're doing well. City's streets are overall in in really good condition. Um, we we took a close look at the program back in late 2024 into 2025, specifically at the overlay since we were going to be reducing the overlay by a mile per year starting this year. And also just looked at the overall costs in general. And we were able to free up $200 to $300,000 per year um within the franchise fees dollars that we had been allocating. And we're looking to to introduce retaining walls if possible to to the program using that dollars that we that we found through the through the overlay that were no longer needed. Uh um concrete sidewalks. We have just under 250 miles of concrete sidewalks in the city. Generally in good shape. We have about uh 75 miles of deficient width sidewalks. Not necessarily in bad condition. They're just less than our standard 5-ft width. Currently, we replace sections as we come through with our pavement management program and other infrastructure projects. And then in regards to trails, just under 50 miles of asphalt trails in Bloomington, uh 32 miles in city rideway and 15 miles of park trails. Similar to streets, we have pavement condition index values um for those um trails. The lower ranges of the 0 to 35 being those that would be in the need of a full reconstruction and then other maintenance techniques as you get further up in the PCI scale. When we first started the program back in 2015, we had about 10 miles of trails in the need for reconstruction. We're at about four and a half now, but the majority of those are Normanddale Boulevard, which is coming up this year and next, and then also a stretch of Old Shak B Road, which is on our list as well. Um, PMP life cycle, you've all seen this many times, but we show it now because we have our street um, life cycle that we use with implementing the different techniques to extend the life of the pavement. We also do something similar with our trails. Typically every 3 to 5 years we fog seal or crack seal our trails um um to help to rejuvenate the life of that pavement. Here is a map showing as I mentioned the deficient width sidewalks in Bloomington about 75 miles in deficient width. Not necessarily in bad condition but just deficient in width not up to our minimum 5 foot standard. And we replace mileage as we come through and footage as we come through with PMP projects. For example, in 2025, we replaced about 7,200 feet of sidewalk with our PMP and other infrastructure projects. We added about 3,200 feet of new um sidewalk, filling sidewalk gaps and adding sidewalk in different locations for safe routs to school items as well as others. And then also we have our um pedestrian ramps. That ADA component was added to the franchise fees a few years ago. We have just under 5,000 uh pedestrian ramps within Bloomington when we did a last full inventory in 2022. About half of those were in compliance. You can kind of see on the map where we've had projects come through along the corridors um to replace those those ramps. The majority of those that aren't in compliance are just for minor defects and we replace 150 to 250 to 200 of them a year um typically with our different projects as we come through. Also, we look to fill sidewalk gaps and and fix safety hazards in regards to sidewalks and multimmoal components. One example that we have coming up here in 2026 is on 98th Street just west of here between Xerxes and Upton. A lot of you may be familiar, there's sidewalks on the north side of the road, one that's very narrow and another one that's curbwalk. A few years ago, we replaced some a portion of that with a ped um accessibility project. So the map isn't exactly showing how it looks out there now, but we're looking to with our overlay project this year to make additional corrections and bring it to one standard width walk versus the multiple different non-compliant walks that we have out there currently. And we'd be using these franchise fee dollars to do that. This shows you our future trail and sidewalk map. Um this shows PMP projects, uh CIP multi- agency projects, um park master plan projects. So th those that are coming up in the near term are the ones circled in blue. So we have Normanddale Boulevard from 94th to Old Shock is a big one. And I should highlight with these trail projects when we bring them up to standards. It does take some time which is why Normanddale Boulevard has been on the list for a while. Takes some time to acquire easements typically it's a 9 to 12 month process and there's definitely some dollars involved with the with uh acquiring those easements. Um and then just the dollars in general to bring it up to the current standards. So we have Normanddale Boulevard, um Nicollet Avenue, which is the Henipin County Reconstruct Project. Um that'll be coming forward in 27 and 28, redoing sidewalks and trails on that segment. And then also um Moyer Central and Harrison Park as part of the Nine Mile Creek project are the near-term projects. >> And just one more point, as what um Bob had pointed out, it takes several years of accumulation of finance franchise fees to be able to do that trail. We can't do it all in one year. So there's several years of accumulation of dollars to be able to do these. >> Yes. Thank you. And then also we're looking at some other technique alternatives. We've been using the similar techniques for quite some time and we're looking at some other sustainable environmental environmentally friendly friendly options that we can do for our PMP. One thing that was that we started last year was maintenance did uh reclamite of an area which is similar in maintenance technique to a seal coat but it's more of like an asphalt rejuvenator that gets put on on the pavement and it helps to hold in all those chemical properties of the pavement. Um we did it on an area that we had reconstructed back in 2020 which is actually the area shown up here on the map and we're going to be monitoring that moving forward. Reclamite similar in cost to seal coat slightly slightly reduced cost but you do have to apply recommite more often than you would seal coat. So, we're looking at comparisons, looking at alternatives, and we've been working with other cities as well that have been using Reclamite as an option. Um, it doesn't have the same chip seal as a seal coat does, but it's an option that we can uh that we can look to use as well. Other cities in the in the metro have had success. And then also warm mix asphalt. We introduced this to an area last year as part of our PMP on the southeast side of town. Um, something that a lot of contractors that are going towards, it's lower mixture temperatures rather than a hot mix. It's a warm mix. lower mixture temperatures in turn saving fuel. And the one area that we did, which I think was a couple thousand tons of of mixture asphalt mixture in 2025, um we reduced by about 5,000 kilograms or which is basically one passenger car equivalent. So we're looking at incorporating larger amounts of that mix to help us get reduced costs for that work, but we're just starting to test that as well. Now, retaining walls. [snorts] We have about we have over 500 retaining walls within our within our existing rideway. Actually, it's like just around 530. Varying sizes, large walls, some only a foot tall, a few feet long, but multiple walls. A few of them that are coming up in the near term. Um on 90th Street, we replaced one two years ago and another one last year and we have another one coming up this year for replacement. Um also on Normanddale Boulevard, there's a number of retaining walls that are going to be replaced with that trail project. And then on the northwest side of town, West Bush Lake Road has some walls that were being look are being looked at to be replaced with their PMP. But those are the near-term walls, but there many other walls that will be coming up for replacement. Um, in the past, when it comes to these retaining walls, there's been a small dollar amount that's that's um um for maintenance work that's been acquired through the general fund that we use for smaller wall repairs. Um, we usually have to carry over a fair amount of dollars from year to year to get to these larger walls. Um some of these walls, for example, like the ones on 90th Street, some of them are $750,000 to a million dollars to replace. So they can get rather expensive. Um so we're looking at for another um funding source to help to supplement that existing dollars, those existing dollars that we're receiving. [snorts] And this just shows you an example of some of the walls. Um seeing them from the face of the wall. You can see the deterioration. It's not the age of the wall is not always seen through the face of the wall. Sometimes there's some drainage issues and other issues on the back side of the wall as well, but we have a few of them. as I mentioned coming up for replacement in the near term and then I'll give it back to Lori. [clears throat] >> So back to the financial considerations um during um the last um I'll call it four months we have been um working um very closely with both Excel and Centerpoint to um model a flat rate structure or potential um percentage rate piece. Um and then in normal um as we're going through normal financial meetings with council and budgets um we we are routinely asked um to diversify our revenues and and look at different sources. Franchise fees for the last 10 years have been one of the most diversified revenue sources. Um it's not usually favorably looked at but um we have had it for 10 years. Um, if we were to replace the franchise fees that are currently coming in in 2026, we would need a 9% tax levy to replace these revenues to do this work. So, in looking at the flat rate, um, some of the advantages of that, it provides really a stable and consistent revenue source so that we can count on it coming in each year. Um, it's minimum staff time to to watch the information come through and it's easier um, for customer calls. a customer will know what's coming on their their their bill each month. Um, and it's very easy to explain. Um, trade-offs, you know, if our population remains flat, you know, we're not growing too much, um, our revenues really don't go just change much. Um, uh, you know, there is an equity concern and, um, you know, we might have a residential one that doesn't use a whole lot and we might have a residential location that does use a lot. they're going to pay the same rate. Um the same with some of the commercials. We have some commercial businesses that use a lot of therms, a lot of energy, and others that don't. Um well, we have different categories of sources so that we're trying to match the amount of usage in that to I'll call it a normalization of revenues for each one on the percentage. um you know, if the if the rates increase from Excel and Centerpoint, um we could see an increase in rates um coming in each month without coming back to council annually or every other year. Um and then it would be really proportionate to the UT utility consumption. Um and it would just adjust um and then it would it would on a policy consistently be applied for conservatism, efficiency and pay as you go. Um the revenue variability that was one of the pieces that when we really looked um and I'll I'll pick on cat at center point is is that we looked at all the pieces and we broke down um you know the total revenue. We removed taxes coming in and then we tried playing with different weather scenarios and um they were able to give us some data about how some of that fluctuates. Um weather plays a big part. Um cold winters, cold summers, you don't know the revenue. So we wouldn't have a consistent revenue source. Um it would be in a range but it wouldn't be consistent. Um there's a lot more complexity in administrating of it. And then um customers would see a variability in their bill every month depending on what they're using. Um and so it may disproportionately, you know, again back to a household if there's one person in the household or 10 people in the household right now that's they're being build the same at a flat rate. Um on a percentage base that utilization would increase and some people may not be able to afford that increased rate. So, some of the comparisons we looked at, we looked at um cities with different percentage rates for both Excel and Centerpoint. We looked at flat rates, um residential, commercial. We looked at other communities around us and what they're all charging. And again, Centerpoint and Excel were very generous with their time. Uh they provided us details on the different categories. They helped us model. Um we looked at a couple different percentage rates. Um in one particular piece with Excel percentage rates at the 4.75 is what we were modeling. Um I would say uh some of the words were drastic variability. um some of their customers that use a lot of energy um it could go anywhere between what we're they're currently charging to well over $600,000 in one year. So um we pulled back from a percentage rate because of just the drastic impact. So with that, we are proposing a flat rate and residential would stay consistent with where it's at now and where it's been since 2023. And then we have slight increases with commercial. Um, and then the larger commercial had a little bit higher at $18 per month. And then the categories, the names between Excel and Centerpoint, you know, they have specific names, but the categories generally are about the same. And with that flat rate, um, retaining walls in the amount of revenue at 8.8 million coming in, less than two and a half% of that would be for retaining walls, the 200,000. With that, um, we'd like council direction, um, going with a flat rate, what was shown on the screen and also including retaining walls. >> Thank you. Uh, and appreciate that and appreciate the, uh, the information. Council, help me remember, remind me if you could, um, as we talked about this previously, the arguments toward a percentage rate. I mean, who who was advocating and and what were the arguments uh, in favor of a percentage rate? I and I honestly I simply don't remember. Anybody know? >> Council member Nelson. >> Yeah, I think the argument is in favor of um similar to our water rates, it it increases the incentive to be more efficient and and I think that's the biggest argument for it. If you if you have to spend that much money, then it gives you a reason to use less to improve your operations. And I think that that is where that that side of the percentage rate came from. >> Council member Alesandro. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor. I personally [clears throat] don't recall a conversation about flat versus percentage. Um my understanding of franchise fees as a flat rate was always a function of per household it costs a certain amount of money. Uh because we are charging the utilities for their use of our roads to provide service to our community. That was what I understood it to be. And so I never thought of it as a consumptionoriented rate. The only reason why we pay it at all, and I will say this, apologies. I've said this in in every council meeting we talk about this. I will say this. The only reason why we as people are paying for it is because the utilities are allowed to push it on us. But the our charging of them for this rate is a function of them using our roads and us asking them to help pay a portion of that in fees. They don't have to pass it along. they choose to pass it along and the state has given them the ability to do that but they don't have to do that. So it comes back to the as it comes back to the consu consumer it's not really about how much they're using at all. So I would be surprised if I ever was going I was never I guess I'd say another way I never thought that percentage was an option let alone I would support it at this point. >> Thank you. I I appreciate that because I couldn't recall us talking about this. So, I appreciate the fact that no, we I don't [clears throat] recall that we did, but I and I agree, Council Member Nelson, that would be the rationale. I I get that, but I don't think we ever had that conversation. So >> anyway, [snorts] >> other thoughts, questions, council, >> if I may, Miss Council member Dander, >> I do I do. You're you're um you're asking us to um to amend the franchise fees at a flat rate. Um, and what is the the Thank you. Um, the Okay, those are the charge increases, but you're asking us to then in addition to that, you're asking us to um put the retaining walls in a separate category. So, would that be a special is that a is that and that the intent to be a special assessment on on folks in the neighborhood of the retaining walls or anything like that? How would we recoup those costs? Mayor and council, the franchise fee at these rates includes the $200,000 to add that category. >> I completely understand now. Thank you. Uh, gotcha. And that would be every year there would be an expenditure of $200,000 towards retaining wall work. Okay. >> Mayor and council, just to remind you that we levy for retaining walls in the um public works budget. Um, routinely we carry over dollars for retaining wells and that goes into their back to their budget. And then we would like to add this too because retaining walls are just um we've seen a lot of deterioration in them and they're expensive. >> Council member Carter. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um so as it relates to the retaining wall piece, I'm supportive of including them. Um, and I would just, and I think I said this in our last conversation about this, but um, where there are opportunities to look at different types of structures or removing the structure completely and just letting it be, that would be wonderful, right, to save money now and in the long run. I know we have some massive retaining walls in Bloomington. I live close to 90th, so I've seen the the project there multiple times a day. Uh so can imagine the costliness of those product those projects but for the smaller ones or ones that like you know where it really wouldn't matter if a retaining wall is there or not. I would just I'm assuming the staff is looking at it like that. But um that's the only comment I have. But otherwise my understanding is we've been at a flat rate structure right historically for the last 10 years. Um and so what we're what we'd be approving is just the increases for commercial um non-demand and demand in the larger >> Right. Okay. All right. I mean, otherwise, I don't have any concerns. >> And if I if I if I may, if I could, Mayor, Council Member Carter, in regards to the retaining walls, yeah, we definitely look at if we have any opportunity to remove a wall and just grade it back, we do so just so we don't have future maintenance of that wall. So, that's that's a great point. Yep. >> Council member Lman, >> thank you, Mayor. Um, just a quick uh question and then a quick comment. uh the these categories that are are put together, these are put together by the state, right? In terms of uh where these categories fall or because my understanding is that nonprofit, you know, like VEP or that kind of thing would fall into that commercial uh area. >> Mayor and council, I would invite up cat, >> put him on the hot seat, huh? [laughter] Thank you. Good evening and welcome >> council. Thank you so much Cat Kudson for Centerpoint Energy. Um yes and I will answer the question and then defer to Scott who uh can can correct me. Um I believe the categories are set by the public utilities commission. Um but yes we Centerpoint Energy and Excel we don't set the categories and you are right. uh in uh the case of gas for example, it's based on usage and we look at it on an annual basis in the late summer and we will help move people up a category or down a category depending on their usage in the past year. So if an organization has um used less energy, then they would be moved down to a lower a lower >> kind of threshold at all. So is is there you know I'm just going to ask a crazy question because I this is not my my level of expertise at all. I'm not going to even pretend. Is there any way to advocate for another category for the the nonprofits, that kind of thing? I know that's beyond the scope of what we're talking about today. Is that something that this body would would need to to do or would we need to talk to you? Is there I mean, is that just something that is just so way out of the extreme that uh because that's the thing I'm I'm concerned about with this. >> Yes, Mayor Council. Um that's a great question. I don't know the answer. >> Okay, we don't need to answer that today then. That's fine. You can leave it leave it just as it is because that that's a question I would have mayor and city manager is if there's a way for us to uh to to advocate that and I'll just kind of move right into my comments then so we can move this along pretty quickly. >> If I could ask a question first. I I have actually one more question and then Kent you might be the one to answer this. As I look at this as I look at this slide as I look at the XL categories and the centerpoint categories can you explain them to me a little bit? What what does small or what is commercial A and B? What what does that all entail and and what are the differences? And could you give me a Bloomington example of those? >> Yes. Oh, mayor, what a good question. And this is making me realize that I should have brought along we have a sample category sheet that breaks down what A what B. So I will make sure that I send a new version over because we've we took a look at it. Um so for example, a residential is pretty straightforward. often commercial A for gas uses the same or less than um a residential home. So I often think of it as someone in a strip mall or an insurance or something like that. Okay. Um B is a little bit more. C is when you start to get up to a maybe a larger restaurant um from a gas usage. And then the um dual fuel, those categories have the option to um when we have a cold snap, as we did in January, as we all remember, they pay a slightly different rate so that they can go a different charge so that they can switch to a backup fuel so that when gas supply, for example, may be a little constrained because we need to supply a lot of it. Um, some of those have have raised their hand and say in exchange for paying a a lower charge, we will go ahead and flip to fuel oil or propane during those times. >> Um, and of course um I I should point out that um the cost of gas itself is a pass through. Centerpoint Energy makes no money on that. Um we uh make money on the delivery charge and the basic charge. So about 40 to 50% of the bill is that. So but I'll send over new a new category sheet so you can have it. Um and I know nothing about electricity. [laughter] So I'm going to defer to the expert. >> Thank you. That's helpful. Thank you. >> Good evening. >> Scott Johnson, Excel Energy. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm filling in for Michelle Swanson. So uh your businesses, I probably couldn't tell you. Residential same. Um that's pretty standard. Commercial non-demand. So you have a a demand meter or non-demand depends on usage and the rates based on that. So I would say something like a small grocery store that don't use a lot of power would be your commercial non-demand and then your commercial large demand would be a bigger usage uh grocery store something like that and then you get your large CNI your your bigger businesses up like that which you don't have we couldn't give you data because there was less than 15 large CNI customers that's why you seen your your big shift if you went from a flat rate to a percentage rate that's that's I we couldn't give you those details because of data privacy act is what I was told. So >> okay and I think if we put our heads together we could probably come up with >> you exactly would know pretty easily >> and uh but as a monthly rate so an $18 increase as a monthly rate to some of those larger companies. I mean it looks large as a 10% and and even the commercial the the demand it's a $17 rate per month but only on demand on the high demand times. Is that correct? >> Right. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. That's helpful. >> Thank you. So then, mayor, what I would say, >> are there any other questions and we can get into the comments. Let's ask if there's any questions. Council member Nelson has another question. >> Yeah, thank you, mayor. So, um I appreciate council member Delisando's point that the fixed rate and everyone gets the distri distribution of the energy, but do those higher users essentially cost more in terms of the city in terms of providing places for energy generation in terms of energy distribution. Um, you know, I mean, we have places particularly with the electrical where, you know, we have substations and things like that where we we build retaining walls and things like that and I have to believe that we have those because of demand and and so is there a higher cost based on that usage that, you know, bluntly isn't being covered by $200 >> and and you know, so I I'm not I mean, have we looked at how we can actually figure out what that demand is driving in terms of cost? Because we've got one where we got a flat fee, one where we have a percentage, but I don't see anything where we're trying to actually figure out what the cost is based on what their demand is. And and how would we possibly figure that out? I mean, it's a tough question, but that's not that's what I'm not seeing here. Mayor and Council Member Nelson. Um, the utilities aren't able to give us specifics on any I mean, we can they can say general a grocery store, general strip mall stuff. We don't have the level of detail to look at how they how it's all truly utilized from their perspective. We don't get that kind of data. >> [laughter] >> Yeah, I'm not sure >> exactly. Um, again, Scott Johnson, Excel Energy. I don't know if I'm going to be able to specifically tell you, you know, those type those type of things what they have. We we could tell what kind of usage they have with your flat rate. We could tell you what they'd be paying franchise fees per customers obviously because we have to put on a bill, but they are taxpayers or your citizens. And this is a pass through for us. So if you put it on Excel Energy customers, we just pass that on to your citizens um at the request of the city. So um I I don't know. So it's just like we say it's another tax when she said increase your levy if you didn't have a franchise. That's that's what you're trying to cover up that that dollar amount through franchise fees instead of taxes per se because I have cities that don't charge franchise fees. Um, and I have some that charge a little bit more than what you have as well at cover maintenance of of the roads. So, >> all right. Oh, one more comment. >> Apparently, I'm just having fun coming up here. Mayor, council member, one thing I should also point out, um, is that, uh, Centerpoint charges the fee per meter. So, for example, for a large customer, like as a residential person, I have one meter on my house. uh a large commercial industrial customer is likely to have more than one meter. So you wouldn't necessarily be looking at just say a $200 charge for a large um a large business, a large often in the large category. You know, it's a hospital. It's it's that kind of thing. So um so yes, the uh uh customers may be paying more um depending on how many meters they have. So thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Council member Lman, you're on. Gohead to get my my comments out of the way here. Um well, I I'll start with that last piece there. You know, uh uh Council Member Nelson, I there's [clears throat] something about that that u the percentage piece that is intriguing from a sustainability standpoint. Uh and if I put that hat on, you know, I kind of like that idea. Um however, the reason why I I I at this time don't want to kind of go down that route. I do think we should from from a future standpoint maybe have a look at that uh is that I do think that there are some uh public benefits that private sources uh provide and I I I want to you know you mentioned the hospitals and that type of thing and and other nonprofits. I want to just be real careful about the the the the unintended consequences that may arise uh from from doing some things without having all of the detail. But generally, I'm I'm kind of with you on that that perspective because I do think that does make some sense. Um, you know, I [snorts] when I look at this, mayor, um, uh, I I don't love the idea of these franchise fees and their continued expansion. Um, and it just it, you know, the the 9%, you know, for some folks, I mean, that's higher than than the levy, uh, for some of our our folks that are out there. And so, uh, that that gives me a little bit of pause, uh, when I when I think about that, uh, that that increase for those those folks, especially those folks, you think about VEP and they were just here, you know, last last week and what that might mean, uh, to to those folks that we service. So, uh, to just wrap it up, you know, you know, certainly the retaining walls make a whole lot of sense. Um, that's a little tighter in there, but I I just I think this is when it's more than than what our levy is uh for some of those that are paying it. Uh, that bothers me. >> Thanks, Council Member. >> Council member Dellesandro. >> Uh, thanks, Mr. Mayor. Um, yeah, I I mean, I understand the need for increasing these. I like I said, I I just tend there's a there's a part of me that understands their utilization using a franchise fee versus a tax. I mean, council member Nelson has said multiple times that this is a sensibly a tax, right? We we're taxing based on number of meters to the point um but we're still taxing folks and and again that's only because it's chosen to be passed through by the utilities. um doesn't have to be just going to keep saying that going to the public utilities commission with that you know and talking to a wall. Um but um but I I would I would hesitate to like ever want to think about this as a consumptionbased tax because it isn't it's that's not his intention. If we're going to do that, we should do that in a different way. In my opinion, we should not use the word the concept of franchise fees because of what it's intended to be. The reason we're allowed to do franchise fees is because we are supposed to be charging the utility company for utilizing our roads to provide a service. That's what it's for. If we're not going to do that anymore and we're actually just going to charge consumers for a portion of their bill because they're using too much energy, that's a completely different thing. I would support that from a sustainability perspective and talk about how to help customers reduce their footprint. Love that idea. But I don't think I want to use franchise tax to ever do that. So with that, uh, I think things are kind of steep. 27% is kind of steep, but it's also not been done in a while, I guess. Um, a couple years, right? 2023 was the last time we did it, so I understand it, so I think I'll support it. >> Thanks. >> Thank you, Council Member. >> Others, Council Member Nelson. >> Yeah, thanks, Mayor. Um, so just because I ask a question doesn't necessarily mean I agree with my question. Um, I personally don't like franchise fees. I I personally understand that if we eliminated these, we'd increase our levy 9% automatically for everybody. I get it. But, you know, we're paying it one way or we're paying it another way. It is what it is. Um, you know, in terms of the percentage thing, you know, I agree with Council Member Delisandre, even though I brought it up and explained the rationale for it. I I agree that this is for the usage of our rightway and and not a consumptionbased thing. If we want to do things to incentivize uh energy efficiency, I think there are other ways to do it. And I think, you know, the reality is energy costs keep going up. We have every incentive to continue to be more efficient already based on on the direction of energy prices in this country. Um so, uh you know, you know, I I can support this. Do I like franchise fees? No. do, you know, but I just want to find a we got to collect the money to pay for these things, these trails, these projects. We're going to do it one way or the other. If this is the way that we choose to do it, I think um my request and this is a request based on the fact that our staff has done an amazing job every year of putting this in front of people. Let's give the full picture to folks when we get to the budget cycle. And you guys do that every year. um even uh if we hear from a few people that um say we don't give them that that we put this all there like here's your taxes, here's your franchise fears, here's your water, here's your you know all all your stuff that it's all put out there every year totally transparent about it and so um again thank you for for looking at this. Thank you for figuring out uh what it's actually going to cost and appears to me that you know things cost more this year than last year. Thank you, Council Member Rivas. >> Just a quick comment. Um um if you mentioned that u the possibility if we eliminate the franchise fees, the possibility of a tax levy going up to 9%, right? But if we keep a franchise fees, is it going to be kept at between five and 6% the tax levy as we discussed last year that it was going to the goal was to keep around 6% if we allowed this franchise fees to continue. >> I think that is on top of anything. >> Yeah, so I mean you know we all know it's a tax and that's basically what it is. There's no way to put it any other. We can come up with whatever we want, but still attacks. Um I I would love for us to try to do something with the state and the utility companies to stop it, right? I mean, I side with the Alexandra on this. I think it's the the greatest idea that has come up out of this, but I mean, it's I don't want to get too much into it, but I saw that's just my question. Are we going to be able to keep the tax levy at a decent percentage if we continue with this tax franchise fees? >> Mayor and council, we're just approaching a 27 28 two-year budget cycle. We um of course we want to keep it as low as we can. We're not anywhere near knowing information at this time. >> Agreed. And and if you look at the chart in front of you, Victor, it's a I mean the residential will not increase. This is this is a 0% [clears throat] increase for this. No, I'm aware of that and I also saw the information that is coming out with the for the budget for next year. It's already started. I I mean I know that the information is out there. My goal is to make sure that people actually see it that we need to be more proactive on how I mean the information goes out there. I mean I get the agenda and sometimes I don't read read the whole thing. I mean I read what catches my attention and I dedicate to that only. So people have the tendency to do that. The public does that as well as any of us. I you know we we I am sure that we don't read the entire agenda. I can tell a lot of the times by what I hear but my whole thing is the co we got an email saying that the tax the levy for next year is already you know they're planning on having uh events to make sure the public participates and all that stuff. So uh and the earliest we do that the better so people can participate and have their comments heard. Um because I remember my first year it was the last minute that people came in here it was just one public hearing and they had no opportunity to voice their this content on it. But that said I don't want to drag this too long. Okay. I'm sorry if I am just going on with this. Just my question is, are we going to do everything possible to keep the tax uh levy at a lower as low as possible? I mean, we heard promises last year that that was going to be the goal >> and and council member, I think we've had that discussion as the council and we've asked that as well. So, yes, I think the answer there is yes. And I think uh I mean, this is a separate conversation, but I understand what you're saying. >> Yeah. I just, you know, I and I hate to do that. I just, you know, and I have a lot more in my head that I want to say in regards to this, but it's a separate conversation. I just um you know my whole thing is and I don't mean any disrespect. Okay, I'm just adding this is because I just want to ask the questions. I you know they need to be asked. I'm sorry if you know I don't mean to put anybody on the spot and no disrespect whatsoever. Okay, I you're one of my greatest hero heroes. You run this city really tight financially one of the best places in in the state. >> [snorts] >> uh you know I'm even in the country from what I hear but you know I still have to ask the questions >> and and council member between now and December you're gonna have plenty of opportunity to ask questions plenty of opportunities don't have to settle on that while we talk about >> franch >> thank you mayor um just a really quick comment and just to kind of echo what some others have said I do think um including retaining walls in this would be a really great use of those funds right um as a frequent park user uh here in Bloomington, I a trail user. Um I know it's certainly something that uh we should be keeping an eye on, right? Um for so many reasons, safety being one of them. Um and then to certainly echo some of what um some of my colleagues have said already. Um I [clears throat] do think, no pun intended, but we're in between a rock and a hard place, right? There's no perfect right there's no perfect solution, but I think um given what's being presented, I think a flat rate um system, for lack of a better word, is is probably the way to go. and certainly what I would support here. Um, and again, ideally, uh, residents, um, or, um, commercial folks wouldn't be paying this and the the companies would be paying it, but that's not the world we find ourselves in. And so, here we are. And so, let's make the best use we can of where we find ourselves. Um, so, thank you very much for the presentation. I really appreciate all the work that you all are doing. Um, and yeah, I just wanted to make that come. So, thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. You have enough to work on there. >> We do. Thank you. >> Work with Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, >> council. We're going to go on item 2.2 here. This is a review of our urban forest master plan. And uh I'll I'll point out to to staff, but I'll certainly point out to council, we have three items on the agenda tonight, and we're already up to 7:18. So, uh we've got some things to get through. We got some work to do, so let's make sure we get it done. So, good evening and welcome. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um I am here with um part of our team from Davy Resource Group. Um Gail Nazal is here and will share this presentation, lead the presentation online. Sandra Albro, um one of the associates working on our plan with us as well as um Dave Hansen and our city forester. Um Dustin is is here too. Um first, this project includes um a significant data collection that you'll hear about tonight. Um that includes a canopy assessment and a smart tree inventory. um that all contributes to the urban forest master plan. So following this presentation, we are going to ask for some strategic direction on a few areas of um urban forest management being rightway trees and um managing trees on private property. Um we'll take feedback tonight um after the presentation on anything you wanted to hear or learn about that you maybe didn't or have questions on as well as the specific feedback um we're asking for. and then we'll be back to review the draft plan um we think by the end of April. I'll turn it over to Sandra. >> Very good. >> Gail, I'm sorry. >> Gail, good evening. Welcome. Thanks for being here tonight. >> Thank you, mayor, members of the council. I'm Gail Nosell with the Davy Resource Group and this evening, I'm happy to be able to present an overview of the process that we use to develop the urban forest master plan um with the with the staff here. So, first off, the urban an urban forest master plan provides vision, goals, and recommended actions to support the city's forestry operations over the next 20 years. Trees definitely speak well to Bloomington's mission and vision, and we heard that continually throughout the community engagement process when people named trees as one of the reasons they loved living in the city of Bloomington. The urban forest master plan is a process that has kicked off over a over over a year ago and the plan will be finalized this spring and hopefully with adoption later on this spring um once we receive some feedback this evening. The planning process engaged over 231 residents and stakeholders throughout Bloomington on a variety of public meetings um including some focus groups, stakeholder meetings, as well as an online presence through Let's Talk Bloomington. Our latest meeting was held on February 14th at the at the farmers market and we had fantastic attendance with that. Over 61 people attended and at that particular meeting we reviewed some of the goals and actions from the draft action plan and we received community feedback and again heard overwhelming understanding about benefits of trees and the u the need for them in the community as part of the process. Of course, the the resource group conducted an urban forestry canopy assessment as part of our first process. And first of all, you have to understand what an urban forest is. It's all the trees in our public and private spaces throughout the city. Citywide in Bloomington, 35% Thank you. 35% of the um of the city had we used high resolution photography and found that that over that canopy is 35%. Since 2023 that's the latest coverage that we had for the aerial imagery trees tree cover does vary uh widely across the city from the lowest area in the north um near your south town at 1.5% all the way down to the south area with nine mile creek and having 63%. So there certainly is variability across the city. Over the last 10 years, Bloomington has added 390 acres of tree canopy. And this is remarkable considering that you've had emerald ashbor um in the city since 2014. So it's very impressive to see this type of growth um with that many trees that you've had to remove over time. um residential land contains 5,000 acres of tree canopy with over 2700 possible um in that area. The conservation lands in Bloomington which includes the parks and natural areas has 2400 acres with the capacity of an additional 800 acres within the streets railways and tree cover is 15% and tree canopy grew over 95 acres over the last 10 years. Um and that's very limited to no street tree planting um since the 1970s with Dunelm disease and currently without any procedures for requesting those that's why that has stayed moderate. I also wanted to address the priority planting areas in the city and as part of our tree canopy assessment we looked and evaluated those based on priority on the heat map. The next slide here you'll see possible planting areas um with the heat map showing in red. Um you'll notice that planting areas included bare planting areas included bare soil and other grass and other low-lying vegetation um where there currently no trees. It does exclude ball fields and other areas where it's not as desirable for for planting. Possible planting areas were prioritized based on the bid ability to reduce the heat island effect as well as capture storm water and improve social equity, human health and well-being. And there are many more benefits. However, these are the easiest to measure through a heat map type of um technology. We also looked at tree count and possible planting areas were divided into small, medium, and large um spaces. Most planting sites are on private land and totaling about 13% of that area. Public land and right ofways um total about 4%. These sites represent maximum planting potential and they should be evaluated closely to determine suitability of course working with engineering and things to determine whether where's a good place to plant. Um continuing on looking at our tree count by priority. Um those are possible planting sites. um planting planting on private land and the right ofway are actually equal. They're pretty low across the priority levels. Planting sites on public facilities are mostly a very low um priority for the heat island um impacts storm water capture and so and social equity. So looking at the street tree and the canopy assessment, the second part of our project was looking at the street in the the Bloomington street trees. And I first before we look at this next slide, I do have to say that um Bloomington is the second city in Minnesota to ever take on what was using LAR and highspectral um imaging to look at their tree canopy. So this is phenomenal. There's probably only about 10 communities in the entire country this past year that took on a project like this. So from somebody in the industry, it is very impressive that you've taken on this project to look at your data. So hats off to all of your staff um that have been moving this forward. Um, as we learned about Bloomington Street trees, there's 24,549 trees growing along the 450 miles of street trees. About half of those are planted in the rightway and about the other half extend into the ride ofway from private um property. Um, of those trees, as we went through the process, we identified um through some remote inspection and then field inspection by certified arborists that there's 56 trees are were identified as part of this process for removal. and another 256 recommended for pruning. As I mentioned, this is a highly technical process that is very repeatable. Um, and the smart tree cap smart tree process captures un an unprecedented amount of data um, one terabyte a day, which is phenomenal. And the data that results in this is five high resolution images and a digital twin where you can look at a tree and spin it around um, and see it right from your desk. All the data cap captured as part of this process is directly um efficient for urban forest. It really helps to move from a reactive situation to a proactive situation for our forests. As an industry, we are still learning about this. This is still relatively new. Um and so we are looking to Bloomington is helping to kind of pave the way for other communities in this high technical approach to their urban forest. So, we're moving from recommendations from visits in maybe every two years to looking at trees that really need that specific help versus considering all the trees every time. When it comes to Bloomington street trees, um there are some that we've identified that maybe are not the best uh for a right ofway. For example, there's a high proportion here you'll see of silver maple and um Norway maple as well as um as elm. Some of these trees tend to be very large. They are prone to some storm damage. And of course, green ash, as you'll know, succumbs to emerald ashbor. So, there's certainly room to optimize that and that will be part of the plan as well to make recommendations um for some additional trees. Um trees are not only aesthetically pleasing, but they come with lots of benefits. And the trees as a public resource um providing 183,000 benefits per year of storm water capture, pollute, air pollution removal, and carbon capture. And again, those are the easiest to to measure um for those trees. So, it's it adds tremendously to the sustainability of your community. As part of an urban forest master plan, um we also look at the resiliency of your urban forest and it estimates the vulnerability of your tree population when it comes to potential pests and diseases like I'm sure you've witnessed over the year with Dutch elm disease and of course um ash. It provides species recommendations for as we predict in the future other types of pest and diseases um how your tree population would be vulnerable is what this outlines right here. Um the information that we captured in this in this process u for the inventory um can be used through a dashboard in the treeeper software and it is something that you can show generally to the public and then control what types of features you would like the public to be able to see. So that is part of your overall project to be able to see individual trees near an individual's home. As part of the process, we also looked at the city forestry operations. Um as part of that, we are is we are able to look at over 500 US cities um of similar sizes throughout the entire country. And currently um through our process, you'll see here on this chart that Bloomington does have fewer full-time equivalent staff members conducting tree care for tree care is mostly continues to be reactive response to emergencies, complaints, and right-of-way encroachments. In recent years, most of the tree care conducted by parks um has been tree removal due to EAB, which I'm sure you're all familiar with. In the future, we would expect to see some of those removals decline and turn and look at and look at moving some of that those resources to tree pruning, more of a maintenance aspect for your trees. Parks expenditures do track um with tree activities. Over the last three years, 77% of parks forestry expenditures have gone towards tree removal as well. And among um looking at the budget um among 463 treat 463 US cities um including the Midwest cities you'll see here kind of how Bloomington compares when it the last three years when it comes to budget. Um there are so you'll notice some allocations. It was higher in in 2024 due to removals for trees and in 2025 um there was a little bit lower budget due to um removals. um that optimum level here you can see is still well below that national average. Um when it comes to forestry expenditures, there is a lot of demand um for forestry consultations within the city. Most of these revolve around right-of-way trees and private trees and you can see here some public request percentages um here shown are from 2024 to 2026. Um, when it comes to policy, Bloomington tree ordinances do date back to the 1950s and to the 1970s. There are some areas that we've identified as misalignment between um, current code and current practice. And resolving some of those issues, we'd recommend as updating some code, changing practice, or a combination of those um, throughout the plan. So from our process here, we have identified six individual goals that we recommend um that you look further into. And some of these are going to we're going to dive into a few of these pieces today, but increasing perhaps into proactive management, supporting more um private street tree stewardship um which is where a lot of your tree benefits are coming from on private lands. looking at the policies and procedures to have some better alignment as well as um aligning some urban community forestry goals as we've outlined here today as well as continuing to um create a resilient forest and of course continue to expand some partnerships that you're already doing within the city. So from here I'm going to turn this back over to Renee and we're going to tackle this one together. >> Thank you Gail. Um first staff are really excited about the data and just the council's commitment to urban forestry. Um particularly um in my last five years here um you know the forest division the the work of urban forestry was managed by um a team member Dave who wore three hats at the time as urban forester um maintenance supervisor and facility supervisor. Um with the development of the parks and recreation department um Dave became a supervisor of that division. We have an urban forester position now. Um Dustin, who's here tonight. Um and then I'll remind you of the partnership that you entered in with Three Rivers Park District. That was um you know, such a win-win for the community, the park, but um specifically for forestry. we were um able to re um program a full-time staff that was working um at Normanddale Lake um to our forestry division and that has um helped significantly with with operations. um a couple other strategic investments. Um through strategic priorities, um one being a really um great piece of equipment with the log loader, um we're able to really do work in half the time um with less staff and much safer um operations. Um and then of course the investment in this plan, the data collection and the plan itself that we're working on today. So, um, council's commitment here to, um, trees, the urban forest, and that commit and that, how that contributes to quality of life in Bloomington is, um, really, um, really recognized and, um, important. Um, the first discussion that I'd like to, um, start here with council is, um, rightway trees. We talked about um kind of the history a little bit of rightaway trees, but the policies and codes about planting trees in the rightway have been in place for about 50 years. Um since the um um as Gail mentioned, the only there's a we inventoried about 11,000 trees in the rightway and those have been planted through redevelopment or some special um permit applications. Um right now code prohibits trees to be planted in the rightway except by permit. Um and we do not currently have a permit program today. Um the other um so that is that's the status quo and I'm here to ask council what direction would you like us to take and explore more with expanding the urban forest and tree canopy in the rightway? Um it is an opportunity for Bloomington to continue to improve um quality of life, resident experience and equity um as it relates to um experiences in um our rights of way and on private property. We looked at a heat map earlier tonight that shows as well as the canopy cover that shows the um lesser tree cover across Bloomington. And what we've looked at so far with this plan is Gail showed a little bit um within the priority planting areas and across the city where there's an opportunity to plant a tree. So we've got that data and can say these are the potential tree planting opportunities and kind of extrapolating from there without you know these inspections. Um we've done some analysis to say um with several options of should we just issue permits to allow people to plant trees in the rightway and then take on that maintenance which we're not doing now. It would be a very small incremental increase to our maintenance budget. The maintenance we identified as a result of this inventory is um about $120,000 worth of work. Um a lot which can be covered through existing contracts. um expanding the program through a permit process or by a city implemented or in combination with the city implemented program that would plant trees is something staff took a little bit closer look at with the data we have across the city. The plan identified about 45,000 places to plant trees. We know those aren't all viable. we haven't expected them, but um looking at specifically in the priority areas, we estimate about 11,000 places to plant trees. If the city were to undertake a tree planting program, knowing the cost of planting a tree and incorporating long-term maintenance, um we estimate the planting costs um at about $400,000 a year, which would be new funding. A program like that would take um you know, two to three years to develop and implement. Um, and then down the road at about year seven or eight, increased maintenance costs would come as we on a seven-year cycle do these inspections to see what do we need to prune and remove. Um, assuming those costs factored in. Um, by year 10 with inflation, we're estimating about $600,000 in planting costs. um plus another um you know 300 in maintenance costs. So that's a commitment of focusing on priority planting areas of those 11,000 sites and what a city initiated tree program might look like. I um offered on here a you know fullervice municipal program. We know what um a a standard like Minneapolis and St. Paul have where the city plants boulevard trees, maintains boulevard trees citywide. And that's really taking those 45,000 sites, you know, estimating what are viable there, which might be half, but um you can essentially um times that by four for um you know a full city implementation program. So in 20, you know, getting that done over 20 years would be almost a million dollars a year in tree planting costs. So um staff is just offering this for discussion on a scale of what implementation looks like um where we could just simply start issuing permits while we take on the maintenance of trees. We could also come up with a proactive plan that focuses in priority areas um where the city is initiating planting um but also while offering a permit um or um we have that option of you know do we want to have a fullervice full city tree planting program at um a a significant investment. So some feedback and direction um there is requested um a small incremental increase versus you know a really large program. >> Before we dive into it, I I just want to say thank you uh for this outstanding presentation. This this is just this assessment is remarkable in terms of its uh how broad it is and how deep it is and and the different aspects that you addressed in it. It it's very very well done and I appreciate that. And for a council that says how they want to make datadriven decisions, well, we got a ton of data here to make this decision here, folks. And uh and not just not just guesswork either. To have the exact number of trees in the city is very impressive. And uh and I will say the the part that's not at all surprising is how the maintenance of current trees is incredibly cost-effective and and incredibly efficient in terms of the the the overall canopy in the city. So, thank you for that. Well done. Thank you very much. So, with that said, council questions, thoughts on this? I'll start with Council Member Robertson and then Council Member Lman. >> Uh, thank you, Mayor. Um, just uh comments, no questions. Um, I was really impressed with the um option, the fourth option, the citywide program that's combining um the resident permit program and the targeted targeted, excuse me, equity program. Um, that to me really does seem like something that's the best of both worlds. I don't want to say that just in case. I don't want to jinx it. Um, but I thought that was a really cool option and I um that is what I would strongly support. I think that gives um residents who have the wherewithal and the time and the money and expertise and all that to get that done. And we know that we're very lucky in Bloomington to have a number of those residents. Um but it would also make sure that we're focusing on parts of the city that don't um have those same resources from private residents. So I think this is really cool. I really appreciate it and I think option four would be the way I would like to go. So >> council member Lman thank you mayor. Um I'm just going to go ahead and make comments. I think my colleagues have all uh given you the uh ada boy uh stuff and I appreciate that. Uh but what I I would say is and I'm not sure if my option is even on here. What I would say is that you know I think that we ought to look at trees a lot like we do our pavement. You know we've kind of did that before uh this council when we looked at trails and sidewalks. I'm not saying add this to the PMP program at all, but you know, a lot of our our budget right now is currently spent on removal, but how do we proactively, you know, you know, build a a a program where we, you know, we look at these trees, uh, like we do roads and sink holes and that type of thing and and build a program where we kind of um, you know, find a way to eliminate those those spots that you talked about across there and really be methodical across the city like we are with the PME program and really have a plan of of action and then you know one of the things I said to the city manager earlier today you know what's the cost you know so we have a really good understanding of what that looks like and then maybe that looks like at some trade-offs that we need to make you know right now we're currently looking at a snow removal program does it make more sense for us to invest in in that rather than what we're doing with these the snow plow thing that's going on here we shift our resources from here to there and that's the thing that I I you know I'm particularly concerned about with this is how do we sustain this for the long term term. So, are there assessments? You know, you know, how do we get other other folks to help us, you know, pay for this? It can't just be just a city tax or just in the boulevard. It's really got to be all-encompassing thing like the city pavement management program is. Thank you. >> Thank you, council member. Council member Delisandro. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, if you don't mind, I do have a couple questions actually about the data. Not surprised, I'm sure. I appreciate the opportunity to talk with you about this. Um, so first off, just to get an understanding, what what does crown like what is the definition of crown size and what does small versus medium versus large mean? >> Great question, Councilman Dlesandro. The it typically can range from like small one that might be a small tree that would be maybe 15 to 20 feet in in diameter. Medium tree might be 20 to 30 and a large tree would be something that would be like 50 to 70 on industry average. >> Okay. And so nothing that would be considered a a sapling or a first five-year tree would have been counted necessarily. >> No, these are you would typically when you're looking at tree planting, you're looking at, you know, mature, you know, mature spacing. Okay. When the trees mature, >> understood. Great. Um, and when you counted all the trees, did you look at, for example, I have a tree that came down. I put a small tree in. It's not canopy level tree yet, obviously, but it's replacing the tree that I put down. Would you have counted that tree as you went by? because it is like close to the boulevard. So would you have counted that tree even though it's a small tree? >> We did. So when you're able to look at the dashboard, you'll be able to find your own tree that there, you know, and it will of course appear as its current size as a small tree. But yeah, yes, you know, part of the study tried to look at, you know, the future and what, you know, how those will grow into that. And so having a planned approach to tree species selection throughout the city is very important to make sure you've got an appropriate sized trees in the spaces. >> Right on. That makes that makes sense to me. Second question was, um, you mentioned we have 24,549 trees across the 45 miles of street that we have. That averages out to about 54 trees per mile. Is that good or is that bad or is that like average for a city our size? I'm kind of curious if 54 trees per mile is what you like what you want to see. Is the problem that that's it's really more like 70 trees someplace and zero trees other places and that's what we're trying to balance out or what what's really going on there? I can't say for sure. However, another city in the area that has also completed this had a very very similar number of street miles and number of trees on their boulevard. So, I'd say you're you know you're comparable >> as to >> in the metro area. >> Right on. Okay. Uh I just wasn't I'm kind of interested in understanding what the outcome would be for a a ride-of-way tree program, meaning what's our goal. Is our goal to increase that number from 54 trees per mile to 90 trees per mile or like you know for me that's that's an interesting question that that determines to some degree how many trees we have to plant which determines how much it's going to cost and that's why I'm trying to understand um whether that's good or not good or anything like that. So, if we can think through that a little bit as we think about what the program might look like, I think knowing what our outcome would want to be in terms of trees per mile or however you would recommend we that we look at that um so that you know 20 years from now if we decide to do another liar or by then who knows it's an AI bot running down the street um picking up our trees, right? We don't know. But if if we do that 20 years from now, we we will want to know did we do better or did we not do better as it relates to that? That's why I'm curious. Um okay. Uh you mentioned um you you also mentioned um that you had data on our public works requests for orders. Uh like did that also include environmental health complaints about their neighbors for example? I'm curious if that was included in that data. >> It was not. I see Dave. >> Okay. So, it's an interesting I think there's an interesting piece of data that we already have that says how many times do our customer do our residents call about their neighbors trees and the problems associated with their neighbors trees because lots of times people will call about their own trees but I can tell you that we get lots of calls about that and I would be curious to see if those line up or if that's an added amount of data that we could could look into in terms of what the the thing is. Um, okay. So, that's all I had in terms of questions. I appreciate it. Um, I'm uh I I would agree uh that I think um looking at two and three is really a as a as a program together is really intriguing to me. Um I I'm I'm curious about the costs associated with this because I feel like I feel like there's a lot of opportunity for us to get free trees for people. I know that that might mean that they're not necessarily the best possible trees, but maybe I'm wrong about that. But it feels like there's a the potential for for us to work with Three Rivers and work with Mandot or um DNR and other places like that to think about trees. Um in fact, I have a little dogwood growing right now because I got it last year at the Three Rivers, you know, uh uh state of the the parks kind of situation. So, I know they have them in all and I just would be curious to see how we could fit that into that. Um, especially if it means because we have free trees, our equity program can be accelerated, right? Because free trees are great. Um, and then I agree completely with um I was going to say something very similar to what uh Council Member Lman said, which is put put the the a tree maintenance program on the books the same way we have our PMP. I think that that makes a ton of sense. The only last question I have, and I don't know if it's possible, is can you actually use any of the the technology that you have to understand where on a boulevard is the right place to plant a tree versus not versus having to what we do now, which is dig it up or have center point out and put a bunch of shitty flags in the you know what I'm saying? Like we let's do better than that. Can we use any of our technology to do that? >> So, Council Member Dasandro, there is um technology available for that. I mean certainly we it wasn't within the scope of this project. Um but certainly with the data that we have in the location data, you know, another phase could be looking at a specific planting plan um by overlaying some of the utility data that you already have as far as the underground utilities and where they're located. So those types of things are certainly all possible to pinpoint exact locations. >> Okay. I think the easier we make it for residents to be like, you don't have to wait. Here's your sapling, go put it in this part of your yard, >> people will do it, right? That's what I'm thinking about. So, the way to make it as easy as possible for residents to participate um by not forcing them to wait for Center Point to show up and then Excel to show up and then the utilities to show up and put all their little stripies and everything like that. Give them an easy way to get their tree in the in the yard. Um, so, uh, I think that's all I have, but I think this is great and I'm super excited to see us with, you know, I don't know, 48,000 trees at some point. That'd be amazing. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member Council Member Rivas and Council Member Carter. Council member Rivas, >> I just want a recommendation on what trees to plant. I just cut three of them. Three huge ones that they were uh one of them was dead and the other two were too close to the road and sometimes will block the people turning pulling up to 98. So I cut him off. Um but what would you recommend for me to plant there? I know that Excel has plans to remove my walnut tree out of there because it goes into the lines. So what would you recommend to plant instead? I mean, you mentioned something to that, right? >> Council member, maybe we could take that conversation offline because I I would appreciate the answer, but I think maybe we could take that conversation offline. >> No, I want to hear the answer. >> Looking at the clock on the wall, right? >> If you have the information, you can just email it to me or something. But yeah, it would be beneficial not just for me, but for people listening. Sure. >> That have the same problem. Right. >> Agreed. Uh, Council Member Carter and then Council Member Nelson. Council Member Carter. >> Uh, thank you, Mayor. I will be brief. So I am in favor of option four that combines two and three. Um I think uh aligning uh what we have in code with like actually what we do sounds like a great plan. And um I think as part of that um similar to what council member Dlesandre was saying, if we can point residents to different resources to help them as they make decisions around their tree planting. Um, obviously there's like three rivers, but we have our own city tree purchasing program where residents can purchase trees. And there's actually a list online, council member Rivas, of like eight different species um at $50 a tree. So encourage people listening to look at that program. Uh, and then I know some parts of our community obviously are like lush with trees, but looking at the maps, it's very clear that there are parts that need significant help. And so that's why I'm in favor of the targeted equity program. Um and then you know obviously similar to other concerns that have been raised. Cost is a factor. And so I think you know starting small and then doing some modeling of what that can look like into future years if we kind of if we grow steadily and like how many trees does that mean? >> What's our goal like council member Dlesandra said? Um so just having kind of a more robust plan in place. But I am in favor of it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you council member. Council member Nelson. >> Yeah, thanks. I'll try to be quick here, Mayor. Um, so there was a slide that you had about um tree resilience and threats to them. And maybe I completely misunderstood it, but it scared me um because >> apparently emerald ashbor isn't that big of a deal. And there's like all these other things that are going to like kill thousands of trees. Asian hornwing beetles and spongy moths. Like are we screwed? Like [laughter] like can you explain this to me? Because this freaked me out honestly that when I looked at this in the packet it scared me. So can you explain to me what I'm seeing here and are are these threats all viable in Bloomington? Are and are we going to have massive tree losses here? >> Councilman Lman, I could certainly we just want to make you make you all aware of potential threats. Although I will tell you that the Asian longhorn beetle, for example, just eats almost all the maples. However, I will also tell you that it has been eradicated in other parts of the country and it's probably been around for almost 15 years. So, it's just a way to be prepared when it comes to tree selection. But we want to look at the number of maples that you had, which would be the 7,233, and just know it could be a threat. But again, knowing that, we want to plan accordingly. Um, spotted lantern fly is not here yet. Spongy moth, um, there was an old name for it in Minnesota. It was called gypsy moth at one time. It's been renamed. That's been around for 30 years. So, again, um, doesn't typically attack, you know, it does attack, you know, street trees. Um, and it has been, um, eradicated in some areas of the metro area. Um, so these are things all to be aware of. Um, but I wouldn't uh I wouldn't battle, you know, batten down the hatches or anything quite yet on these. So this is for awareness on continuing diversification of your urban forest. >> Thank you. I I appreciate that because like I said, this this scared me. I was like, "Oh no, I mean ashbor was bad and now we got all these other things." Um, so my other question is I mean we obviously we talked about the the rightway trees. there was some other information about other locations. Um, can you tell me the pros and cons of the rightway versus other places? And one of the particular areas I'm looking at is within city controlled property around parks. We have um looked at different projects that spend candidly a significant amount of money to provide shade around uh youth sporting locations or adult sporting locations. um and I've always been in the opinion, why don't we just plant a bunch of trees to provide shade and and provide a benefit on both of these? And I've been to uh you know, my my kids are a little bit older now, but when they were younger, I've been to a number of different athletic complexes, they you know, the whole sidelines or whatever are shaded with trees. Um and are those opportunities? So, and so I guess my question is what are the pros and cons of Boulevard versus other things and and part of my concern with the boulevard is just the long-term maintenance as well as the other environmental um things that they get uh you know impacted by salt and plowing and and other things along that nature. So, can >> I can take a a real quick um response here. We we did look at um trees on public and private property on public property. Um city-owned parks in addition to rightaway were both um analyzed um and looked at tree planting opportunities. The um a large portion of the opportunities in parks generally is used up as our program has been very aggressively planting trees in parks. There are still um some more opportunities. Um this conversation was seeking and we will continue to pursue those um as we do today. Um the conversation around rightaway trees um was brought to you because it is a big policy shift. Um and the the city has had a specific um um program that prohibits trees in the boulevard. There um is also reasons for that. Um we talked with our um uh colleagues in engineering. There's conflicts with utilities. tree roots grow into private property and have sewer conflicts and cause maintenance. Um, so there's there's cons. Um, there's the maintenance costs long-term of a rightaway tree program. Staff brought this um to council for direction if there's interest pursuing um a a switch in that direction and I'm hearing there there is um to explore that further and bring that back um with our with our draft plan. um what that looks like. Um long-term goals, metrics, how we can balance costs long term um with a combination of allowing permits um for rightaway planting and potentially um a city um initiated program in those places. Um looking more at um socioeconomic um factors and environmental um factors um to provide um comfortable places and spaces for people. >> Thank you. And I appreciate that as we look through it, like I I think the pros are there. You're laying that out. I would also like to know a little bit more about the potential consequences. Like you said, you put a tree there. That's where a lot of the sewer lines are. A tree root grows through that. I had that at my first house. It's not an inexpensive fix to dig up your entire front yard because a tree root dug through an old sewer line. Uh we're looking to put more sidewalks in. you know, how do we have conflicts with those sidewalks and other trails that we're looking to put in? Um, you know, and then, uh, you know, just the overall maintenance for the homeowner and the city. I had half of my tree fall into the street. Our public works department, our plow, they're amazing. The the ability that they came and just pushed a tree over to the sidewalk and then like few hours later, our team showed up and uh, cut that tree up. And it wasn't because I'm a council member that they just they knew about it because of the plow truck and took care of it. So, but there are there are significant issues with regards to putting a bunch of trees in the rightway. There are huge benefits of it as well. Um, and so I I think my last question is, are there other things outside of just trees that that we should be looking at in terms of other uh plantings or things of that nature within um uh those areas that might be as effective to reducing the heat island effect um and protecting our natural environment? And it is that part of what we might look at as well? Um, Mayor, Council Member Nelson, streetscape is um we do have a streetscapes program. Um, something that's very maintenance intensive and expensive and it's focused in um some specific areas of the city. Um, and we can bring um a little bit more discussion back on that as we kind of collectively talk about these mitigation approaches. >> Council, I'm going to move us forward because we are on question one of three. Let's go to question 2A if we could please. council. I'll combine our next two questions and they really focus on um the role of the city on private property. Um there I broke it into two parts. Um homeowner property and then how we um as a city um look for opportunities to protect and grow our urban forest with development and redevelopment. Um first the role of the city on on private property homeowners. We talked about um the number of calls that the city gets. The code is um vague about the city's role. It allows us to enter property to do inspections to remove trees, which um about up until about three years ago, we did on a um callin complaint basis. It's not something we're able to implement equitably, which is why we stopped doing that and allowed this plan to take place. Staff's recommendation here is in short that we no longer we continue the practice of not entering private property for tree inspections, for tree removals, and clarify code um make code more clear in that way. But like other Pierce cities, we provide resources online of um contractors to call um and uh solutions um for tree questions. And I just wanted to um make sure we were in concurrence with kind of continuing that practice um as staff and um moving forward later with a a code alignment. In that regard, >> I'll note too, the city um does have a contract that we work with private property owners on tree removal and um that is still in place to continue as um a resource for homeowners. Tree protecting and planting with redevelopment isn't a discussion we wanted to go into today, but um wanted to offer um the council an opportunity to direct staff if there are specific issues um or questions we should pursue um with this plan um around development and redevelopment and tree protection. if there's things that have come up in past discussions that you'd like to call to our attention. I do have Nick Johnson um online for us um quickly to answer any questions, but it's just to kind of ask is there something we should look at um operationally or in code there. >> First, I want to double back and say uh yes to to the previous slide. I think uh any policy changes that make it more equitable, that make it safer for our city employees, uh and then just make it more uh more consistent from situation to situation, I think is better for everybody. And so I'm I'm certainly in favor of that. uh in terms of the tree protection and planting with development. I I I guess I we we've all heard different possibilities and different things and people complaints, but frankly I I don't know I've ever seen in front of me exactly what our current preservation and planting standards are and how how it all works. Uh and whether it's you know preservation planting standards or I'm I'm assuming planting standards means replacement in the in the event of you know clearing to to develop and that kind of thing. uh that might be the place to start this conversation rather than us trying to guess our way through exactly where we are just to uh get a baseline and see where we could be. Uh council member Dellesandro. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes. So, when we talked about the res R1 versus R1 R1 versus R2 standards and everything on the west side, this was a big part of that discussion. One of the questions I asked was are is our is our environmental review for new development strong enough and couldn't we revise it? So, this is a great way to dovetail those things together. I think um my personal opinion is um I think right now it's a one for one. If you tear if you take down a plant uh one of a certain size, you have to replace it kind of thing. Um I would like to see us make that more injurious, if you will, or more more punitive. Maybe that's not the right way to say it. Maybe they have to buy us three trees, one of which goes there, but two more have to go somewhere else that we're planting it or something to that effect. So, I would actually like to see us do that. um in in alignment with the comments that I've made before about the R1 standards and um and how we how we should make sure that we are preserving tree canopy as we do development. So um hopefully Nick remembers those me those conversations at that time and we um when we were doing our our R1 work and we can maybe bring that back together as a study item. Thanks. >> Agreed. And and I was thinking beyond that conversation. I was thinking uh more of a a town home development perhaps on Penn Avenue that [laughter] uh where a number of trees disappeared and it sat empty now for three we're going on three or four years and uh absolutely but I don't know what they're required to put back in. I just don't know and I think that would be >> well and to your point when >> or when I mean that's the other point. Yeah. >> Because a you know a statute of limitations could expire on you letting it be bald land for a while. >> Exactly. >> Yeah. >> Exactly. Council member Lman ju just briefly. Uh so just for both these two questions here, the mayor answered it the way I would too, but I [clears throat] expand that a little bit and I think uh council member Delos are kind of kind of going beyond the scope of what you said before because I think that we really need to have a comprehensive kind of PMP style where we look across the entire city at all these things to really kind of, you know, progress all of these these items. And this is really speaking towards that uh because there's some real advantages for the the city that are a lot like roads um and other things that we do. So, I just I think as [clears throat] we look at each of these questions, we got to figure out is there a more comprehensive way and I I agree with with Council Member Carter, we got to get started somewhere. That's a great place to start. Uh, you know, where she's she's mentioned to just get the ball rolling and I know we're kind of thinking kind of bigger. Um, I'd love to see a much bigger, more comprehensive, more kind of thing, but we got to get started somewhere. >> Council member Nelson. >> Yeah, thank you. Um, can you go back to 2A just quick? Um cuz I guess the question that I had here was with regards more to dead trees, not adding additional trees. And I know that that had been a conversation we had for a while. And there's often times uh conflicts between neighbors because a dead tree is threatening to fall on a neighbor's property. And am I correct in understanding that it's still our policy that that's just sort of between them and >> correct? >> Okay. Um, in that, um, I will channel my, um, uh, council me, former council member Jack Beloga, and just say that, uh, that'd be something I' I'd continue to be interested in looking at because it is a conflict that I hear from, uh, constituents on a regular basis. And unfortunately, a lot of times people um, mistakenly believe that their insurance will cover that even though it's a known problem and that you ignored it. um try to argue and rationalize with an insurance company. Um so um and then on 2B, uh I I think it's very appropriate that we look into this. Um I'd just like to avoid getting sued like Adina did. So um so would we? Yes, agreed. All right. Thank you. >> The thoughts, council, you have enough to go on. Mayor Council, I heard concurrence in um the change on private um residential property and I'm sure our colleagues in planning have um more to offer um to the um development and redevelopment conversation and we'll bring that back. >> Very good. >> Thank you. >> So, you had one more uh slide of next steps just very quickly where we're headed next. We are taking this information to um refine and complete a draft which will have a full review um that incorporates um what we talked about tonight um shooting for the end of April. Um after that final review, we'll finalize the plan and bring that back for adoption. >> Will uh sustainability or planning have any review or input on this? We are um planning a um meeting with the sustainability commission and coordinating that right now and um we've been coordinating the review with um Nick Johnson and we'll um ask and see what his his wish is there for that commission. >> Very good. >> Yeah. Mr. Mayor, may I ask one real quick thing? Have you guys have have you done any requests to the I do a lot of product work, right? Sometimes one of the biggest easiest questions is are you willing to pay for that and how much would you pay? Have we asked any of our residents if they'd be willing to participate in some way in a program that actually comes out of their pocket? Because I'd be very interested in knowing what they'd be willing to pay. >> Can we ask that question? Can we get something up on Let's Talk or something and try to get some meaningful data on that. Okay. I appreciate it. Thanks. >> Very good. Thank you much. >> Thank you. >> Thanks for being here with us tonight. And gentlemen, I'm sorry we didn't get to you, but uh I'm sure we'll hear from you again very soon. >> Yeah. >> One one thing to clarify um if I may. Nice to see you all tonight, mayor. And I'll be very brief. Um early on, uh Council Member Dalisando asked a question about environmental health and um private property. Um I answered that by saying no, we didn't look at what environmental health gets for calls, but we did look at our own. And we get plenty of those, too. So, if you look at the one slide that has the right-of-way inquiries we get, uh, the private inquiries we get, and then the park tree inquiries we get, those would all be lumped into the the private inquiries that we get or right away if it's a deemed to be a hazard or resident has a question and we can tease out a little more information and send that forward with the actual numbers of calls that we get. So, thank you for your time tonight. >> Thank you much, council. So, we're going to move on item 2.3, uh, city manager performance evaluation. And this is a closed item. So, I'm going to ask everybody in the chambers to go home and have a good evening. And we're going to, uh, get set up. Uh, council, as we go into this, uh, closed meeting, there are, uh, as you know, and you've heard me say before, there's a handful of reasons why we're able to close a public meeting of the city council. And, uh, evaluation, employee evaluations is one of those reasons. And so we're going to go into private uh closed discussion on all of this and we will um we will have a have a conversation. We will then come back into open session and we will ultimately report back out on this uh our discussion. I I will do that at our next possible meeting. Is that how it is stated, Miss Manderine? >> Um mayor members, yes. The law requires that there be a report out at the next open meeting which is tomorrow. Um in the event you all finish tonight. Um if you don't finish tonight then there is a specific plan that has to go into place. Um but I think the working assumption is you all will wrap up tonight and then there'll be a report out uh tomorrow at the um mass concurrent meeting. >> Mass [snorts] concurrent meeting >> and then a point of clarification mayor actually the the close session is going to occur in the Dakota conference room. So you all will go to the Dakota for the close session and then come back here to um to adjourn the meeting. >> All right. Very good. Council, there is a resolution in our packet directing the closure of a public meeting. I would look for a motion and a second. >> So moved. >> Motion by council member Robertson, second by council member Lman to adopt the resolution directing the closure of a public meeting of the city council. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. >> Opposed. Motion carries 70. We're going to go into private uh or we're going to close close session and as I said, we'll come back into open session to close the meeting later. Thanks. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] Hey, heat. Hey, heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. of heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. >> [bell] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat up here. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. N. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Hey, Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. N. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> I think we're good. It is 9:06 and the council is now back in open session. Uh we have completed our closed session and I will report out on our closed session discussion tomorrow night at our meeting. Council, we have completed our agenda for this evening. I would look for a motion to adjourn. >> Second. >> Motion by council member Dallas. Second by council member Revas to adjourn this evening. No further discussion. All in favor please signify by saying I. >> I oppose. Motion carries 70. Thank you much gang. [music]