It is 7 o'clock, so I'll go ahead and call the meeting to order. We'll start with a roll call. McKe here, Lanterman here. Uh Varamp here, Nicholls here, and councelor Bottom is absent, I believe, uh somewhere flying home from New York or somewhere over there. So, flight unfortunately got delayed, so he won't be able to make it. Um, if you'd like to stand and join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. Agenda approval. Is there anything from staff? Looks like a couple additions. Uh, yes. Three changes, mayor. Uh, item 6A was updated, item 8 was added, item 10 was added. Okay. And anything from councel? All right. Uh, then I will entertain a motion to approve the agenda as amended. So move. Second. Kemp and Nicholas. Thank you. That helps. Uh, all those in favor say I. I. I. Okay. And on to open forum. Jay will walk us through it. something we have a few cards. Yes. Uh ladies and gentlemen, this is an opportunity uh where you can step forward and speak to the council uh at on the dis about something not on the agenda. Uh and the council will receive your feedback. It won't be a dialogue. They'll just take your feedback at this time. Uh mayor, we have four cards and so the first person I would like to invite uh up to the microphone, please state your name and your address is Banu Ready. So we both are here for the same. So if you'd like to go off together, that would be fine. Uh the other gentleman is Rajan Civan. Please state your name and your address. My name is 1909 Galloway Circle. This is Rajan 1986. So uh we are here to uh present our case. So we live on 101 where our backyard space 101 basically both of ours. So uh I mean uh over the years uh I mean uh since our backyard is very close to 101 so a lot of people just stop there. So we have an idea of you know having a privacy fence along that line so that it's more safe for our kids just to play uh outside. So we we were wondering in China uh as well as uh the other city they have a lot of privacy fences along 101. So we wanted to build one just to block you know somebody entering our backyard from 101 since it's an easy access so just from the safety perspective. So we were talking to mayor uh Tom as well but we just wanted to present our case here as a general comment so that it can be uh what do you say uh reviewed for the entire city just from the safety purpose around 101. Yes, I think the city ordinance right now is to set up 100 ft setback is what a city ordinance and certain cases they do allow us looks like 60 ft 60 ft or 100 ft almost half of a jar and that would not allow our kids to play properly. So we would like to have that reduced to the ordinance that we have as a city or online so that we are able to make the privacy plans for the safest of that's I know mayor presented it with the idea of the ordinance uh amendment. Uh but there is a state fee of $2,000 plus another 700. So we we sorry we just wanted to check uh since it's for the entire city if there's any other way that can be waved and and our application can be taken and that's good for them and then so that we can build our privacy fans. We we were thinking of doing it this fall so that you know kids can start training during the winter coming summer as well. So we wanted city to request to look at one as amendment as a at a city cost. You would be happy to file application fees for the fences or anything but we wanted the city to take up the amendment results and do your amendment for us. Right. Thank you very much. Thank you. Sure. [Applause] Uh, next person would be Mr. Kurt Tim. My name is uh Kurt Tim. I recently purchased a year ago A1 for Power 7630 Commerce Street. That's the address on my home address. Um I'd like to u put a sign on the back and there's a sign there now that's grandfathered in 8 by 12 and we have a lot of issue people have issues people stating that they don't over there and uh the back side of the building faces 10 to try and put something or no stop let people know that we're there then I sign right now to do to the front which doesn't faces the door company doesn't do as much good advertising. So, they try and do something on the back side, you know, make it bigger or try and put something up on it that uh that's running into. So, I was recommending at the front. Mr. Tim, have you reached out to staff at all to discuss it? Uh you spoke with white I've been emailing back and forth for a while. So he kind of gave me this reach out to the council when I talked to actually recommend I come to the meeting. Great. Did did you say the size of the existing sign was 8 by 12? Is that 8 in by 12 or 8? 8 ft by 12t. And that's in the back right now. Yeah. Okay. So that size is grandfathered. I can do that, but it's probably 200 yards to the road and it just doesn't stand out very well. And and I mean the sign I mean it's the sign from the 80s. So it hasn't been updated or anything. Probably to try and you know bigger lighter something just to say that we're there because people say they drive the same road for 15 years never knew were there. Are you wanting to keep the the grandfathered sign as well or are you thinking potentially if you were to get it allowed on a different side you'd remove that? Like are you wanting to adsed or or I'd like to go bigger? Okay. Than what's there right now? So ideally if I could I mean we have which I came with when I bought the business. There's a steel sign for steel chainsaws that uh the previous all paid $5,000 for, but it's been sitting in storage for 15 years because it's a line of sign and can't go that can't go from can't go up. But just I just want to get more notice on the road for people to drive by and that's my main thing. Just trying to get more businesses there. So So you haven't met with Dwight yet just Okay. But it's more of an email correspondence. I met with him one time. Okay. about that, but I haven't and he told me that, you know, talking to you guys kind of next step would be $2,000 in escrow and with it, but I guess it's my first step rather than going down that path first to see if it's even something I can do or not. Or what I can and can't do, I guess, of trying to Yeah, I think it would potentially be again, I'd have to see kind of the details of this specific situation. Well, either that potentially or or an amendment to the sign ordinance, which is something that has come up a couple other times, espec especially in our in this area. In that area, uh because the the businesses are so close together, right, they've expressed concerns about not being able to get noticed, right? So, yeah, maybe if you'd want it, um we can touch base with Dwight certainly and and kind of get a sense ourselves of that. Maybe we can set up a time to follow up with you and kind of get a better understanding of what your request is and then kind of come up with a potential game. I'll follow up with staff and uh and apparently Dwight's got your contact info. I've got your phone number. Yeah. Dwight has my email and everything. Yeah. So So we'll we'll follow up after this. Yeah. I mean I own up to 10. So I own four acres there with it. So but there's nothing between me and the road. was just the 12 by8 signs doesn't say much for people to see and drive by. Gotcha. Great. Thanks for coming in. Thank you guys. Thanks for your time. Have a good one. Thank you. Uh and then the last comment card that I've received, mayor, is from Mr. Jason Bartell. All right. I had emailed uh some pictures to Jay earlier today and I believe I didn't show you later. I got them here. Um I believe you forward these on to you, but it's easier to speak to them when they're right in front of us. So one of our copies. Thank you. Um Jason Bartell's 1979 Hunter Ridge. Um Mr. Mayor, council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. The section of Hunter Ridge that I live on is sandwiched between the Bellweather and the Hope Church developments. There have been many prior discussions about that section of road and the traffic on it. The most recent council meeting, August 8th, agenda item 5B, there was a discussion about the topic of Hunter's Ridge. All the residents there know any road improvements, overlays, etc. are currently on pause with all the projects in the area. And that makes sense. My concern comes looking forward when that pause gets lifted. It's my understanding there has been and will continue to be a feasibility study to determine the scope of that work, whether that's an overlay or whether that amounts to something more than that. My goal tonight is to share how much the condition of that road has been impacted, not by six residential homeowners, but rather by the construction equipment that has already been on that road and will continue to be until all the projects are over. If there's a study that results in road improvement cost, it needs to be made clear which parties are responsible for that damage. The pictures that you have in front of you are just a sample of what we've been seeing. You can look at the first page. This is the equipment that has been used for the city water treatment plant. They come down Hunters Ridge. They cut in behind the trees and then they've been removing trees. Uh the second page really shows the damage that this particular tree cutter had caused with the tractor treads actually digging into, you know, the surface or the soft tar on the top of Hunter's Ridge. So that's one thing. Uh Hope Church, the Hope Church project is now ramping up and moving forward. So actually this morning, here comes a whole array of Hope Church construction equipment contractors down our road. Um, the last page shows right where they had stopped on the east side of 116 on Hunter's Ridge to unload their equipment and go ahead and do their work. With the Hope Church project just starting, you know, the fear is this is likely to go from bad to worse. I wasn't expecting any of the Hope Church construction folks to be on our side, but you know, it started already. So, I wanted to bring that to your attention. The last page is a view from Hunter's Ridge facing north toward the water treatment plant. And that area is staked off for a new road. And we know that the the road to access that water treatment plant is going to be in that space. And that's fine, but obviously there'll be more construction equipment coming down to build that road and they'll damage Hunter Ridge even more. Bell still comes down the road. They hit the culde-sac. They can't get through. they go back. Farm equipment's been coming up and down that road for years. Uh I know that they don't get fined or anything even though they're over the weight limit because I've been told farm equipment has an exemption, but it's still a heavy piece of equipment and wear and tear on that road. You know, a lot more than my poor little Honda CRV. I appreciate the opportunity to share and document what's been happening on that stretch of road. I'm requesting that if it does come down to assessments for road repairs, the council would hold these entities that created the damage financially responsible and not penalize the six residential properties on Hunter Ridge for those potential costs. Appreciate your time, gentlemen. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Jason. Mayor, we have no other comment cards and we received no mails. Okay, sounds good. Then if there's no one else for open forum, we will move on to consent agenda which cons give me one second to catch up on my notes here. Um which consists of items 5A through 5 I. Does anyone want to pull anything? I do. Okay. Uh I would ask you to pull 5 A and 5 F. A and five F. Anything else? All right. I will entertain a motion to approve consent agenda items B, C, D, E, G, H, and I. So moved. Nichols. Second. Very cute. All those in favor say I. I. I. Uh, Councelor Lanterman. Go ahead with the A. Yeah. I just have a couple of quick questions with respect to um our uh IT vendor. Uh you'll recall uh I want to say it was probably three or four meetings ago. There was a question about uh double billing that occurred uh on an invoice. And when I am looking through um the uh financial claim since then, uh I do not see a credit being issued, nor do I see that we skipped a payment. So I'm I'm I'm wondering where we are with that. Um I will have to follow up on that, Council Member Lman. I don't have a a clear answer for that um at this moment, but I will follow up and get the answer for that. I was trying to uh you and I spoke about that earlier this week and I was trying to get to that uh but in preparation for this evening's budget meeting. Uh it didn't rise to the occasion. So, I apologize. Oh, that's fine. And you know, I know I know you have a lot on your on your plate. I just wouldn't want to see double billing by a vendor kind of slipping through the cracks. Uh, one thing that did you you had also asked about CIT and their different contracts. So, I did request from the vendor a layout of all of the current billing cycles that we have, for example, different types of software. Uh, just so I was clear myself on what those are. So, I'd be better prepared to answer any of those types of questions. Uh, because when we had discussed it on Monday, I didn't know how many different contracts we had right now with CIT. And so I got that information. Gotcha. Thank you. And then uh Kevin, if you bear with me, I just have a quick question. Let's go on A. Oh, no. I'm done. I'm done. Oh. Uh no, I'm sorry. Now I'm looking at F. Okay, then let's I'll move to approve A. Thank you. Uh do I have a second? I'll second. Perfect. Um all those in favor say I. I. I. Okay. And then F. Let's see. I just want to find this. [Applause] All right, Kevin. Um, with respect to the water tower, um, you'll recall some time ago, uh, the city of Blaine, uh, was the victim of a cyber attack that shut down their water processing plant for on two separate occasions in the middle of winter. And uh um what and I know that there is a uh SCADA connection to our proposed water tower. Now on their continuation sheet, I see a $10,000 entry for something called safety. Can you tell me what safety is and does it have anything to do with securing the ski controls of the water plant? And I don't mean to put you um my guess was if it's just is it um do you know what page that is of one of three or two of three line item or bid number? Yeah, mine is so in the PDF it's page 125, but it is showing as page uh one and it's right behind the application and certification for payment if that helps you. Kevin, the top is continuation sheet. Yes, if that helps. So this sheet here They put the signatures or where they do the break. Nope. Keep going. Okay. Break down. Okay. Top left it says continuation sheet. Continuation sheet. Uh oh. I may have to follow up with you. If it's labeled just safety as is there a bid item number that it's reflecting? It says item number 10. Safety $10,000. I mean, I would hope that safety would just be built into the project. It's like a this contract I can I'll have to follow up. So, this is like a lump sum contract. So, these kind of specialty contracts, water treatment plant, the water tower, their contracts are packaged differently than you'd see say center drive or ste they're more of a lump sum project with allowances. My suspicion tonight would be safety. is just we're paying them for safety of their facility. OSHA safety, other things as a line item. I don't think it it wouldn't be called safety if it was related to the SKA system. Okay. Wouldn't safety just kind of come? It's just how they break these larger contracts. It's technically a lump sum contract and they're just trying to categorize it for for justification of payment. So yeah, I get that. But you know, when I go to HiV, I don't pay an extra fee for floor. I would just think that it would safety would be baked into it. So I was the purpose of it. Yeah. The purpose of I calling them out is normally like in the steep road project safety is built in as an incidental. So it's spread through those costs. You don't see a line item of safety. I think on these significantly more specialized projects that their recommendation with those our engineering team's recommendation those contracts is to highlight that. So, I think if there is a safety issue, it creates less liability on the city because we're directly paying you for safety of site. Now, I will have to confirm that that's what that item is for, but that's my speculation tonight. And and I I just wanted to clarify that that's actually found on the continuation seat in item 5G for the water treatment plant, not items uh 5F for the tower. Okay. So, so I I did find that uh it's on page one of the continuation sheet for item 5G. Okay. Find it. I apologize. Um because I was going to say the SCADA contract is really part of the treatment plant contract and it does connect the tower. Okay. But I but yeah, if you could just let me know what is safety and why are we paying $10,000 for it? I I just want to know what that is when I think it should be kind of part of doing business with our city. should be they promise to be safe and and I I just want to clarify for this one that's that's for the scope of the entire project. For this particular window it was $800. Uh that's uh column E. Uh work completed this period $800. So if you even look up at the first line of insurance in our standard bid unit price contract is rolled incidental. So, wherever they apply it, they apply it for the bid unit price. The way the way these specialized contracts are set up by our engineer and this they were reviewed by our uh city attorney. They're more specific and I think it helps them break it down as well as identify that you are getting paid for this. It is your responsibility. So, I think it's I would agree it's a liability kind of component to it. It's more about the the construction safety aspects, OSHA requirements, stuff like that. uh site meetings, different Yeah. lines 11 and 12 are are weekly clean up for labor, weekly clean up for materials, and all three of those have that dollar value in order to make sure that they're operating a a good work site. That would be I guess I guess my only thing is um you know, if we're spending tax money on this, maybe the description should be a little more detailed than the word safety. You know, if I'm confused by this, I bet other people are too. So, thanks, Kevin. Yep. And then, um, so question was really on G. Kevin's going to get a followup on that. Yep. So, um, so I'll entertain a motion to approve consent agenda item uh, 5F because that was the one that was pulled. So, moved. Nichols. Second. Bar, you. All those in favor say I. I I Okay, on to unfinished business. Uh we have a public comment opportunity. If there's anyone that would like to speak, Jay can walk us through that on 6A. Yes. So, item 6A, the preliminary budget and levy. Uh if you uh have any comments, please move up to the microphone and and speak to the DAS and comments for that item. 68. Okay, we will move into the item. Um, give me one second. All righty. Jay, did you want to start us off? Yes. So, mayor and council, uh, th this is essentially, uh, the similar information as what was provided to you, uh, when we did our work session on August 8th. There's a couple reasons for that. Uh, one, um, the feedback that we had gotten wasn't clear, uh, for staff in order to identify any particular areas to reduce. Uh and so um as a result we are going forward and with an understanding that this might be an opportunity to get clarification on what those areas might be. Uh another reason is we're we're moving up towards the time that we need to um pass a resolution as to our not to exceed levy limit. Uh that needs to be submitted to the state at the end of September. And with some of the other things that we have coming before us, we wanted to make sure that we carve some time out to give due diligence to having a conversation about this topic. Uh and um lastly, uh as as staff has worked on this, it's also important to note that we haven't gotten all of our final information from the county. And I alluded to that in an email, uh which makes it difficult for us to give you solid numbers when the county hasn't given us solid numbers. And so we have clarification on our requirements on the expense side. Uh but in terms of of what the um tax capacity is going to be and what our fiscal disparities contribution is going to be, those two are not clear as of today. Uh and so I was just on the website earlier this evening seeing if if I have clarification. So, it's important to note, and that was noted on the on the uh proposed resolution, and when I sent you the update on what the um tax rate would be, it had an asterisk next to it that said, "Note, the best information that we got on fiscal disparities right now is provided by the League of Minnesota Cities. We haven't gotten clarification from the county." And then our uh projected tax capacity is based off of last year's tax capacity uh presuming that with what we've seen with growth um it's it's our best estimate. So and then I also have uh Vicki who has been working with us here. So together we will uh field some questions. I I've I've talked with all of you about this and so a proposed framework that I would uh ask you to consider is it might be helpful to go by council member and get your feedback on the budget so that we can capture that information specifically. Um I I've shared with with all of you some different ideas that I have. Uh the concerns that I have are last year um previous staff that's no longer here made some decisions about cuts that didn't involve dialogue with the whole staff. And so I want to ensure that we have transparency and equitability in terms of what we're proposing. But most importantly, I want to clarify your service levels. So an example would be and I just had this conversation with staff earlier this week on the difference between a commitment and an obligation. So we have some financial obligations that we must meet. Example would be debt service payments. We can't choose to not pay our debt service. Uh the the impact of that is significant. Uh and then there's some other things that we have to pay. Uh some examples would be our current fire contracts. We have three uh different um organizations that we contract with with fire. Part of the delay as we were trying to do a projection is it was only on Tuesday night that I finally got the final fire numbers from our last fire district. And so, uh, people not being forthcoming with the information that we need makes it difficult for you to make decisions and it makes it difficult for us to provide you with the information to make those decisions. I want to reassure you that we're doing our best and we want to have the conversations transparently. So I propose that framework if if that's or an alternative if you wish. Uh but really important for us to get feedback in terms of service levels if you want us to decrease some things. Uh priorities if you want to ensure that we protect particular things so that they are not considered for potential cuts. Uh and any other feedback that you can provide. Okay. And one one thing I'll add too is um whether we approve preliminary kind of as it is or make potentially some cuts off the bat. What we're maybe looking at is a bit of a different philosophy in how we've approached the the budget previously with um typically, at least in my time here, we've done all if not most of the uh cuts before preliminary and then didn't do much with the budget between preliminary and final. Um, I would think if we pass something tonight on the preliminary that we're kind of we're flipping that and that gives us the the advantage of more time uh potentially uh additional staff who's either recently started or coming in. uh they're getting settled into their departments and getting their eyeballs on the budget and being able to refine it over the next few months as we get additional information from the county and and our numbers and projections are better as we get closer to December. Um so it's just what we're looking at is potentially somewhat of a flip of how we do that. In the end, the only one that matters is the final. It's just there's that preliminary that's uh due by September 30th that you can't go above but you can go as far below as you want. Um so thank thanks mayor if I could add something to that. Uh with that philosophy here's an advantage that I see both for you and for the public. Uh what staff wishes to do is over the course of the time that we set our not to exceed levy and the time that we have our truth and taxation meeting is to bring the departments forward and and have them give you a briefing on what's happening and which helps clarify why some of the priorities are the way that they are. Get some feedback on that and then to go through their particular areas of the budget. Um, so rather than us looking at this lump and we're doing, it's been called in the past horse trading. Okay, you're not going to get it this year, but you'll get it next year. Instead, we're looking at it holistically. Uh, and we're making specific decisions, looking at the operations of each department. So, it's it's informed decisions. Uh, I want you to have all the information that you need to make informed decisions. And I also want staff to feel like they've had their opportunity to share the reasoning behind some of the proposals that they're making. Uh and with limited time, uh with what we've had, for example, just the work session, that dialogue isn't able to happen. Uh and so I think that's an important piece. The the last thing that I'd add is is if you're not comfortable with a resolution this evening, I would ask that we add a special session at the end of tonight's agenda to the schedule in the future, the week of September 16th. Um, I will be out of town uh doing my annual volunteer service, suffering, helping out veterans, scuba diving in the Bahamas. So, I will be there for 10 days helping disabled vets. Uh, and so I will miss the 12. Thank you for your sacrifice. happy to serve. It is a really beautiful thing. I'll show a video on that some other time. Uh but but so I won't be here on the 12th and right now with the 26th, I have significant concerns about our ability to get the present workload done that we have and do our due diligence for the for the budget in order to meet the timeline that we have for the state. And what was the date that you were proposing? Uh September 17th. 17th. It's a Tuesday would be my proposal. I said the week of the 16th, but my proposal would be the 17th unless there's an alternative proposal, but sometime that week. What time would it be? What time would be helpful? Let me see. Well, that that would be presuming that we don't we don't uh reach a point that we're comfortable with a resolution this evening. Yeah, maybe we wait until later to determine, but but I just asked that as a playing that out in the front that um I'm not available the 12th and then I'm I'm not comfortable with putting that burden on another staff member while I'm out and it's not feasible that we could achieve that objective on the 26th. So, you asked for ideas. I I'm happy to Yeah. take a stab at going forward. So, uh, Jay and I had a conversation yesterday and he suggested several things that I thought could make sense to try to reduce the levy to either be flat or less of an increase. My preference would be to see it flat as we discussed last time in the work session. Uh first one that I thought made a lot of sense was the debt service fund coming from the utility transfer rather than out of the general levy just because we have assessed for utilities and the bonding was for utilities in the first place and that would be a pretty significant uh portion of the increase that could be deferred. Uh, I think the park consulting fees, there were $50,000 budgeted for that that should come from park dedication instead of from the general fund. So, I'd prefer to see that not included. Um, I think those are really more especially the second one more corrections than even changes. I think it that that 50,000 should be coming from park dedication probably. Yes. Um, it's not really a decision point so much as I think it was incorrect in the initial Yes. information. Uh, and then the city center drive decorations. I think it makes sense to defer that and try to identify some partnerships either with local service groups or maybe companies that could help to fund some of those uh, and make less of it be dependent upon the taxpayer. Uh, generally, and I don't know what our options are for this, maybe Vicki has some thoughts. Um, we have a pattern of budgeting for positions that we intend to hire and we get into the following year where we had intended to hire and we find there's not a person that we can attract for what we had budgeted or there's not time to do the recruitment and so that person doesn't end up joining the city staff, but we've still increase the levy to account for that person that doesn't get hired and then that rolls into uh a general fund account. I I wonder if there is a way we can structure our plan for next year such that we can account for some amount of that where the levy doesn't increase by the full amount that we're expecting to hire given our past performance and how much of that new hiring we've actually been able to complete. So if we if we had intended to hire you know four to five people across all the functions but we realistically expect we're probably only going to be able to physically hire three. Do we budget for three rather than five and then we hire the ones that we can afford when we're ready and able to find the people to fill those roles? Can I speak to that one specifically? Uh we had 32 applicants for our HR generalist position and Alicia has been handling that well. Interviewed six of them today and so in filling that position for the first time ever. Uh I am expecting that our ability to recruit and to onboard is going to improve significantly. Okay. Uh so that that's important to note. Uh and um a lot of the positions that have been delayed um have been because I was a army of one. Uh and uh this this precedes you. This is not I'm not taking it as but I'm trying to explain that uh we have strategies in place to get most of them. But we most definitely have positions that have been have proven difficult uh if not impossible to recruit. Um that doesn't mean that we don't need those positions. It just means that the market is very challenging. Um and so uh I I would I would be concerned about not budgeting for them and then where do we find the money? Uh but also projecting forward for 2025. uh we're not looking at at the same sweeping changes that have that have been proposed in previous years, you know. So, for example, just 2024, I think it's a total of 10 positions that have either been moved from part-time to full-time or have been created a new uh at at the most right now, it's mostly part-time positions that we're adding that already exist. Uh, so we're just multiplying that position for public works and and and and the police department. Uh, the only full-time positions that we're looking at are in community development and and in the police department or public safety, I guess more accurately. Um, so I I recognize the impact of what you're saying. Uh, and it's been frustrating, but I'm optimistic that that's going to be a thing of the our past. All done. Yeah, for now. So, is so tonight are are we talking about the specific cuts we want to see or are we talking about setting up a time to talk more details? Both. Both. So, so, so it's it's some some guidance for us so that we can come back for proposals if you have specific things. So, for example, uh that was helpful clarifying when we last had the conversation about the beautifification. Uh four council members were in favor of deferring totally and then one council member wanted to consider uh having some and then now that's changed recognizing that deferring. So, that's helpful clarification as you've had an opportunity to ruminate. Uh, I think the initial proposals that I've talked about with all of you will get us most of the way there, but they're not going to get us all of the way there. And and when you're saying get us all the way there, if uh would your um recommendation or or preference be that we still get into the weeds on making those cuts after preliminary? Okay, that's what I So, so, so, so we still need to set a not to exceed levy. And then I think it's important even if we aren't doing any cuts for every department to have an opportunity to raise your awareness of how they're operating and where the money is going. Uh, because you all get a lot of questions about that and the more information that we can provide to you, the better that you are in those engagements. you can educate the public uh just as we try to educate the public and and I think having it here in this forum also becomes an avenue for public education. Um having been a former finance manager when you do the truth and taxation meeting no one comes uh because they feel like the decision's already been made and the truth of the matter it is. And so instead to have the process really transparent and a dialogue and and so everybody understands this is how we make the sausage and then in some cases I suspect we'll go is that the recipe we want to continue to use. Uh you know so for example some of the materials that have come up with the raising cost of materials and with with concerns about how that's going to continue to rise in the future. Is this the practice we want to continue to use or is this an opportunity for us to discuss an alternative? I don't know if that was helpful, sir. Very helpful. It it was I have a number of comments, but I I don't want to jump in and take up a bunch of time. I I'll defer to to Dean. You go you go right ahead. I'm not going to take I'm not going to My my thing quick real quick. I'd rather see a number and I I I've said it the last two years. We're going to run into a wall where we aren't going to be able to keep this flat. I don't know if we've gotten truthful numbers in the past. I'm feeling very strongly that we're going to get truthful numbers this year. Okay. And I think the initial number that we talked about last time and then our conversation Jay I think you were saying it's about 12.2% 2% above it's 4.1% and and then the calculus that we use is so important with with about 4% of that being um people if I'm if I'm saying it right I'm I'm trying to simplify it as much as I can and the other 8% is inflation I think was the quick numbers we were throwing around the opposite yeah it would be the opposite way Okay. See how screwed up I am? Um, so I would rather see the max. I would rather see a number and then we whittle it after the fact. It's the way I do my budget. I'm hoping I can do this, but then realistically this is what I'm going to do by the end of the year and uh we go from there. This is the way I'd rather do things than that's what's proven what we've done in the past. So I' I'd rather do that of just So you're saying you you want to do it how it it's being proposed? Yep. Okay. Yep. Gotcha. And understand everybody I'd love to keep my taxes flat, too, but we're we're running in again against some stuff and things the way they've been done in the past. We can't keep doing it like we've always done it or we'll keep getting like we always got. So, well, and and again, the whether it's tonight or the 17th or whatever we look at, whatever we pass to the preliminary is not what our actual budget is going to. It's not final until it's final. The final is the final. Um, and I, yeah, I think I'm agreeing with you that I I like the methodology and the advantages it gives us by being able to have the time to break it down by department and and have more eyeballs on it and more time on individual aspects of the budget to get to that final number in December. um than trying to do it just for the sake of doing it ahead of preliminary so that it's a good feelood thing for him. Chairman, what do you think about taking out the items that we've agreed make sense to take out? Like the 200k for the debt service that would come from utilities, like the um city center drive decorations, the 50k for park dedication just so we can have that initial number be more realistic. Yeah, I'm not opposed to that. Um, I guess I'd want to verify that all of those things, like I'm I'm pretty sure that 50k for uh park services um with HKGI is something that should go into park dedication. I'd want to verify that before we it is. Okay. So, like that one I'd be fine doing. Um and some just kind of the same with the other ones. want to verify what you were saying about the uh debt service um out of utilities instead of out of the general fund. City center drive does seem like we have general consensus on that. Um and another one that we talked about and maybe this one would be one that would make sense not to cut off the bat um but to have future discussions about would be the the uh fire position, fire deputy director. um as well as we'd start getting as we get into departments, we get into more of those conversations. So, so helpful information since I met with the last fire department on Tuesday. Our projections that we were having of a 20% increase in our professional services were fire was based on what happened with one of the fire departments recently. You many of you were on council when that happened and there was a huge 20% increase and so we were trying to project that. In reality, now that I have all the contracts in, uh, I'm happy to report it was only an 8% increase. Uh, so that saves us, uh, just in the fire services, professional services contract, 56,47855. So, uh, excellent. And and the reason I'm bringing that up as an example is as we continue to go through the year and we get the information from the county and some other things, we'll continue to be able to refine some of these numbers. The data just wasn't available uh when we had to to come forward with it. And so that that's a classic example of now we have all the numbers locked in uh and and so I can give you an accurate number. Uh to your point, council member Bearing, going back, I don't understand uh some of the projections that were taken forward. For example, with all of our different um IT contracts, uh in 2023, we had $144,000 in all of our different types of IT contracts, but they only budgeted 120,000 when they built the budget, you know, and so that's everything from uh our BCA contract, which is very complicated, to our BSNA system to I mean there's there's a a lot of different systems that that were on long-term agreements with ADP, our payroll system. Uh my point of bringing that up is we had historical numbers, but I suspect that it was in an effort to try and provide a flat rate. They didn't actually bring forward a real accurate projection, and I want to have a more transparent conversation in that. Appreciate it. I had a follow-up question on the fire item. Yes, I know Rogers had been accelerating their price increases for a period of time. Is this smaller increase indicative of what we could expect in the future or do we think that it could go up much faster in the future regardless of rumblings are that it's going to get uglier and there's a couple reasons for it. uh new facilities, new equipment. But the biggest thing that's on the horizon that's going to impact fire services across the state is new OSHA requirements. And those new OSHA requirements are going to increase their costs is they have to add a whole bunch of different things to their how how they do business. Uh to the Rogers, it actually only went up 8.4%. And our Rogers contract is largely based on valuation. So if we see right more so the other contracts so if we see um you know a large scale development or two in there that's that's high value buildings whether it's the business park or hope I think hope is on in the Rogers area I would think um as those value as those come on board um at their full valuation we'll see that number go up whereas the calculation for our other contract effects are estimated market value and total calls per year. So, it kind of it uh waters down the just the pure valuation increase that you're seeing and with all the new development. Um, so it'd be it'd be nice if we had a similar contract there as our other ones that weren't purely valuation based, but okay. We can do about it at the moment. any chance that would change at the next contract renewal or are they pretty locked into that model? Uh, Rogers is not going to be willing to change their model and they're trying to persuade our other partners to adopt theirs and our other partners have said we're comfortable with what we have. So interesting. To your point, Jeremy, um are there two, three, four things that we know and are comfortable with that we just want to knock out today from this? Or do we just stick with it and and pass the preliminary knowing that we're going to go back and cut those as well as do our deep dives into all the stuff and whittle it down over the next few months to get to that final number? Are there a few things that we want to that are the easy ones right now that we want to tackle or do we do that as we go through the process in the next few months? I'd like to see us cut as we agree on things rather than try to save it all for the end and potentially forget something while we have clarity. Let's capitalize on it. Okay. Well, I would say I mean some are again corrections like I would kind of label the the fire projection uh the increase in the fire services as more of a correction to the numbers um than a cut of any sort. So, we'd update that number. we'd update. I think we're all on the same uh same mind of deferring the city center drive beautifification which is budgeted for about 100,000. Um may I speak to that? So I think we should consider a small amount in there still because we are adding plantings and some amenities. That 100,000 was like kind of the nuclear option. So I would still at least recommend reserving 20% of that and that could we could have a conversation bring back those details. You so we could we could cut significant amount could be cut. We could cut 80 and then as we dive into it what we need next year to keep what's being planted this fall going you know if we have to add more mulch if there's we're probably need to do something there without enhancing more might be one set of banners or something. So, I think we can reduce it significantly, but if my recommendation would be is to keep something in there and have additional conversation for it, if that makes sense because there there are new costs that we'll have to do at a minimum. So, I would throw out 20 20%, you know, 20,000 in there, take the 80% off for future consideration. So yeah, then I' I'd propose that change to uh with it and then that that 20% will be what we look at as we're going into the items over the next few months, but the 80 we can cut now, I think, unless anyone feels differently on it. Okay, I'm I'm just waiting to jump in with my comment. So sounds good. I think I've just got one or two more that are kind of consensus ones. Um, did we get clarity on or I kind of mentioned it, but I don't know if we got clarity on the first one that Jeremy was mentioning about the debt service. Um, where that's coming out of. So, uh, we we can have that uh, as a transfer from the utilities based on how it is and, uh, that would be as simple as a a line item change the resolution. are and we already worked with Tammy Amdul uh with Northland for our long-term projections so that we've got an understanding of what the implications of that are and that briefing will come in September uh if we choose to do that. Okay. And are you comfortable with that change, Jay? I am. Okay. I I actually uh talked about it a lot with Vicki and with Tammy uh and we agree that we think that this is actually the best choice for us. Don't know how it happened, but here we are going forward. This is the best choice. Gotcha. Um, here already did the park dedication one, the the 50k. Um, and then the rest I think are kind of ones that we will get into over the next few months uh as we kind of do a deep dive on with the budget before we get to final unless there's any other consensus ones. I know Mark has some that he wants to discuss. Maybe we'll agree with Mark on something. Yeah, we'll see. So, um, you know, the proposed tax levy is 17.9% higher this year, but it's actually 35% higher than in 2023. Um, you know, I think we should really focus on cutting our expenditures because to me, and uh I I recognize that this predates um the current administration, but it seems to me like this is a money furnace. So, uh I'd like to start with me. Please remove my salary from the city council uh expenditure. So, that's cut one. Number two, uh, under election, I see a $2,000 operating supply expense. Is there a special election in 2025? If you look in past years, that number is usually significantly higher, but we have some maintenance requirements on the equipment even when we don't have an election to ensure that it's functional for the following year. Okay. So, that's like repair and repair and maintenance. That that's the absolute minimum. Uh, and we may not need all of that. Uh, but we do need to earmark some funds to ensure that the equipment stays functional. It'll be a school board election year next year, too. Yeah. So, under finance, I see salaries of $171,000 in addition to that to $100,000 being budgeted for professional services. What are those services? Is that the audit function? Yes. So, it breaks down just a second. I can actually [Applause] So, audit services is $50,000. Uh, we have been, as as you're aware, trying to solve our escrow challenges. Uh, we have made tremendous progress, but we're expecting that there's still going to be some residual effect as we're moving all of those escrow accounts into our BSNA, which is above and beyond normal operations. So, we budgeted $10,000 for that. uh the financial management plan which we have a contract with Northland uh that is $22,500 and then specifically for Gazsby75. So uh governmental accounting standards board number 75 pronouncement the implementation of that is $2,500. Okay. And that's and that's accounted for under that professional services. So all of those are under the professional services. Correct. Okay. Thank you. for IT expenditures. Why are we paying $150,000 to a third party? Um, I would like to get a copy of that contract because the way I see it, the city has an internet connection, a website, and email. And $150,000 seems kind of steep to me considering the $90,000 that we're also paying to IT full-time employees. We don't yet have an IT employee. Uh that contract under CIT, uh our BCA system, which is for our policing system, is where a bulk a bulk of those goes. So we just recently had to have an a a new system that BCA added just recently. Uh it's roughly $811 a month. Uh we have recurring response to emergencies. Our system uh goes down. It has to have the patches just like every other organizational system. They do that on our behalf. Uh the Office 365 has a contract and then there's a maintenance to it uh that's included with it. Um and then uh the backup system as things go down. So we have on call and then we also have residual assistance. The total CIT is$127,000$127,08 uh for 2025. And then there's other contracted things. I mentioned some of those uh one that um I presume and I haven't been able to identify it yet is the cost for Granicus. I I believe that's included in there. Okay. Well, you know, you you you mentioned some of the things that are part of this. You know, uh, Office 365 is about $35 ahead per month. So, what what I'm trying to understand is what are we getting exactly for the $150,000 uh contract to this third party? I don't think it's one contract. It's it's multiple contracts. Uh so I I just mentioned one, two, three, four, five of the contracts. Okay. But they're the third parties, right? Uh so CIT manages five of those contracts and then we have uh other party contracts for example with Granicus. Uh we have the contract for the system in here. Yes, this system is managed with a contract with Z systems because we were at the point of it not functioning. Okay. When it doesn't function, do we still pay? It hasn't been a problem since we've gotten that system or that contract. All right. Could Could I still get a copy of this contract? I can provide the details on the contracts for you. Um, my next point is with respect to building inspection. And you know, I understand that a lot of this is probably pass through, but I see $450,000 for professional services and we're paying $220,000 in uh salary. Uh so I'd like to learn a little bit more about that. I see also uh well I'd like to better understand what passive code enforcement is. Uh it looks to me like the position was eliminated but we're still spending $1,500 on educational supplies and $10,000 for professional services. Uh I would imagine that both of those could be zeroed out. Um, and then you know really I guess uh you know my final you know I want to be mindful of everyone's time here but uh you know I'm I'm looking at the costs of parks and wreck and I'd really uh would it be okay if next week if I kind of pop in unannounced and shadow these folks? I'd really like to know what they're doing for $220,000. I'd like to understand what is that money going toward. So there's no individual that's paid 220,000. No, but that's for salaries, right? And it adds up, right? But it's $220,000 for parks and wreck. So, can I like pop in and kind of figure out what it is they do? Uh, I I can work with our parks and recck supervisor and schedule a time for you to shadow with her. That's okay. Yeah. To me, I mean, that just seems like a you know, that's a that's a big check to write. I I I wish you'd been here uh to do that within the last two weeks as we had night to unite uh which is a a huge heavy lift for that individual. Uh herculean task that has tremendous communitywide impact and then corporate country days. Uh so there's a lot of coordination at I get that. I get that. But 220 grand to manage parks and have a couple of neighborhood parties seems like a lot of money when we're asking uh our residents to cough up even more money. So, one of the things that I I would ask for clarification on because uh with some of the amenities that council has directed that we're even developing in city park, those amenities take maintenance and they take management uh and and so um those are also future requirements for that person. So for example, right now the city park planning project, this person is the one who has been uh heading up that project, working with the developer or sorry, working with the contractor, working with the commission, doing community engagement in order to get the feedback uh so that we're actually providing the amenities that residents desire. Would that amount also include grass cutting and things like that or is that uh so I need to look at that specific part- timerrs provide the grass cutting and part of the increase uh for the part-time budget for 2025 is we're increasing the acreage that we have and so it takes more people to mow more acres. Uh that's part of it. Uh we we have a part-time recreation coordinator. Uh today actually was his last day. A shout out to Jackson Chipley who did a fantastic job this summer. Great. Uh he herculean task. We we have a lot of programming that that is provided for local children. Uh and Jackson is our our summer help that ensures that that goes off and and coordinates all of the the coaches and the referees uh in order to pull off that programming for summer programming uh for T-ball and soccer and other programs. Uh and then also included on the park side is uh rink attendance uh if we're able to to have them. Last year we never got to hire drink attendants because the weather didn't cooperate. Yeah. And I I I I truly appreciate all of that. I just think that if we are asking residents to cough up more money, we should start cutting before we ask for more. And I think it's unfair to expect residents who are struggling to come up with more money for parks and wreck. And you know that may be unpopular but you know balancing budgets are that's not a not a fun thing to talk about but sometimes you know you got to make tough decisions. So that's all I had to say about the budget. Appreciate appreciate it. Um, and I I don't I don't necessarily disagree um not actually agree or disagree specific to that, but I think that type of deep dive is exactly what we need to be doing and should be doing throughout the next few months as we get to that final budget. Um, as opposed to some of the other stuff we were talking about that I think we can knock out. Yeah, we and we we'd need it we need to collaborate between staff and us A lot of that involves feedback that we need to get that you'd like to see that we'd all like to see contracts. Um details on what some of those specific dollars are going towards. Um I I had one more question. Oh, yeah. Kevin, could I And again, I don't mean to put you on the spot, but I see, you know, we we spent last year uh looks like we spent $4,000 on radios and we're looking to spend another $5,000 on radios. Having used radios my entire career, I know they don't have a one-year shelf life. Is there like do they like expire? No, that's actually the user fee that we get charged to operate them. So that's what that cost goes to. So Okay. So you have to buy them and then you pay someone to use them. Yeah. Yeah. It's a monthly fee that Henipin County to be part of their system and their encrypted system. Um it's same police has the same fee as radio have a monthly fee associated to each radio. Okay. That's actually the other big expense fire uh related wise that in addition to OSHA that is being proposed is a a huge broadening of that system to incorporate all fire departments on the same channel and dispatch which would make radio costs skyrocket for smaller departments like Lorettto or or West Suburban. So that's just like a maintenance monthly maintenance fee that doesn't include replacement or anything like that. That's all right. That's a that's good to know. And maybe if we can, you know, in in our budget documentation, maybe if we can put some additional details because when I just see radio cost, you know, I I don't like that. But if I understand that it's for, you know, some lame Henipin County madeup sir charge, then I get it. There's nothing we can do about that. My final question is, uh, I see, uh, in the budget $15,000 for uniforms. Uh, I'm wondering Chanel or Versace that. So our staff gets we have a contract with Craas and so that's what manages that contract. We basically provide them uniforms and there's they do washings and they collect. So it's that's what that cost is for employees. Okay. All right. Would it for how how many uniforms roughly? I I don't have that number. I can get you the data. I mean it's each employee. I think they wear a different one every day. So some of the OSHA rules like you should change and go home. So yeah. So it' be eight employees. I don't get it. It'd be the guys working in the field that would get it. Yeah. So when I was in law enforcement, we had a washer and dryer at the station. Would it make sense to maybe do our own wash? We do have a washer and dryer out there too, but it's I mean you would do that at We'd have to pay someone after hours or hire, right? So that would be you couldn't wash it during your shift. So those are things we can look at, but I I I don't know that it would be we have to do the analysis. I'm I'm just saying to me 15 grand on uniform seems a lot, but you know, if it's a contract, it's a contract, but I I personally I I'd rather just buy a washer and dryer and do it ourselves. So I can provide some for future conversations. Yeah, if we could that would be great. Perfect. So, I think and we have it balanced yet. I think we're I think we're on the right track. We have identified a few things that we can easily knock out right now. I think get a preliminary that that ceiling done and then this type of analysis is what we're going to be diving into quite a bit over the next September, October, November, December, four months. So, we we talked a lot about outflow. We haven't really talked about revenue and inflow. Uh, do we you mean taxes? No, revenue. Let me let me talk. Okay. So, the budget has $385,000 in expected interest income. Do we feel like that is as much as we can reasonably expect given our risk tolerance or is there opportunity for further interest income on various city accounts? We had we had floated the idea a while back in the escrow conversation. We don't know if we're getting interest on those accounts. Uh maybe there's opportunity there. Maybe other accounts are held in, you know, low interest bearing accounts that could go to higher. Any any input on that idea? So, the first thing that I'd say is I'm looking forward to that conversation. I'm not prepared for it right now. But, but when I talked about investments when I first came on board, we had some council members that were comfortable with making money off of taxpayer money. That was the phrase that they used, which from me, I think it's a stewardship perspective in which we're actually investing in order to get more bang for your buck. But but we did have a council member that was uh very very explicitly opposed to that. They're no longer here. Um and so I'm not prepared to discuss that right now, but I do think it's an important conversation. We haven't pursued a lot of investment opportunities because one of the volatility that we've had in the finance department and we didn't have the expertise necessary in order to provide the appropriate recommendations to council. uh takes time and space and then and then the second thing was uh risk tolerance. So I just got 4M feedback today on potential investments whether we want to do CDs or some other alternatives. It's not great, but it's better than nothing. And if we don't need the money, we can we've projected our requirements well. Our long-term financial plan, I think, is solid, and so doing something with that money makes a lot of sense. I agree. Uh, I didn't see charitable gambling, but we do have an account that's acred to some level, and I think we're making, I don't know, $30 to $50,000 a year there, but it's not used for anything, and it's not accounted for as revenue. That might be another opportunity to use that to offset other costs. We have used it a bit. We use it for Birchwood School. Yep. Or Birchville School, but I think that's been it. But there there are a wide variety of things we could do, but there's limits on what that There are limits, but it's much broader than what we've done in the past. And there are things that we do have to do that we could use that money to cover. So, that would be another opportunity. We might be I'll I'll check it. We might be able to use that for beautifification. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, I'm open to that conversation for sure. And then um the code enforcement piece. I've mentioned a few times the idea of having code enforcement take a more active role in new developments where we know there's lots of folks coming and going operating in ways that are not consistent with the long-term interest in the neighborhood. Um we we see a lot of issues and complaints. We heard from somebody tonight that talked about that. We've heard from people in all the neighborhoods that are under construction about different things that have happened. Um, is there a way to offset some of the cost that we have to bear for having the complaint based code enforcement that we do have with fees in those maybe focus areas of the city? Could we establish a program where we have a a certain part of code that deals with certain kinds of violations in certain areas that might have fees associated with violation that could cover the cost of code enforcement activity. Uh in my limited experience with code enforcement, uh I haven't seen successful fee collection, but I've seen a lot of people get upset. Uh, so I think with the strategy that we have of a passive, so I I wouldn't use it against individual homeowners. I would apply it in cases where you've got, you know, construction zones and people are obstructing sidewalks and doing other things that violate code requirements for say corporate owners. So, so I will defer and I'll talk with uh our legal with names about it because one of my concerns would be uh it it looks like we're picking and choosing who we're going to enforce code on that that that's the optics of it that I would see is is that we're only enforcing these types of codes who happen to be developers with deep pockets. I think the other side of it though is where do you see the majority of the problem? Where are the violations occurring? And where do you if you have to invest, you know, 50 to 70% of your time policing a certain area or a certain entity, there may be justification for having a fee to cover that cost. And you'll see right now in code enforcement, uh, we have zero dollars for staff because we have zero capacity for staff. Uh so um the $10,000 that was in there related to contracting that was for specific types of code enforcement requesting assistance. Uh but I haven't seen that used a lot. I think it's more of an earmark. Uh then it's then it's been a high level requirement. But otherwise I agree with council member Lanterman that code enforcement at this point should be a is projected to be a blank slate. And so that would be a shift from staff's current plan going forward, but definitely something that we talk about. I think it's certainly a discussion we can have. I don't know that it's anything we can change on prelim like the preliminary. Yeah. But a topic among many to dive into. So what do we think? Do we think we can amend on the fly here those couple items and then are we comfortable with passing the the ceiling here and then knowing that we'll be diving in over the next four months to get down to to our final number which specifics. So we have the de the debt service uh coming out of utility funds which was what Jeremy if you look at the resolution it's line number three it's $27,585 improvement bond 2016A so we would simply redline that out so it would be that it'd be the um 50,000 uh for HKGI to park dedication instead of out of the general fund. like it is currently um not finding a resolution. They do 130,000 out of the general property levy, 80,000 from the beautifification element and uh 50,000 fromation. So what does that total to? Let's see here. 880 plus the first one was two. I'm for some whatever reason I took out the resolution probably to look at it and did not put it back in my packet. We check my math. I believe that's $8,342,249 for the property tax levy. Yes. Uh and then decrease that by I do have all the numbers ready if you'd like to. Oh, that please give it to us. Any chance you can put it on the screen? She probably can't. Sorry. We have We have the technology. Scratches, but so plug and push. All right. Right. It'll once it's live, it'll turn green. Okay. on my hot spot. I don't know if that There you go. Push it. Yep. Good. Push it again. Should go, right? Push. So, about that it should we get a discount? It might be because you're in the hospital. Okay. Well, um I'll just verbally talk through some numbers then. Um I was tracking a couple other revisions as you were talking um in addition to I did make a note coming into this evening's meeting that we did receive the release numbers on the small city transportation advancement account which will bring 29,36 $631 to the city of Corker next year. um which is another element we could add into the revenue budget if the council uh so chooses. Um so that um if we just went with those three items um I'm sorry in addition to the bond and how about the the fire increase fire. Yep. Okay, I'll include that one as well. Um so I'm I'm setting the bond aside because I'd already taken that out of my numbers. Um, so I have a total additional revisions tonight of $216,131. Um, 16131. So that would reduce the line for the general fund to 8,256,118. I'll pause there for a minute. And then the overall sum for 2025 with all your debt service levies is 9,441,047. And I can tell you council that again based on our very preliminary numbers about tax capacity, fiscal disparities, all the things that administrator Tobin mentioned, um that's a almost just above a 44% tax rate. Um so up about a a percent and a half from last year's tax rate, which my professional opinion, knowing that some of these numbers are still prelim, I was going to suggest to you tonight, start 1% higher on your tax rate. We can always bring it down for a flat tax rate by the end, but at least give yourself some cushion for when those final fiscal disparities numbers settle out. Great. Thank you. So, are we comfortable with the changes that are highlighted there? And then that's what we work with. I'm more comfortable starting from one and a half% up than 4% up. Yeah. Yes. That's what we're talking about. Victory. Not yet. Progress. Well, for good starting point. Yes. So, I'll I'll entertain a motion to amend uh resolution. Someone help me with the number. 2024-95. That one. 2024-95. Uh, as just laid out by staff, I will make that motion. Nichols, do I have a second? I'll second it. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I. All righty. We've got a starting point. So, we you just edited it. Yes. So, to approve it? Yep. Thank you. Um, I will entertain a motion to approve resolution 202495. [Applause] I will make that motion. Do we have a second? Second. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I. Thank you very much. We got a lot of work to do, but good starting point. Thank you, staff. Thank you, council, for getting through that. And we we'll have some fun times diving into the numbers over the next few months. So, to clarify, mayor and council, uh my intention would be for us to on that first meetings of the month, uh schedule one or two departments based upon how heavy the lift is, uh uh for them to do both an overview, uh of some of their operations and then to delve into the budget. That's an acceptable proposal. Yeah, good way to do it. I think that'd be great. Okay, we'll move on to uh staff reports, planning project update. Anything? No, Natalie's maybe virtual, but I don't know. It's online, but I don't think there's any comments. It's just our standard uh don't think there's been anything too significant changed from our last meeting on there. Um we'll go on to council reports. Does anyone have anything they'd like to discuss? I just wanted to touch base on uh Banu's comment in Okay. public comment in the beginning. Yeah. Go ahead. So, we allow landscaping in that setback from county roads as a way to allow people to achieve a smaller setback. Would we ever consider a fence if it's decorative enough to be that type of landscaping that can be in the setback or is the fence always considered something that has to be inside the setback area? Maybe that's a question for someone who's not here. If I there's been a lot of discussion with those two residents and I've been tracking the discussion. So, they've been given a way ahead and because the whole development hasn't been turned over yet, it would actually for this level of change would require a PUB amendment, uh, is what what was explained to me by staff. We can't do a variance. Uh, I don't know if they'd meet a variance anyway. What's that? I don't know if they necessarily meet the requirements of a variance or or or a zoning ordinance amendment would be an alternative as well, but I think the timing of it is part of what makes it complicated in terms of who has who's responsible for the request because there was a similar issue with uh offense by a existing land owner around where offense went up but the process to do it was a PUB amendment. And there was history between LAR and that property owner which got it had the motivation to get LAR to get that done that I don't know necessarily exists here. um at least right now. Um but yeah, I think that would make sense that because of there there was some ex some some extended communication about what the steps would be in terms of staff communicating with them what would be required uh and um which also um there there was a lot of exchanges on how to do it. Uh and it's complicated. Mhm. It it might be complicated, less complicated if if they have some patience for it to wait, it becomes less complicated. Or if they're motivated enough, uh staff was having a hard time seeing how they could achieve their objective of having that fence installed this fall. Yeah. Yeah. they could plant trees this fall and and they were given a list of all the different ways that they could plant trees. Overstory deciduous trees, overstoried coniferous trees, ornamental trees, different types of shrubs, lots of recommendations. Evergreen hedge, Kevin, uh, when is that development going to close? If he had a crystal ball, he could tell you. We're pushing. I mean, they they did some big corrections in the seventh edition. That was a big hurdle. I think they're they have still to do the trails, which has been a form. Um I know they're I I'd have to probably give you an update. I mean, we're we're pushing them for this year. So, there's some escrow reconciliation that has to happen. They're moving more than they had in the past. Yeah. Yeah. But we we put a pretty big line in the sand in the spring and I feel like they haven't come up fully to that line. Maybe some justify, maybe some not. Are we at a point now where we should be starting to do the work and and pulling lenders of credit? Um, I think the main things that aren't the biggest main things that I recall aren't done is the trail. I think a lot of the other I think the trail and the escro reconciliation for at least some of those early phases that we had the conversation with in the last nine months. I think if the trails done and the escros are reconciled, I think they're clo very close. Um, so I think if we have any issues with collecting or getting those through, then I would agree with you. Um, I my opinion is they're doing slow and steady that they're doing enough to keep the wolves at the door. Can you I do think those are the two biggest things at least for the first half a dozen editions. Um, and some of the other ones like the seventh edition was a huge lift that they did this fall. Um, I think the some of the other stuff is they got, you know, the middle of summer is a tough planting season. I think they have some landscaping inspections do here in September. So, some of us we just have to wait to to run out the clock and some of this stuff. So, I would say great question. Um, I would say if we run into issues here going into early fall, then I would support um, could you keep us informed as that as we get into fall? Yeah. So, I mean, I think the trails and the escros are the things that are at least for those first six that are I can think of that are that need to get done to close them out and put them into warranty. Keep in mind then they just go into warranty for two years. Yep. but got to get there to get and then I think the other ones are are not as I think that catch up was was the hurdle and I think the other ones they're incentivized to go. Um the other thing and this isn't this isn't making excuse they've had a lot of turnover there so that has delayed it a little bit which I know it's not excuse so um but I think they are making progress which was a change in action from the previous scenario. Just uh so you know, the the things that were destroying the trails, those invasive willows, they started to grow back again after they removed them. So they might need to come back out and I think that's going to be something that we just have to deal with over time for sure. But yes, as we monitor that, we'll as part of the trailer, are they going to put in better root barriers so that that doesn't become an ongoing city expense? There's conversation about that. You know, there's also some potent I mean there's some rumor that they're they have the other significant things which aren't in the early there's some islands that have to be irrigated uh per per their agreement that there's conversations going on about that. And so there's they haven't given us anything. Those are for some of the not the ones the original ones we're talking about. There's 15 additions. So the first six, let's call it, is a separate conversation than the the remaining 11. But there's a fluid conversation as at the staff level of how to close this out and may or may not see some PUB amendments back in front of you as things finalized. So um our goal, my goal, the goal we at one point all agreed on was that they would be done by the end of this fall. And if they wouldn't be done by the end of this fall, then the city would complete it this fall so that it doesn't go into next year. Um, I guess I'll informally poll the council. Are we still on that page or does anybody want to continue to show patients beyond this year? [Applause] I guess to me it would be really important what those updates look like as we get into fall. if they're on track to get those trails done and those last items done that Kevin was talking about, I'm I'm okay with the progress that's been made because it's a lot more than it was essentially no progress to now they're actually making significant changes and I I I guess I wouldn't want to be in a position where the things that have come up since um that are genuine issues that weren't known about before that were lumping that into the timeline that we already had kind of unofficially set. Um, so if they get the item, the main big ticket items that we had talked about by this fall, like the trails, um, I'm okay with them continuing as is. If we run into some roadblocks, then I would support dates then on when they'll have the trails done, can they commit to that and let us know? I can try to get an update. Quite honestly, we've had the wetest summer here in a long time, if not ever. And those trails are low line. They actually were out there one time and tried to go down them and they were destroying the trail more. Um I I'm trying to be fair to everyone, our side and their side. Could you How about could you see if you could get a projection? I can ask for an update from them for everyone and bring it back on the put it in the pack or distribute it. Um I do think the trail is critical and I want to bracket at one you know the first six is where we've kind of been focusing and sending those had that conversation. So I do want to I want don't apply it to the whole development but I do think I've seen progress in all phases but the one remaining item that we that we have told them to get done is the trails this fall and they're aware of it and they're saying they're going to get it done. I would if that doesn't happen I think that's that's the uh conversation to be had. I expect it gets done all the information we had like I said they tried to go out and do it one time already and it caused more problems than good and we don't want it to be built under that condition anyway. So, um, presuming presuming the trails get corrected in those six additions that we had talked about, um, and then we're remaining on escrow and cleaned up and paperwork, that can all be done through the winter if we wanted to to take action on that. So, I really think to address the previous concerns, it's getting the trails done and those additions. And then if we don't see progress or we want to regroup over the winter on closing out the whole development, I think it's a future conversation. So, have they finished their build now? Are they done selling home? Uh if I if they're not done, they're down to like one. They're in low single digits, if not completed now. I think it's completed, but just some of the remaining ones were golden rod. I think I drove through there half more inspections. I think they're done. So, they might be all done or one lot left. I mean, they're significantly done. So, it it'll be telling too here in the in the weeks and months ahead how they're able to continue this progress. Uh because a key person that we were having a lot of positive impact with isn't that red flag. Uh yeah, I mean the trail is a huge issue for some previous conversations. If that doesn't get done, then we have to have a conversation about what we're doing and but I anticipate based on what they've done in 2024 that they will get done. I'm presuming we can get down in there and we have a little bit drier fall. If we continue to get rain, you know, the rain that we've had the whole year, that'll be crazy winter. But yeah, because I mean, we can't challenge them if we have the wetest. There's some things that we just can't do other than, you know, reassert that it needs to be done as soon as conditions allow and we could have that conversation if we need to at that point in time. And then the comment from Jason Bartell's on road repair costs in the beginning. Do we have the ability to do that kind of assessment for people who damage a road if we're going to have to repair it? I would imagine that we don't. Is that true? No. So, like the one of the pictures there was the one with the most significant damage. I think it was picture number two that was a subcontractor on the water treatment plant project. So, we've documented that and we'll address it through that contract mechanism whether it's a patch or whatever. So, I think that's how we would address damage. So, if somebody sees damage, please let us know so we can document it and deal with it through the contract methods. Could you withhold payment? We could. Yeah, that's part of Yeah. So, that would be my recommendation. Don't pay them until it's fixed. Correct. Yeah. So, that we take retain it on all the contracts and then that gets reduced when the outstanding items list gets reduced. So, that's the you know, you'll see that as we get we take 5% off the top and then as it's done it gets reduced, reduced, reduced, reduced. Yeah, because once we pay them, then we're going to have to chase them and I don't want to do that. So, I'd say don't pay them, make them fix it. 5% on that project is a significant amount of money and we're having to go through it. So, we have I don't It's in the report here, I could tell you. But we have plenty of retainage that we justified to hold until we get that address. So, to council member Nicl's point, we can't like apply an assessment to that. that has to be a benefiting property but we can address it if we can get it documented appropriately through our contracts. Do we know why hope would have so that that picture that I saw actually with small utilities. So this is some of the challenge that we have small utilities aren't necessarily they're doing the work of needed for the development. They're not under contract with the development. So I I made a note to make sure we're monitoring that and documenting if there's any damage. Um, it's a public roadway, so we can't like restrict them from that area, but we can document if they damage anything. And in that case, I didn't see any damage. We can make sure our team looks at it, you know, just on a picture, but but there certainly was damage in that one picture and that was already documented previously. We've talked to talked to the gentleman and he, you know, he lets us know when things are going on, so that's appreciated. You know, we don't have full staff everywhere in every project site at all times. So we encourage if you're seeing something that doesn't look right, make sure we know so we can, you know, use the tools we have to make sure we can address. If sometimes too late, we can't do anything about it. So it's very important to let us know and our team know Mark. No, I guess the only thing councelor Nichols said something that got my attention with respect to code enforcement and correct me if I'm wrong. I think you said you wouldn't hold uh individual property owners responsible, who would you hold responsible? Like developers or corporate property? What what I was thinking of there is if you have um a neighbor who doesn't have their grass cut, for example, can all relate to that. Uh, I wouldn't find a person cutting their grass unless they don't do it to the point where the city has to go in and cut the grass for it and then they should be charged for that fee. But if you have somebody who's repeatedly, you know, blocking sidewalks or blocking people's driveways with construction traffic, things like that, I could see in order to create the incentive to manage the site appropriately, you might need to assess fees in order to create the mechanisms within that corporate entity to drive the right behavior amongst all of their network of subcontractors. Yeah, I support you on that. What are we doing with the abandoned right henipin electrical relay station? It's turning into a rust statue. They've started taking it down. The small one. I actually was doing a ride along. They're taking half of it down and they they decommissioned one of the transformers and I stopped and talked with some of their staff. Uh he did not have the larger scope picture. He said, "I'm just here, man, to take this thing down." Which is years ahead of when they said they would. They probably heard that you were going to make that comment. There was there was three vehicles there. Yep. I was really I was pleased to see it the other day that they they took one of the two transformers down or about half of the equipment. They started to work. Send them a thank you. Yeah. Cuz when we asked them initially was done really talked to him. He's like, "I'm just here. I'm the dude who wrenches stuff off." Yeah. I don't need any more 8 a.m. phone calls with their uh chief executive over there, Tim Sullivan. Not going to comment on that. Um but yeah. Anything else? No. Okay. Uh item nine is just our upcoming schedule. uh to clarify, mayor. So, uh at this time, I don't see that we need for a special session the week of the 16th. I just wanted to confirm that. Nope. Sounds good. And then item 10. Uh the city council is going into close session to consider an offer for real estate under the authority of Minnesota statute 13D.05, subdivision 3C3. The city is permitted to close a meeting to consider offers and counter offers for the purchase or sale of real or personal property. The city council is going into close session to consider an offer for real estate. The following properties are the subject of the closed meeting for the city center drive improvement. The property to be discussed is P24119 23330000001. We are in close session.