for the regular city council May 14 stand for the pledge Al to theed of the United States of America to the repu for it stands one nation under God indivisible liberty and justice I need a motion a second for the agenda I'll second discussion changes yes uh mayor members of callil need to add one item item o to the end of the agenda that is resolution 21 2024 which was sent to you yesterday and that is is approving Dayton staff to draft a grant agreement with MN PFA for the $1.75 million Grant we were approved in the legislature at the end of last month all right any other changes all right I got a motion a second all those in favor say I I I all those oppos say no carries 4 to zero on the consent I need a motion a second make a motion a second yeah it's got all right discussion go ahead I had a question on item e which is the technical review of the Wellhead treatment plant and um I mean a lot of good information in there um but the one question I had around was around piloting and I don't know Jason if you're I know it's not your report but um wasn't entirely clear to me what that meant in terms of uh what our plan is I guess as far as doing it or if we have a plan at this point to be honest I haven't been involved with the project I didn't even read the report I can I I can answer I can answer the question so what piloting is essentially they set up a small sample water treatment plant and see how the water comes out of it and they do different types of samples to be able to treat the water in basically small samples so it'll take a gallon of water through this type of system and then through a different type of system and they basically set it up and as a small pilot um black of beach did not want to do piloting number one it's it is kind of expensive it's a more expensive process however they' have a lot of back data about the water in the wells that we have so they have lots of they don't need to analyze what kind of treatment's going to work because they have so much backed out on what the water looks like um Marty can prob explain a little more on that but that's essentially what I gathered is that we didn't do piloting because we have historical data on what the water looks feels tastes like so on so forth with its makeup over many many years yeah that's great and because it's a um basically an iron and manganese plant they're fairly straightforward if you got any um n uh radium or that kind of stuff or something there a lot of um uh other chemicals in there that need specialist treatment that's when you usually use the pilo in for um just a basic uh iron and manganese uh system you don't really need that much it's going to be the same filtrations system and the same chemicals that you're using throughout okay yeah I guess there just seemed to be some questions about what kind of sand or mixture of Sands to use in there and and know black and Beach did address that um I sent the report to them and they address it they were over cautious with the sand because the mag uh the manganese fluctuates in our water so from the uh the initial uh findings that we took with our raw water the manganese has elevated and and gone down so you know it does fluctuate so it's more on the cautious size to use the green sand okay thank you do you know roughly what the the the difference would be between the silica and the green and what sorry what the difference in cost would be between the Green in the silica I I don't have that data on at the top of my head but it depends on you know it can vary in the depth of the sand medium that you use um I don't think there's a huge amount of difference in that c it's just the replacement cost how long that stuff is going to last without getting plugged up we can get some information for you if that's what you want to know I'm just curious because they I would assume green sand is is a lot harder to find therefore I would assume it's also I'm not I'm not sure about that Dennis um okay I I mean I could find out you know that information if you if you want it we can provide it to council I think that's a good question we just just keep it in mind because and I don't how often we're going to be measuring the manganese um because if I mean if we do monitor it and it and it just sits there it it seems like we we should maybe look at switching although it looks like that might have other impacts yeah we um we monitor water samples every day and so we can we um I think three times a week is uh what we do manganes and you we do three times a week up here and twice in the Old Village um just to monitor where it's going during the week on that report there were some conclusions in there a good handful of them things like adding second sets of gauges and looking at how we do flushes are you already working with black and Beach to help Implement some of those recomend changes in black and Beach's response um they all those um items were addressed there were some different kinds of nozzles and spray heads that were uh questionable at one time but the the system at black and Beach is using isn't um it's difficult to me it it sucks the A3 rather than blowing it out so there's not much um chance on getting plugged it's a different set of systems um and the uh valves and and stuff that we were talking about and gauges um I think they address them somewhere in their report but I can forward the black and Beach responses to you guys as well so uh that will probably help you guys yeah that'd be helpful please they're going to have this all set up and ready to roll once they push the button anyway I would think that's going to be the plan yeah yeah they were just like report talk about duplicate gauges so that way in case one gauge isn't working it's easier you have it there and then something about the wash so I thought it was important yeah there was a check bill they was missing y exactly so so okay so so none of these things they had concerned about I mean especially the missing check valve and the air bra um at the end of the conversation um there was no things that were going to cause this thing to fail there are just some tweaks that may make it make improvements to it so um there are a couple of things that um we may want to do um that we're going to talk to black and Beach about including um one of the things was a raw water line um for the black backwash system y yeah I think it be good to see black and Beach's responses and then we can make a decision right CU we have two experts both giving counter opinions if a valve is cheap to install now it could save us a lot of money down the line if something does go wrong so I think it's important for us to see those options yeah and we shared black and Beach's response with um Aaron from A2 um he was you know okay with all the explanations and stuff that black and Beach supplied so okay thank you just so the council's aware we will use a2s again to test the model at the end when they're getting ready to go um to make sure we up and running with all things tested because I don't want to get this thing up and running as anybody else does and then all of a sudden we're back at square one where we got to fix something right away so yeah we we will see another agreement with a2s later on down the line just so the council's aware more that's all I here you have anything M I asked been already thank you anything good I think I'm good um yeah okay so we got a motion a second all those in favor say I hi all those opposed say no motion carries 4 to zero on to open Forum um limited to three minutes for non-agenda items state your name and address no cons action will be taken items will be referred back to staff is anybody here for open form come on forward thank you since it's uh three minutes we each get three minutes I'm going to give her my three minutes to speak also could you state your name and address my name is Duff Petty Court 16220 territorial and I'm Julie T his wife so um good evening mayor city council as I indicated I'm Julie T is Duff Pedic cour and we are at 16220 Territorial Road in July 2021 some of you weren't here at that time um we addressed the council about the city of Dayton's 2040 plan which included moving Rush Creek Road onto our property at that time we were told and informed by the council that if we sold our property and it was developed prior to the road construction on Rush Creek the road would need to be moved to someplace else we were also told by the council a developer would need to present a concept plan to the city what a joke that has turned out to be we have had eight people come to the city and get the Runar around and um so here we are so last week on 510 we received an email from John indicating he would be presenting our property tonight to the city council and if we wanted to meet and ask questions on Monday or Tuesday before the council meeting to make an appointment unfortunately that didn't work for me my mother passed away last week and there was no time for us to meet so here we are fighting for our property which we own and want to sell our property is 10 1 12 acres and has a partial Wetland delineation with buildable 4.5 Acres our property has been on the market for over 4 years and we have had multiple investors developers Builders single families that are interested in purchasing our property and yes there have been purchase agreements for over $1 million however due to the 2040 plan as they should the potential people went to the city for more information and were shut down and they backed out of the sales please note so for over the years and very recently the city has worked with our potential people who have visited with Tina Alec Jason and John and have gotten nowhere um all eight potentials have been discouraged from our property by the city staff every time the story changes the plans change the requirements change the reasons change the dollar amount changes the number of houses that could be built and allowed changes and the runaround begins we are hostages in our own home by the city of Dayton we can't sell and they won't approve any concept plan which have been brought to um John and Jason we are at a stand and you can tell we are angry the city of Dayton already purchased a wedge of our property years ago and put in two 8 in Maines for hookup for Future Property development prior to Paving Rush Creek Road as an entrance to the Capstone lar and Hoy developments there was no problem with the location of Rush Creek Road at that time so why not just because there's more houses behind us so why not just put a three-way stop sign on Rush Creek and Territorial Road put in some curbs plant some flowers put in some trees and call it a day it's much cheaper to the city and its taxpayers and their hard-earned dollars that they send to you guys so here we sit years later unable to sell unable to fully retire we continue to pay taxes and unable to move out of the city of Dayton we are hostages and tonight on the agenda at 7:15 John has been working on a plan with Jason the engineer and um you know we look forward to seeing and having more explanation on what's going on there and we will set up a separate meeting with them to ask some additional questions and um but this is just so um unbelievably unfair and um I guess one of the questions that I have um is that we were informed before there was it had not gone before the Met Council and we were told that it didn't have to go before the Met Council for approval um but it does and then um that there wasn't any budget that was approved so we're talking I'm talking 2021 and we're still at the same point as we were back then and you know when they came down and did Territorial Road with the water and sewer and all that kind of stuff um they had an open house right in this room and they presented to the people in the neighborhood what their plan was you know how it would impact us what the assessment was going to be to our homes cuz I'm sure this Road's going to have an assessment and I'm going to pay for it again for a road that I've already paid for and impacts my property and so it's the the communication is very poor with the neighbors in our area and so um you know we were told that we were to expect three plans um One commercial one residential and I don't know what the other one is to straighten out Rush Creek Road put a roundabout um and then the severe plan would take our entire property and so that means the road goes right through our house and so I don't know and I look forward to what's being um shown to you folks tonight but um you know I understand that there's there's just so many questions that we have that need to be addressed and so um for that I want to thank you for your time and for listening to me and my husband and did you I just did okay all thank you sorry for your loss oh thank you very much uh is anybody else here for open Forum I just have a question if I may oh come on up then sure well address this I'm Steve on Yan over here okay um so I'd like to get some clarification around the proposed walking bicycle path that comes into BR bur Trails goes through the Wetland by the gulf course there um is this the right place to address it or or can we address that with open discussion around the item J on the agenda you're referring to the item that was started at The Parks Commission meeting the last Parks Commission meeting correct the r trails and it comes up we got a PDF sent out from the city that's said it's part of this Territorial Road Rush Creek Parkway thing the last page of it starts to talk about a proposed path that comes through the Wetland sure um John do you want to address that one I think it's a future discussion that we have to have item J yeah it I mean it's item J but it's not really item J but it kind of is yeah I mean it is but it's not directly related to the project because it a it is so I mean we can wait till item J I guess is my recommendation yeah okay so we can ask questions at that point yeah yeah okay fine thank you thank you anybody else and be St I yeah later yep okay anybody online yeah I do have someone online that I'll allow to talk Andrew is it coming through my Hang on we're not able to hear [Music] you okay now can you try speaking again can you hear me now yes hello my name is uh Andrew Babcock uh I live at 100 uh 16124 116th Avenue North in the braer trails uh Community uh I would also like to speak about the acquisition of the Wetland parcel from the braburn trails uh neighborhood on page 181 of the council packet wait it can we yeah we'll just have you wait until we get to that item then okay okay thank you thanks anybody else so if anyone else is on here that wanted to speak in the open Forum if you can use the raise your hand function okay and we will be done with open form staff can Council updates yep mayor and member Council a couple updates for you tonight a reminder that next week on Wednesday May 22nd is our open house that's for residents and for uh council members we're looking to close City Hall at 3 p.m. for this just to get set up and ready to go um hopefully the council's okay with that we will post it on the front door as well um did want to provide an update on the transfer that was approved at the first meeting in April we did um discuss with the Auditors at length and said decided that we were only going to do a transfer of $853,000 after the transfer was approved up to 1.25 million the reason for that was the fund balance achieved was at the 35% level which is what the state recommends at the state minimum oh and it doesn't meet our fund balance policy which is what the 1.25 million does but I thought it would better to keep the fund balance in the temp financing fund and meet the state minimum so that we can look at this year to keep expenditures lower and revenues higher this year in order make up for it I would hate to have it where we put the full fund balance in there now and then have to transfer back at the end of the year it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me so um we did $853,000 so that's a $400,000 difference between what was approved just so the council's aware and the uh last thing is you should all should have received my goals um set for next year and this next year if you didn't please let me know um that was a result of my review from last month so that's all I got thank you so much Amy um we are one week away from open filing um so if you'd like to file for office you can come on into City Hall with your affid David it is $5 um and that goes until June four it has yes so be prepared for that it is based off of our population so and that's all I have Marty uh mayor and Council just a couple of updates uh the Wellhead Water Treatment Plant they're starting to back fill around the structure now to stabilize that until uh we get the other part of the funding and sorted out um so that should be taken care of uh the over the next few days um the pressure vessel package has been um or ordered so we can try and keep that part of the project moving and on on schedule um Parks um I had a great meeting this morning uh no sorry yesterday with the DNR regarding upgrades to the boat landing in the Old Village um they have a budget of $570,000 guaranteed for that project um and that to include a kayak and canoe land in there um they are committed to the project and would like the city to to design and construct the project and they will reimburse us the funding there's some agreements that need to be pulled together but that's the basis of how that's going to go together it's likely to be spit split into two projects uh one the design aspect and one the construction aspect of it so there'll be two separate agreement so we don't get too far ahead of ourselves with the funding um they are very excited about the project and there is a strong possibility um if we want to do the job right or the the plans come out um more than 570,000 they have additional Fund in p a project um it gives us a put in and a take out then yeah it's good that's exactly what I'm trying to get to yeah um I've had several applications for the last seasonal position so I'm going to be doing interviews with those guys uh at the end of this week and early next week we have one position uh still open um the plants in the Old Village have been planted with the summer flowers and stuff um Jane ramuno has volunteered her time she's the lady who did the winter project as well um and is managing the watering schedule so um at this time um if we can discourage residents from going out and watering them at this time um she needs to water and fertilize them to get them to go good so that's all I have evening mayor members city council uh just couple um officers have been working with Rogers and corkran on building searches uh about a month ago they did uh walkth through um on how to do building searches and then this week they're doing Sim rounds um while doing it they're not taking any rounds they're just going through the building running into a suspect and then uh using Sim rounds um they also did a shoot um last week um as we're trying to become more proficient um we have been training a lot more on um shooting John um the next council meeting we'll have quick trip and probably one or two final plants June will be busy so we had um you know typically when things get warm in March everything shows up to plan commission Council in June Sor no updates here nothing no I don't have I've just got one thing I was a I was unable to make the Parks Commission meeting but I they did um reaffirm because I know we've been kind of talking about Land versus Park dedication dollars that um The Parks Commission feels and it was unanimous that they prefer that we accept the land instead of for growing funding for new development so just wanted to let everyone know what happened from which develop from when we get new developments they prefer that we just yeah not give up the land yeah okay uh on the council business item H audited financial statements yes good evening mayor members of council we have Janelle um from Bergen kdv here to present the financial statements you did receive those prior to the meeting in paper form and she'll be ready to go for you so thank you so much CLI just click on this CLI on the screen and then now you can use the arrow thank you Mr Mayor members of the council I'm here tonight to present to you the results of our audit um the first thing that I wanted to cover with you are the reports that we issue as part of the audit process um the first one being the independent Auditor's report this report does discuss that the financial statements are Management's responsibity ility that's where you're relying on your Finance team to pull together all the information that goes in into the statements and then our responsibility is to express an opinion based on the results of our test work we did Issue an unmodified opinion this is what's considered the clean opinion or the best that we can offer you um the opinion states that your financial statements present fairly and all material respects and then the second report we issue is our report in accordance with government auditing standards these standards require that we um review the internal controls over financial reporting as well as compliance with various laws regulations contracts and grants when it comes to internal controls we had one item to report and that's the lack of segregation of accounting duties um you've seen this in the past just do with the limited staff that you have within your office um not necessarily having enough people to um spread those duties across and so we just continue recommend that you be continue to be aware of the situation and um continue to provide your oversight through your reviews of um reports and such and then when it comes to compliance we had no instances of non-compliance to report and then the third report we issue is a report on Minnesota legal compliance the state auditor's office gives us a list of statutes to test compliance with each year and we had no instances of non-compliance so another clean report for your city um moving on we do have some graphs charts and graphs that show some Financial Trends and Analysis for the city for the Last 5 Years um the first graph here shows your property tax um Levy and tax capacity for the Last 5 Years um from 2019 to 2023 your Levy has increased about 45% um your tax capacity over that same time period has increased about 119% um for 2023 it was increase in the levy of about 5 1 12% and an increase in the tax capacity of about 37% um so your tax rate did decrease from 47.7 in 22 to 35.1 in 2023 so you've been on that downward trend for that tax rate 2023 was kind of the most significant um drop in the year's present Ed following that we have a graph that summarizes general fund revenues expenditures and fund balance for The Last 5 Years um in each of the years presented here except 2023 your revenues did exceed expenditures um so your fund balance has been growing in each of the years your fund balance still did grow in 2023 um part of that was attributed to the transfer that Zach had mentioned earlier um so at at at December 31st your fund balance of the 2.78 million was about 5 months of expenditures or about 38% um of your expenditures your your policy for the city is 40% so you're just below that percentage um and as as Zach mentioned the the transfer that you um made was you know you could have made a higher transfer but um because of where the city was going um it was deemed that it maybe was wasn't necessary at this time but still within the guidelines of the state recommendations as well the next graph here shows your general fund sources of revenue for The Last 5 Years um for 2023 you did see a decrease in revenues of about $35,000 or 6% um much of that decrease was in the license and permits category and charges for services um 2022 you had more development so those revenues were were higher um and then the decreases in 2023 um and then partially offsetting those decreases you did have some increases in um property taxes with the levy an increase in intergovernmental revenues with the recognition of of more of the the federal arpa funds during the year and then also an increase in miscellaneous revenues um investment income increased significantly this year here just with the change in the market conditions the next graph is the general fund expenditures um this fund you did see an increase of about $1.3 million or about 22% um you did see increases across um all programs um within this fund um General government saw increases with some planning and Consulting work and then also a litigation settlement um public SA safety was the largest component um with increasing or filling some of the open positions um also increases in repairs and maintenance and insurance costs um and public works also saw increases in um Staffing costs and repairs and maintenance as well as culture Parks and Recreation saw an increase in staff cost as well with more time in in that area the next graph here our table is your general fund to actual results um the First Column of numbers is the budget that you as the council approved as directive to management of where you um anticipated the general fund fund balance should come out and that um budget called for a balanced budget or essentially no change in your fund balance the actual results are are posted in that second column of numbers and that was an increase in your fund balance of about $117,000 in total your revenues were about $241,000 or 3.6% under budget um a lot of that related to development activity the budget some of those budget numbers were set based on your prior year development um on the expenditure side you were about $494,000 over budget or 7.4% um again with Consulting and planning being over budget as well as the repairs and maintenance um that's a lot of the that Public Works um overage there and then um the the transfer in that was mentioned earlier the $853,000 that was not budgeted so again your your net fund balance increased $117,000 and then moving on the next graph is the water fund um operations in this fund continue to increase each year just with the development of the city and adding new users to the system um for the last two years this this fund has shown an operating income with depreciation so you're able to fund or cover the full depreciation expense in this fund I think that's the first time ever and then the sewer fund is on the the next graph um this fund is also seeing an increase in activity with the additional users to the system um 2023 you see more of a significant increase in your operating expenses um much of this relates to depreciation um there was some new assets that were added to the system last year that are starting depreciation depreciating this year um depreciation is a significant amount in this fund and a lot of that too is attributed to the newness of your system um so those numbers are usually higher when your systems are newer um so this fund does have an operating loss with depreciation it was $519,000 for 2023 um when you factor out depreciation there is an operating income of about $242,000 um but it is important to consider depreciation um in these funds because it helps you set aside dollars for future repairs and Replacements um as those things are needed I know a couple years ago we had talked about looking at those schedules are we I don't know what it's typical but it seems like it sounded like we were using too short of a duration but so what you're talking about was lifespan that we're talking with assets so we' use 30 instead of 50 yeah which would mean that we're depreciating them faster than we're actually going to replace them yep so we don't need to cover 100% is what you're comment it means it means we need to cover you know I mean to me if if the lifespan really is 50 and I would suspect it's even higher foru I I don't know that yeah our Capital asset policy only allows us to qu to 50 that's the max we can do based on our policy but we've just historically done 30 just to try to make sure that we're depreciating enough to be able to make sure we're covering our costs only because inflation continues to be a item of factor need to that doesn't take an effect in this it does put us in the ditch even though we probably aren't correct yeah so the main number that you need to look at is the bottom one which shows that we are making or we have income we're not just we're just not covering all of our as long as that income without depreciation is not zero we are putting something away for depreciation is some of this related to the the accounting change where we were gifted a whole bunch of infrastructure that we now have on our on our books that's correct and so that is that kind of a one-time thing or is that continue then to the depreciation y it will continue okay but it you made sound like it's kind like a car like the first year Dee a lot more than the second year than the third year you say new stuff that depreciates at a higher rate is that what you were insinuating yes but as um as you reach the end of your lifespan so if you've got 30 years on some of your infrastructure some of it will start to drop off but the city of Dayton's infrastructure is fairly new as a whole meant none of it's dropping off is what you meant yeah it's going to take longer for some of those items to start dropping off where some of your neighboring cities you know some of their infrastructure might be fully depreciated so they're not in a sense adding to that set aside each year thank you but a couple other items to note too when it comes to your unrestricted net position that number also you don't see that on this graph but that number for this fund also increased so it kind of again shows that you are setting your fund as a whole is improving that you're able to set those dollars aside and the fund did um positively cash flow so you're able to make all of your payments and such and still so those are also signs um as that kind of indicated too that there are some positives even though it looks like you know you've got the the last fir operations but there's other things that are happening in that fund as well so that's kind of um just the brief summary that I have um I've got my contact information here if anyone has questions throughout the year they're certainly able to um contact me at anytime um and if there's any additional questions I can certainly address those at this time as well anybody have any questions yes I have have one and I'm not sure that that you'll be able to answer it on the Fly exactly but we participate in a couple of of Pensions um and it doesn't not clear to me in the report I guess unless I'm not reading it right you know uh what our exposure is in terms of those F those retirement plans being funded okay those are actually There's a summary on in this financial statement document on page 64 so there's two plans there's the um there's the per one for the general employees and then there's the separate one for the police and fire um both of those when it comes to the funding percentage both of those plans um the percentage funded did increase for both of those plans for 2023 um so it did decrease your overall liability for those plans um and those some of those you don't always see right away those changes in the liability because it's also netted with there's deferred inflows and outflows that that get a little confusing on on the accounting side but overall the liability to the city has decreased um because those plans are better funded now um ultimately though the only impact to the city is as um employees are working and earning those benefits that you're making the required contribution on their behalf and um if there's ever changes from the state level as far as what percentage the city is required to contribute then you'll have to change your contributions based on that but if the city dissolved as of tomorrow those liabilities go away as well so you're just paying on your current employees through their current pay roll okay and it seems to me this the state does some kind of Health uh you know help check on these funds sort of a green yellow red kind of for the overall funding are any of these in any trouble or either of these I guess it's just the two um I guess I haven't heard about the the coloring or the health check but like I said the funding percentage has been increasing so like the general Peril is at 83% funded um the police and fire is at 86% so those are both higher than what they had been in the prior year and sometimes that can fluctuate too just based on the um definitely the market rates you know with the higher interest rates and stuff that helps these plans um and some of the other assumptions that the actuaries factor in but the interest rate was the a big change this last year which helped both of those plans okay to expand on your question I think also to add some more information is that um so the one plan that's maybe more in question that's just in total is the police one that's related to all of the retirements early retirements related to um B basically PTSD related to all those um police officers so that one's probably in more of a red or yellow situation than the general employees would be but that's the answer your question that we Rel to parir of yeah overall I'm just trying to understand if we got any sort of surprise exposure out there um yep not that I'm aware same thing had mentioned okay thank you yeah and usually if they're going to increase your contribution rates and stuff there's typically a couple years notice that you'll kind of know that ahead of time or can anticipate that coming on okay thank you all right thank you item I quarterly report oh do we have to to I think you're supposed to make a motion in a second just to make sure we've accepted it Scott second any more discussion all those in favor say I I all those opposed say no motion carries four to zero now we're on quarter rep wonderful good evening mayor members of council I'm here to present the quarter one fin report this kind of goes with the audit so it actually is good timing that we had the audit presentation tonight um this graph we've always historically shown to the council just to show what the general fund cash balance looks like you will always see a high balance at the beginning of the year because we start off with our full fund balance as in 35% we typically work all the way down to zero Andor somewhere near there depending on how operations go and they Spike back up in the middle of year when we get our first tax settlement and again a second tax settlement comes in in December so that's why you see the typical W format um nothing majorly different has changed this year however you can see the decrease um is relatively the same as last year that's because we also started out with a lower fund balance percentage and we had a much bigger increase in operations this year so we will see our tax levy dollars come in in July and then in December which will then hopefully bring the balances much higher than they were in the previous years so we are operating with dollars from 23 with a higher budget so don't be too alarmed with the decrease in the cash fund balance so yep the the 2823 line yes um the gray one you're referring to Y yep what what drove so it looks like we had two dips that dip down to yep so those would be normal operations however we had as you just mentioned or Janelle had just mentioned with the audit is that we had an significant more expenditures and we did revenues um what was holding up the other two lines which would be the orange line and the blue line that you see on this would be related to building permits so if you add in $600,000 of building permits into any one of those numbers we're right back at where we were before okay so that was kind of pumping it up correct so artificially the blue and the orange lines were I will say nontypical operations because we were being artificially higher with the fact that building fors were much higher than what budgeted for um which helps us overall cuz it comes through with building permit dollars right away and then it also helps with the tax capacity numbers but normal operations is more of the gry line however I will say that 23 was a rough year for repairs and maintenance and lots of items um that we can rehash again if we want to but I think we hashed them out of the transfer last week we could talk more if you want to so those dips the the two bottom do we we do we know how far down that went percentage wise um well essentially that bottom number was like 183 Grand which would be the low the lowest number I've basically ever seen and that was Bas and that was if we were scrap and bottom on that one uh and that I said it's based on normal operations and if we had building permit dollars that would have come in in typically April May June as John mentioned we wouldn't have been that low by any means and we wouldn't have been that low again in November if we had again the building permit dollars we did if you had 600 Grand to any one of those numbers we're you know right back up with the orange lines at and then well we'll probably have to plan accordingly so we don't do that again right correct exactly since then gone from 250 to 200 um four building per yes that was for this year 200 is what we budgeted for for building permit numbers 250 wasn't 23 right but you know we're budgeting for 250 in 2022 where the orange lines at we had 45 or something or 400 know we historically did that yeah yeah correct sorry take that back 2022 was 49 6 yeah so that's why it was so much higher in the orange number it's a lot of homes so we're kind of paralleling the 2023 line but we're yes given that we're 2 and a half months into the second quarter y do you are you anticipating as low a dip or are things looking better so the dip will be fairly the same as we get to in June and the reason for that is we don't have the revenue dollars so we have increased budgeted expenditures for 20 for but we're using $23 to fund those things so we don't get our Revenue until July there using the money that got deposited in December 23 if we we increased operations by roughly $1.3 million in 2024 but I don't have an additional $1.3 million to pay for those expenditures until July and December so what we'll see is we'll see a typical or similar down until we get to June or July I should say and then we typically get our um settlement it's like July 4th right around there doesn't actually happen on that holiday but I guess um the increase will then be significantly higher than what you see as the orange line so we will have a abnormally large increase in the revenues that come in related to your question Council Fant is that we will see a larger increase in July than we would normally or would have seen last year in the gry line so just at that rate before we get that six month we're we're going to be scraping bottom again and I don't I will be I will be surprised if we H the 200 so um yeah we like I said so um as staff based on a month ago's conversation we are doing whatever we can to keep expenditures as low as possible keep revenues up as high as possible maintenance cost are better this year than last year I sure as heck hope so I don't think they can get much worse um I don't want any more $36,000 engine repairs that'd be we are um bringing a little that discussion forward we are reporting these when the liability occurs now we um yes so this it was happening we happened just so the conversation was on uh middle of April we did this quarterly report at the end of April so um it will say that it's not maybe like fully implemented yet but it's there are some things in here for 23 and um quarter 1 that were paid in April but actually were occurred in March so there are some of them I will not say it's 100% but I'll say say it's probably 50 to 60% that are in this March report um but we are doing a much better job and department heads are getting information as soon as possible typically we're on the 15th of the month I'll send it off tomorrow the department heads let them know where they're at for April so we continue to try to you know book back dollars that are going to happen at the end of the year anyways okay good questions though is there any I mean there's probably not much but if if again I I don't think we're going to hit the unless something turns around in the economy but is there anything we can do to mitigate that loss um so there will be some offset with expenditures related to those because we won't have the inspection dollars that we normally would have with the revenues um again we don't pay for building inspection unless they actually happen um so we are budgeting for both 200 inspections and 200 um permits if they don't hit those and we don't hit the $200 you know we don't pay the 200 permits of inspections okay but it's not a one to it's close but it's not a one to one otherwise we're like I said looking at just normal line items for expenditures do we need that do we really need this can we save here can we do that um part of the 2024 budget was building in into some contingency which we had talked about during the 2024 budget season um individual in individual line items so we are trying to do our best to not use those if we don't have to okay and that's across all departments um from anything from Administration to parks on trying to get this screen to go away I won't do it but okay so um income statement just want to touch base on taxes again we don't get the taxes until July don't expect to see them in the June report I will let you know what we actually receive when I give the quarter to report just so you have a number you can plug in mentally um on the on the report but we won't actually get it until July uh licens and permits again they're less than what they are but quarter 1 is always lower we've never had a quarter 1 report that says we're on Pace for the yearly um when we went Gang Busters in 21 and 22 we still didn't hit quarter 1 reports um for quarterly things it was just really crazy in the summer months uh we got all our Federal grant dollars right away this year that's our second half of our arpa dollars at 182 Grand so that's going to be in the intergovernmental Revenue which is why it's showing that it's higher than where it would be normally Salto release payments came in or come in in quarter 4 um so those are about $30,000 which will be right on budget um first half assessments we pay for all quarter 1 and Quarter Two if you double the number for the budget we would be almost right on track for the assessment which is good those do adjust slightly we get the number from the county but they adjust slightly if there are any prepayments you know things that happen with the county related to assessments if we get any new assessments those always go on there as well um but they're typically pretty close um inspections we budgeted for a planner and that position is still open so that's why we are not at that number again again there are some direct correlations to not hitting building permit numbers we don't pay for those expenses so there are some savings there um it we paid for all our subscriptions right away everyone wants their money for the full year right away so and then we also had to purchase a new printer that was $9,000 that was um planned for in 23 but based on what the operations were in 23 we held off until 24 to use $24 for that so hopefully we are good to go again that's a onetime purchase um number eight fire suppression assistant chief didn't start till q1 so we're Below on that one hopefully we continue to have that Trend as you see I do want to let you know that March payroll which was not put in this report um was 13 Grand so if you had 13 Grand to the 133 you're at roughly 167 and some change um that is a little closer to budget however not crazy high by any means and then Parks is not up and running yet any questions on the income statement again you will see a more accurate income statement as of in two when we actually have it fully 100% implemented with the booking back of AP and payroll and everything else that we've been working on internally since the transfers conversation in April for those it items when we go to renew those contracts we should talk to them about paying quarterly at the beginning of the quarter versus annually a lot of them will do that now uh potentially yeah we most certainly can um some of the it stuff that we do we just pay for it all up front because it's not that much money but they do add up over time if you you know if you I think we have five or six subscriptions that we do and each one of them is $4 or $5,000 now we're talking 20 grand when interest rates are at 1% it's not a b deal but they're not 1% anymore correct yeah they're roughly 5.33% currently which is good any questions on the income statement couple that you didn't have U Notes for mayor and city council or yep over budget so that is also related to subscriptions so we pay 100% of subscriptions for like um LMC uh Metro mayor's Association League of Minnesota cities um Metro cities all of those subscriptions are due as of one one they're due they're due one one we typically pay them in December or November and then they're considered prepaids so they sit and you'll see them on the audit um underneath prepaid number under the general fund those are most of those are subscriptions that we have to pay because they're due as of January 1st if we don't get them in January 1st they charge us a nice 10% late fee very kind of them so that's why it's over by otherwise it's it has nothing to do with your guys's pay well we knew that uh Finance yes Department yep so those are related to I believe again those are subscriptions that we had to do and then I don't remember what the other one was I looked at that one as well um because just cuz it's at 11 19.9% and not 120% which is why we didn't analyze it um I can get back to you on that one so you can have a response back for me on that one but I do not have the answer and I'm not trying to hide anything I just don't know the answer and these are things that'll kind of compensate later correct yep just because those are all time most things are timing because of the fact that we're in q1 by the time Q2 hits around typically they're pretty flattened out because we try not to make full year payments like to your point call nor TR but happens and then U Public Works is that the same kind of thing we've got heavier expenses during the winter quarter then yep and so that would be that's like salt purchases as well we purchase salt right away in January or February for the whole year um and that'll be that's a significant cost and we hold L of those um other than that I don't remember what else we would have in public works right off the bat did we use all the salt we purchased this year there wasn't a lot of snow did we use all the salt we purchased no we did not so do we store that or we get a credit back for it we no we have to take um 80% of what we have asked for so that's the way it works so use up to 120% of it um but the minimum that you have to take is 80% of it um and then if you leave it with them then you'll pay in a storage fee um and then uh we generally bring it to the shop because we've got enough storage there for it so part of the salt in question is the fact that we have to order salt so far in advance too we can't just say oh we're going to get it next year I think we have to place the order in October Yeah March March when we do it for next season for the next season so it's tough for us to budget so next season yes well we'll know we'll have better correct so we make a purchase in March of this year for next year's salt season and we don't know what's going to happen in next year's salt season because we don't know what the winner is going to be like so they basically pre-order us and we try to do 80% if we can but um it's possible some years we've even used 120% of what we had it just depends on what we get for snow events and ice yct any more questions I think those are good like I said I'll get back with you with finan just to verify and then also public works if we find anything major that's not related to Salt I'll let you know anything else all right cash B cash balances nothing majorly you know weird to report on this one um general fund is is typical operations happen at the end of the year and then overall as the balance goes down with operations um again you can see that's a little lower than it was as of 331 last year but again we have a significantly higher budget for 2024 um the other ones that may be of concern you know you see a bunch of funds that are basically going down to zero we're trying to reduce the number of funds we have or um closing funds they will still be on there until the balance goes away to zero in balance of a year ago so that's why you're still seeing those those are labeled with number sixes um and then yeah Tiff Tiff cost we had Tiff cost related to um I think it was Tiff 19 um take that back Tiff 18 and that's our Tiff bond that we issued in 20203 um so that'll be set up as fund 379 which is a negative 189,000 and that's based on the bond payment and then also the um St um setup costs we will get our first half payment for that Tiff bond in July so that will be significantly better as well um and then also for um item four 59 that's the Tiff Street Improvement project that's why they increase so much is because we issued the bond so that's why it was NE 5.1 million as of 20123 March 31st any questions on cash balances overall as you can see we there is a small decrease from the end of the year to now most of that to do with operations and it also has to do with debt payments as well water fund um this is again fairly healthy we are on the right track typically water fund shows a little weird in q1 because we only build out one time which would have been in March for January and February um we are right on Pace as of last year we might be a little lower and it's just because of timing of when um we do readings and stuff too that can be even a even a week or two can change a um a revenue amount by a a couple tens of thousands uh because of all the number of residents that we have on water um overall the water fund seems to be fairly healthy um we have utilities that are a little higher and I can note those sorry give me one minute here um utilities are a little higher based on the fact that um we had to pay Maple Grove uh q1 of 23 didn't get paid until q1 of 22 of last year so that's just a timing thing last year we didn't we paid late to Maple grow um this year we actually paid on time which was I think appreciated by Maple grow but um not by us so the difference in year-over-year 38 to um 25,000 we actually paid less to Maple Grove this year than we did last year and again that relates to the charges for services because we're not charging people for water another major one that you probably looking at is repair and maintenance and those are over budget and that's due to the Ami system that is on our CIP list so it shows up as a repair and maintenance line item here however that will be turned into a capital item and it will not be there at the end of the year that's based on gasby 34 so it's a little odd to look at um I am thinking about adding a capital outlay item on this sheet so that it doesn't look so funny and you can actually pick out what is capital and what's actually repair and maintenance in the future but for now it's all we had to use and we just copied what we had last time any questions on the water fund very similar for the sewer fund um again nothing too crazy repaired maintenance is related to that Ami system again um again looking to add a capital outlay item just because we don't have a ton of projects in the water and sewer fund that end up being capitalized but every once in a while there is one and the Ami system will be a significant um significant cost for us that again that Ami system is to be able to read meters every 15 minutes essentially from one together is by the way yeah huh what kind of shape or where is that so that is being implemented I think the implementation is June okay so June is when we're fully going to be implemented on the Ami system what we'll do is we'll then communicate with residents that they can then download the software set up alerts do all the good stuff um and then it will be implemented ready for us to do the July readings as our goal um we have most of the meters in town are already on the system and I think we're slowly getting the touch pads to go away hopefully but um we're slowly getting caught up with our backlog of um uh MX mxus that actually radio read out to the to the signal right now we do have some homes that are just on touch pads we have to physically R in everyone touch and those were what they were not supplying an outa correct yep so we are slowly getting more and more of those I think we're caught up or dang close but maybe not for old stuff maybe but some of the old stuff I think there's still going to be around 600 met that we're going to have to go out and change out um meats and touchpads just because they weren't um this system wasn't around when they were installing those so yeah we have roughly 3,100 meters just as a reference for the council know how many meters we have in town including the 600 that's there so 2500 rough number of mxus and and actual meters that are going to read to that Ami system this would be a great system for everybody including the residents cuz so be alerted of leaks and or over usage um well before we actually do Billings which is good for everybody cuz then we don't get yelled at because we charged the resident what happened to the happened to the water meter alarms too yep when they're not alarms they alerts but yeah they we'll set I think it's a dollar amount or it's a usage amount um they'll set their alert for the the month what they think they should be using and if they hit that then they'll get alert if it's the 29th great fantastic you know you're right on schedule if if it's the second of the month you'd be like what the heck's going on so um and hopefully we're checking those before that but we get alerts too so we will do we will try to be as proactive as we can be to reaching out to Residents that we have contact information for because we'll get alerts and be able to review the system daily it'll give us warnings it'll give us um cautions it'll give us things to look at um empty meters empty pipes um reverse flows all kinds of odd stuff that happens but um okay good questions so it'd be nice if with new houses we could default them to a fairly low number so they get hit right away because i' I've had a couple residents get hit with their first bill and they get hammered oh yeah most of it's related to sod cuz they P they crank the thing up for watering the sod till like I don't even know the max level twice a day every day yeah correct and so that it adds up to a ton of water you don't think it's that much it is a crazy amount of water yeah well and for yeah res all all new residents will once we have the system up and running it'll be on the new Resident packet as well that um we do have for residents that come in we will tell them how to download the system set up Alerts get it be notified blah blah blah so that they know and can get set up right away we'll probably get calls right away for those ones as we always do any questions on the S fund overall Cal one report isn't you know isn't terrible um we are trying to keep in getting continue to do better with um acral rates so that we're better at analyzing what's going to happen at the end of the year cuz we don't do acrel through the year but um again we only had about a month to get this implemented so the work of progress Q2 should be much more accurate so any questions I think they that answered okay if you have any other questions or anything comes up please send me an email happy to answer them thank you okay um item J thank you Mr M Jason and I are going to tag team on this um let's see okay so generally kind of what what staff is looking for from the council is some Direction so we we have uh property that let's see we have a property that's been for sale for some time um we've had a number of developers or buyers that have looked at this property that that have turned away for various reasons um one of them is uh that as the development happens typically if if there's a need for additional RightWay the city would require right away in this case there's a few different scenarios that has a significant change to the amount of RightWay that would be needed to correct or make improvements to the intersection of uh territorial in Rush Creek so um what we're looking for what staff is requesting for direction from the council is are is there different options that you would like us to pursue um I don't know if I have a big p yeah I do have a big picture so the the property that we're talking specifically about is at the intersection of territorial and Rush Creek um this is kind of a an over well large picture so uh the more let me back up there there's kind of two things one is corrections to Corrections improvements to the intersection the second is the opportunity to acquire land for um a city trail that would connect or kind of follow this Creek and then eventually connect to Elm Creek Park at 121st um the blue line here is a proposed Rush Creek Trail for Three Rivers so um there's two parts going on one is improvements of the intersection and the second is the opportunity for a trail system so John just to be clear the Blue Line's not us that's the River Park District district is proposing and they have that outlined already Yes River yes you know and that also goes through the the Pedic cour property here thank you but they have not acquired any of it um they or did they bits and pieces of it yes yeah so mostly the and I couldn't say exactly which Parcels they have but they've been kind of working east to west and that's Maple Grove yeah yes so this this is the city boundary with Dayton above and in Maple Grove to the South yeah so the mayor members of ccil so this this conversation has happened for I will say maybe 10 years maybe five years whatever related to the petty Corp property and what we want to do with that intersection um and I don't know if there's been any ever any clear direction from Council on what we want to do I don't know if there's ever been any discussion with Council um between City sta there might have been some but not clear Direction um we want to get clear direction from the council tonight based on you know overall the conversations we've had with Developers on the picor property people who P potential buyers that want to look at the property overall um we don't have great direction from Council which is what we're looking for tonight part of it relates to Trails which will be discussed with the bror and trails development here again that's just tentative area not confirmed you know that's a what it call Fat marker fat line on a drawing there and then part of it is related to the intersection as well so I don't know if which one you want to discuss first but both of them are they're combined discussions however they are separate items yeah why are weting these two well they're coming together together at the same time so that's why you know timing wise it's we need to have a conversation it needs to start somewhere and and why are we having a conversation I mean we don't have any clue on that on the trail part of it I'll cut through the chase right away in the park meeting last last week there is a proposed idea to buy all that property for a a big no no so the park commission discussion was this uh solid green line that goes through here but I guess what I'm asking is why is that in this discussion why isn't that a totally separate discussion we can break them up as part of the conversation yeah you can break them up if you'd like to but they are related because if you do one they all include the one property they'll include the one property which is why we want to have a discussion on it because the convergence of the trails meets at that same property as does the right of way so if we do one um one decision is given for Clear Direction on the right way that's where the merger happens is is at that property we want to get clear Direction cuz if we again in reference in reference to the comments made earlier at open Forum we don't want to keep yeah I get holding the property to you know figure out what we want to do and get different answers or whatever else may have happened in the past but well in reality we've been holding the property for a couple two and a half years or so basically I mean I I like I said I wasn't here so I don't can't confirm or anything but I can just tell what's happened and within the last couple years there was no need to look at the uh fixing the road now all of a sudden there is why that discussion's happened a while ago so that did happen between staff and council at some point I don't know when but maybe when the Rush Creek Landing Sundance Woods development went in because there was discussion at some point with doing it cuz there is a it's essentially a driveway Jason correct me if I'm wrong at the entrance of Rush Creek Landing it goes down to basically a driveway I don't have a picture unfortunately I can't give you yeah when Rush Creek Landing was developed they improved the road in front of the development and left a section of gravel down to territorial instead of upgrading that to the parkway or a substantial roadway there was basically a shape and pave effort meaning they just beefed up the road a little bit and paved it just to get a paved connection to it with plans to upgrade it in the future um the the discussions regarding in the realignment or reconfiguration of this intersection have been around for a long time um the question's asked why now um it doesn't need to be improved now um there's nothing triggering the need to redo it however the property potentially being for sale or being for sale gives the opportunity for the city to consider an acquisition of it to preserve it for future improvements if desired so I I think also a few years ago we were under the Imp at least I was under the impression Maple Groves is going to close off Territorial and I I guess what I'm seeing over there now is not necessarily that they that they may actually have quite a bit of traffic on territory so I mean if we if we were to reconfigure this road at least to one of the examples I've seen I'm going to go back one slide so you can see that example yeah this thing um I mean is that going to it seems to me that they're going to be putting a lot of traffic on territorial so I'm kind of wondering if this still makes sense so I I can just share that I've had a lot of discussion over the years with Maple Grove regarding this intersection um all of my direct discussions with them have been of the opinion they would like to deter as much traffic on territorial as possible well um they did talk about severing it at one point or at least the the concept of of trunk anent and just removing this connection Al together to detour traffic this was viewed as a favorable outcome or a configuration by them being that when 81 is overloaded with traffic which is frequent uh Territorial Road is used as a bypass cars do 70 M an hour on it that generates calls for Maple Grove they want to deter it the thought here is if it tees in in this configuration now they have a stop condition a force stop at least one stop to deter them from from using it so um to date all of the support from T from Maple Grove on this configuration has been supported um whether the projections have increased I guess I don't know um what their long-term plans are um it has been shared that their long-term vision is not clear they don't know if this will be a major collector or if it'll be something less than that or even truncated in the future so in the past what has kept us from letting a a development happen here with with this I mean typically when we when we um okay developments roads that go through developers put in so what would keep this from being done that way so this is a smaller property and and when I say smaller yes it's 10 acres but much of it is wetland and flood plane and so from a developer's perspective I'm going to interrupt you there it is not a flood plane we've had FEMA out and Ins Insurance not okay of the move that please of the 10 acres not all of it is developable um it makes a difference how much Road it is or how much land is is consumed by RightWay depending on how we treat the intersection so the developer is going to look at this and want to know what the answers on are on what the city wants for a road before they're going to Sure propose a formal development or for formal project yeah but I guess what I'm getting at then is it if this is kind of our Target our goal why would we not have them look at this I think with the sav of say it's never been decided by Council this is our go yeah so there are three options we can do which is I want to show make sure the council knows all three my thing will work here there we go this is the current layout um what we would suggest is to at least get the amount of right away needed to continue to redo that roadway so that it is a Parkway standard that was stopped at the Ed Edge of Rush Creek Landings development um which was not done previously again it's essentially the with with and feel of a driveway um from territorial to The Rush Creek Landing development that would be what what staff would say would be a minimum requirement that again the intersection with um what Jason had mentioned earlier it does function and it may function for the next 50 years we don't know but we would like to at least get the current layout with additional right of way at a minimum what yep squares the white squares are kind of cut WR an elevation or something they're just labels or call outs just saying what they are for for taper topography these are elevations on you probably can't see the Contours they're pretty great back okay so option two is a roundabout again this is done a a a design this is not ideal per engineering and even the roundabout person that does roundabouts for a living says don't put a roundabout here it doesn't make any sense so again it's an option we can do it however it's not really favorable for even the round engineer who does round we talk a lot about how good rounds are for traffic because it causes more side swipes and less tea so Jason can you give us any insight as to why this is not as good of a set option well it it's it's not not an option that it couldn't be done um however the predominant traffic is Rush Creek Road and territorial hence that's why we were looking at the realignment to have that the through motion with the third leg being less trafficked so our thought is ideally we get that strong East West Connector all the way through the city that avoids the stopping and the left turns at this intersection by realigning a roundabout would still allow the free flowing without having stopped conditions which is still a step up however the thought was this takes up a lot of space and I want to point out we didn't design this this is we just popped a circle in there that's the right side to get the minimum so I don't want so this looks like it takes up less space than the other options in the P yeah it would it would be a little bit bigger than this um at a minimum again we just did this for internal purposes just to say okay what magn order magnitude what are we talking about how much size it would it would almost certainly be a little bit larger than this um similarly for that turn lane I just want to mention that it's the absolute minimum for the right away that might not even support a trail through there which I think would be a minimum so um we did a just for discussion purposes and we were LED very quickly to say the realignment and the reconfiguration was the preferred option yeah and this versus three cost difference um we haven't run costs on these yet um obviously the cheapest is to leave it as is um the intersection and just do the upgrades without a doubt um roundabouts I mean just I'll just say generally speaking we might be talking a million dollars um I that's a super round number it could be very far off from that um this one we have we have not looked at a cost we wanted to see if there was even um um any indication that there might be appetite to to do an acquisition to support this in the future before putting too much effort into it you think this is more or less than a million ballpark well with the the land acquisition certainly comparable or more I would say more so again this is the design that's a potential this has not been engineered at all either and this is a line of the paper the last one is realign the roadway so that we are basically focusing on that east west traffic that we're seeing already without having the stops and then the turn rights um on this again they can still take territorial down um another suggestion that came to you know um discussion over the last week since this has been sent out is do we make the connection down to territorial instead of um so it's would be going east on territorial essentially making a u at The Rush Creek Parkway cuz then we can get send people down a maple gr Parkway versus sending them to the 81 and torial intersection um over to the West that's what Zach and I had talked about earlier this week too was we you know with this design we're pushing people to territorial in 81 which we know is a bad intersection but they're redoing that intersection at 81 and whatever that Maple grow Parkway thank you Maple grow Parkway there so if the connection at territorial is going to stay that's going to be a safer intersection because there's going to be lights at that intersection for people to use versus trying to do the you mean because of mapal parway yeah because they're redo the whole that's quite a bit Yeah so essentially you making a giant U versus having an East West Connection I'm not sure if that's a positive or negative I'm not sure again these are just options that come to mind if Council has other options or such that we just need direction of what we want to do with the property so we can provide them good information back you know essentially from staff I don't really see any advantage over this versus just leaving it as number one personally so I think at minimum we would need it to match the existing roadway including the path so I think number one at minimum yeah yeah option one is a a minimum that we would look at I'll go back to them just so you can see them again come on there we go op one is a minimum that we'd look at again getting additional right away to continue that same roadway that will work and it will function that is totally fine um do we want to hear from the audience about the roadway first and then yeah so I want to make sure we stick on the roadway first before we go to the trail oh yeah I yeah separate okay just why don't you come on up so we can otherwise they we're talking about your property so come on up the majority of that property is ours but it does involve another property owner not sure if you guys are aware of that property owner owns this is Mark pole he lives in Maple Grove owns this corner and he owns this section and then the house that's second house over just so you know that um it's not just our property you're talking okay thank you I know we had people ear that want to talk about the trail is anyone here that wants to talk about the road not the trail Steve Steve Steve raised his hand hold on one second stay the same ASR is now there discuss changes the question is asked of is the speed limit going to change on territorial no plans for a change in the speed limit someone raise your hand yep and see if you should be able to talk uh yeah I I just want to ask going forward that the Rush Creek territorial intersection changes be separate from the Wetland Trail Edition you guys already mentioned that and I I think that would be appreciated by all the all the property owners that could potentially be impacted by that noted thank you Steve all right thank you so we yeah we need clear direction from Council what you like to do with options know that we have information yeah I don't know I mean I'm I'm still kind of lost we've talked about this intersection before and you know the the need to upgraded I understand the the quality of the road piece um but it didn't well where I get lost in the in this whole discussion is that the contention is that the city's chased away all the developers I assume it's because it doesn't match the the city plans comp plan but what kind of development you know I mean it seems like our what's being presented is we should buy this property because it can't be developed or we won't let it be developed and I guess where I'm lost is what's why is it not marketable why isn't it so sure so the the property is owned agricultural it's guided for low density residential of 3 to five units per acre um so developers have looked at this for a variety of uses whether it's just having a house and a a barn with horses to town homes and apartments and so on so very wide variety of uses um if it's and to answer uh Mr uh the petty cart's question um if it's something that's more intense than 3 to five units per acre it does it is a an amendment to the comprehensive plan which does require um a bigger review by the Met Council not huge but um it's it's a change so so that's if it goes above the five right five units an acre um so we we know that this is a challenging intersection we just haven't had a solution to how to fix it and now we have a few different options of how to treat it um but you know not until now so this property has been for sale for several years we've had a number of developers that have looked at it and walked away for various reasons um and I guess my opinion or my assumption is it's it's just the lack of unknown of what does does the city want to do with this intersection um because you know there's a big difference between if we take a little bit of right away to straighten out the intersection versus if we put in roundabout or realignment and then also from the developers perspective they're going to ask you what are they responsible to do so typically when we have a development um the developer is paying for that road this is a significant cost and so the expect the developer expectation is that the city's going to be paying for this just to be clear normally we would have the developer do this nor but normally they're developing 40 acres or more and so they can spread that cost out across there's not enough land there to do that corre there's a lot of unknowns and and essentially that there conversation needs to be had with the council what does the council want to do what direction does the council want to give to the prop well the staff the property owner and potential Developers well it's not only the road but it would be the RightWay I mean yeah yeah correct so at this point we don't we are not looking to reconstruct the road that's just want to make sure everyone's on the same page we're not looking to reconstruct the road today or even next year we want to make sure that we have if we are looking to do option three we do not want to have bring forward a plan with staff to then okay we bring forward a plan for the developer we want to do option three but a developer brings in a plan that they want to put a bunch of town homes on here that meet the three to five per acre and then Council says no we're not going to do that because now we want to Reign the roadway it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to not have correct and clear direction from staff level to from Council for this but have we had that's we have not seen any kind of a conent plan from anybody we have not been submitted a concept plan from this from this development and has the conversation ever been there that there hey we're going to put a 3 to five unit per acre deal here I don't know I mean there's been interest in town homes so that would be probably more than five units an acre y we also have to worry about access as well because this is the main collector road so this is essentially this would be very similar if we're looking at Rush Creek Parkway this is the same thing as Pioneer Parkway in the north side of town of connection points onto that road um we typically want to limit those on a neighborhood collector road which is what we do on pineer Parkway on the North side in River Hills through Cypress Cove through I own Gardens that is a technically considered a neighborhood collector that is the same thing as Ru Creek Parkway and territorial even though it may not look like that yeah we're not going to have anywhere near that kind of a residential buildup in that in that spot we have more homes in this area than we do on the North side yeah but they don't dump out they don't dump out there currently but I don't so as far as access goes yep um if we do this it looks to me like both of those loes need access to the whatever the new R CR Parkway is the assumption is the existing home would stay as it is and then there'd be you know unknown development there unknown number of homes that would be built over here on the east side yeah I don't know if you want to and then okay yeah so the the access is then next question is how many access points do you want to have on this road way being it's a neighborhood collector if and when territorial 81 gets upgraded and people are headed towards the Dayton Parkway interchange they're going to want to go this way versus going down Fernbrook to 81 to then Dayton Parkway interchange I certainly don't see no benefit out of this plan here I mean it's not a whole lot different than EV a te I mean you is taken up more more property to to do this mind flip into the overall one I know it shows the trail but for different purposes um I mean just just to address that and and again not that it's critical again it does work this way but just to demonstrate I mean these are our primary users I'm sure lots of them are going to frb without a belt but any of them wanting to get to The Interchange or other to this side are going to be going this route um all of these vehicles come to a complete stop with a left if it's a controlled intersection so this makes it a free flowing dominant East West collector throughout the city that that's the intent of it so it's it's a good practice it's a good layout good Improvement for an overall transportation system plan um will either work yes yeah so territorial will not access M gr Parkway it it won't you know it's cut off but down here yeah um no it will be connected is my understanding well why wouldn't they it seemed like if they're headed to theway potentially go that way so now you got you and I both cuz I would avoid 81 in territorial for everything it's worth and I would go to the light so this is where so might be coming down this is where my recommendation why don't we curve it the other way versus curving the road like if you go back a drawing or two one dry maybe this curves the road basically so it's going east west I said why don't we curve it the other way so it's basically going north south well into opposition from me Gro right well possibly yeah well I think in part because the that black line is the city Bard oh so we can't control oh yeah so it I don't understand how it's our intersection to begin with yeah it almost seems like right it almost seems like we have too many questions to to say we need to go there's an underlying reason here and I guess I that's what I'm curious about I I think my only concern is I don't want six entrances onto whatever this road ends up being whether it stays two separate roads or is one continuous Road I think we need to try to limited to one access point onto this road as it's going to be a main Maines feeder so you don't want a bunch of drop we don't want like we've got an 81 we got a bunch of driveways in 81 that's not hopeful Rush Creek isalan so there has to be an Access Road in between Territorial and FAL Lane for that neighborhood unless the goes under peral Lane so I think the decision for this intersection has to factor in Access roads on Rush cre Boulevard so that's an higher number of vehicles if it's town homes and you average 1.5 cars per town home that's a huge increase in traffic just for that intersection just from that property you're talk yeah so your question is on area 81 and territorial correct I'm sorry territorial rest Creek intersection because if you you go first on Rush Creek from Territorial Road the next access road is the left on Fair View right of Fairview Meadows Lane so in between Territorial and Fe me Lane is the penny cor property yeah and if it gets developed there's going to be an Access Road in between territorial yeah what I'm saying is I don't I don't want I don't want every driveway to butt up to Rush Creek I want one access point that they all come to so we don't have six driveways connecting up there but you're not there's not going to be I mean there's not that big of a development there I don't disagree with that so one is enough I think yeah yeah I agre the problem is getting that one there with setbacks and setbacks from the Wetland is where it gets to be really really tough with the number of space that that town home needs in order to function allowing only one access so I my question is going to be for cons salonic of underlying reasons we don't have clear Direction which is what our underlying reason is is that we want to give the council the idea the ability to talk about it and and discuss it in in Open session so that we can get clear direction for staff so we can provide this the um resident with the information so that he has it for his his realtor and for selling the property because it is currently for sale for them to lay it out correct yeah and so if we don't have clear direction as staff it's hard for us to say Yep this is what you should do because then we are providing wrong information to anybody who's looking at it I don't have a preference on the three of them my only concern is just one access and this is far set back from this intersection as possible I yeah I'm kind of inclined to leave it alone that's that's where I'm at I think that the additional right away needed for the trail andever that's I think we're going to talk about that separately but I I think that the intersection itself you know I just don't see the compelling reason to change it and if we were changing it I think we're talking a long ways out and that doesn't do these folks any good sure okay yeah if we develop it all on this property it's we're not going to be able to do any revised layout so yeah so okay so you want just to so that I'm clear this is the direction that the council is providing yep with the access as far with the access Northeast as you can get it in my opinion okay yeah okay okay could I just throw one more thing for consideration only because I've been part of the discussions um we have been talking with three riverse Park District they do have interest in part of this land for facilities or at least potentially um they did look at an acquisition at one time they realized they don't need all of the property but this would serve as a trail head or another uh facility that might benefit their system so there might be an an opportunity for a partnership if you will between the city and Three Rivers if the acquisition was to be completed now the improvements wouldn't have to be completed now there wouldn't be a timeline with it but that would be the benefit to the property owner is you would you would buy the property now from them with the intent to make whatever improvements could even be decided at a later date for what what should happen on this property regarding the roads and other developing that takes away that might be 10 20 30 years before they pay for it before they pay for it absolutely three Park District yes oh no we would have them up we would have them fr the cash I guess I don't have a problem with you know like if us discussing an offer but I'll leave it at that I mean it seems like they've got the rers park not far from here so if you want a trail head there's a trail head right there I mean it's on the other end of Rush Creek it's not super far maybe I'm underthinking mile away less than a mile yeah maybe I'm underthinking it but it doesn't seem like it's you know if you're going to drive somewhere mentioned yeah I mean I'm I'm willing to think about it and talk to them about it but they need to come to something because this Nexus of there may be this thing isn't going to help anything I don't want to hold up something going in here for the property owner on the thought that this may possibly happen someday and rers doesn't have their stuff together what they want to do and so none of that is um contingent oning this correct think here I mean it is actually more buildable land if if we that intersection we did and just you know we did look at is it possible to fit a daycare in this little triangle and it is not it's not large enough and so then that was brought up the idea of a of a trail head all in that triangle there yeah all right I think we got a direction from The Cult of what we're needing which is good yeah and as far as us looking at making an offer on the property I don't have a problem with a closed session on that okay but I I I yeah I think just leaving this as is um sounds like that's where we're at yeah like I said the proposed idea isn't for us to build it next year or even in the next two or three years it's more like we just need to have direction from Council because if come forward with a concept plan and development and so on and so forth and then later on we decide option three is what we really wanted H that isn't going to happen so yep so with this plan Jason I'm making an assumption there's enough room for a right turn lane from uh southbound Rush Creek to that's included in here and the trail is in there there's just not much wiggle room so I would say this is the minimum we might want to consider more additionally we would want additional RightWay along territorial that's not showing on here again it was just a minimum starting point for our considerations but it's probably not far off but there'll likely be a little bit additional second part of the question is the trail so this is where the other residents went on and I apologize I wasn't aware that we were talking about a trail tonight so I'm going to defer to John No so this was brought up at the park commission meeting so I think I believe we've had some discussions um about having a trail through a land that's owned by the Home Owners Association for br Bur um and then connecting down to the South eventually to rush the proposed or plan Rush Creek Trail by Three Rivers on the North End at some point or somehow would connect to Elm Creek Park Reserve at 121st so um just the idea of of why are we discussing all these things at once is because there's a number of factors that just kind of timing wise all came together at the same time within about a week or two of each other my understanding is the HOA came to us to see if we wanted to take ownership of that Wetland correct I don't not been part of all those conversations well there's some sort of a conversation yeah this conversation has been had yeah and the other thing is the Wetland we're not looking at putting a raised pathway we're talking about like a boardwalk like we did off of Vinewood if we do anything I was just going to ask you we're not talking about like an actual path we're talking more of like a natural Wetlands Boardwalk correct just for clarity of what the conversation is tonight I I think there's a number of options and and we haven't explored all of them but I mean aren some of them precluded by the fact that it's the wetlands I waste time on something that we're not going to do yeah I I I would I would hate to see an actual path path if anything goes in there I'm not saying I'm for anything but if anything goes in there I'd rather see it be a boardwalk through a wetland than a path are we the four of us in agreeance to that so we can just move on then it might change the discussion you guys yeah want is you one by or yeah I think I was want to make sure appreciate the comments and I want to make sure we hear them tonight but mayor council I want to make sure that we I think this is a future discussion that probably shouldn't have been included in this thing so um okay just that's just my I think I still want to based on that understanding sure I don't know who I give this to but um mayor council thank you for giving me a couple minutes on Dave Steiner I'm 11155 uman and uh we just got visibility to this through kind of a a social media posting and we didn't understand it was a bat marker plan um but one of the things you may be interested in is that uh the whoever from the HOA may have come to you that's being turned over to the homeowners as we speak so whatever that dialogue was is pretty much neutralized by the fact that they don't have a say anymore yeah which isent manag so that's why we're like whoa which is why this conversation shouldn't have happened tonight like I said I just I got that email from the developer yesterday so so the ho is going away do we then inher at this land like we have other the the developer currently owns this property they are turning it over to the homeowners as in the and the three of us are which is why so the developer sent me an email yesterday that says hey we're going to hold off on this and it was lit yesterday because if they said oh we're turning this over to the HOA as we speak essentially perfect so that's why so maybe my only comment SL request would be that we can be uh positive participants as this discussion evolves um because uh and maybe we can also help help you familiarize with what has been going on that fat marker uh my one comment would be the fat marker plan doesn't look anything like the 70 ft that's been cleared through most of that Wetland already oh with a uh with a water line um that I think gets a lot closer to territorial a lot further than the North that's not like the edge of the pro the edge of the Wetland though that there's a paveed trail going on the edge of the Wetland but that's not so right now it kind of does this and and it and they just installed a water I knew they put what's there and from what might be okay so if there was any advice on how we might um be a part of the conversation so someone had emailed me and I emailed them back and said I think there's going to be some parks commissions opening if you're interested in being involved and not just this but all parks and Trail in the city that's a great way to get involved CU I think they change over on June or July so there's usually one or two that come up was candid for one of yours earlier this winter so there you go we back sorry you hit the one exting yre did you have something additional okay up Meer so as D point out there's already been work done big trench D through here then it goes this way to the property here water line Etc what's the plan with that why is that there why is nothing being done with it now because it's been tore up for a year it's sat with a planning thing going on for a year no there's nothing happening why would the line go off that way yeah so mayor and Council so that is a redundancy line for bror Trails currently you are served by one water line so if that water M goes down you have zero water okay so that line is put there for redundancy we do not have access or land rights to the east of that or sorry to the west of that to be able to connect up the current water line other half of that water line sits in that um culdesac just to the southwest of that in territorial Trail so the redundancy is about this far on a map away from each other but we don't have land rights for that yet so that's why it was installed and it was installed by the developer based on our request to have a redundancy line for br bur trails and that's to serve you if that main water line coming from sundan and screens ever goes out so that's why it's sitting there right now is cuz we don't have land rights for the other portion if you're we'd be happy to if you help us with land RS we'd be happy to help great explanation thank you so that begs another question though for me anyway um the water line runs this way makes a right angle here here there are two fire hydrant along there yep and yet this is non-buildable I don't know what the situation is on this side do you have any insight into that why the hydrant yeah to let the air out oh really M air gets trapped in the line and you have to bleed it off with the hydrant so you don't get an air hammer and all your pipes are shaking in your house good enough thank you than do we get such bigam corre reasoning did you have I don't think I too much yep just got to stand up in front of the class name and address okay with these two fine folks back here um mostly just that when this does come to fruition the fat marker if we can if there is a trail that's going to go in here that we can all talk about exactly where it's going to be it seems like we're ignoring all this Wetland area here and putting them awfully close to the the homes and so just in consideration of okay we have one more online oh okay so Andrew if you could state your name and address please yep so this is uh Andy B back again uh live at 16124 16th Avenue North in the BR bur sales community and uh I just wanted to reiterate sort of what uh my neighbors have been saying that um you know I feel like the portion of the trail that goes through that Wetland area is redundant and uh unnecessary there's already numerous paths and sidewalks uh in place creating a thorough Fair through the neighborhood to 117th Avenue um that's outlined in your plan uh additional paths are also currently or my understanding are planed to be um constructed in that adjacent uh Forest Area and uh these paths I think would provide access to the areas uh you know the out um outdoor areas and their beauty without uh disturbing the delicate uh Wetland area the Wetland is a sensitive and uh vital ecosystem that's a habitat for many deer turkey peasants and uh a bunch of other Wildlife uh in that area um and there are numerous City Signs posted around the property stating no cutting or disturbance is allowed in the Wetland or the Wetland buffers so it seems uh unnecessary to ignore your own posted signs and attempt to disturb that area when we already have a a pathway through the neighborhood uh and finally I'd like to note you know it's already been sort of noted but a lot of homeowners paid pretty large lot premiums for their homes with the understanding um given to them by the the Builder and Representatives that the Wetland would be owned and maintained by the homeowners association and not uh developed or disturbed so I find it interesting that um you know if in fact the developer approached you to sell that property uh I would be very interested in uh confirming that uh thank you for your time thank you okay so so it sounds like this is a dead discussion yeah I think we're Y at this point the mayor council want to make sure I don't think we need direction at this point like I said there's a you know discussion to discuss and talk about what the trail looks like um I do want make sure that the record is clear that we reached out to the to the developer not the developer reached out to us about I don't even know a month ago or so because we were working with another property owner that is currently um landlocked doesn't know what to do with their property so we had a discussion about possibly looking at expanding this area and making it larger and having more of a I will say um Trail SL nature Area Preserve in this area and that's where the discussion started with and we reached out to the developer they said possibly potentially and then again I got the email as of yesterday that says that they're turning it over to the HOA so um we're happy to have the conversation with the HOA and we did not avoid the HOA by any means um again this conversation happened about a month ago and the developer entertained the conversation not knowing you know what we were looking for and they said that's potential to have a discussion about it so there'll be future discussions on this move forward um okay so um is there any appetite to uh talk about a closed meeting for the property purchase I think that could be worthwhile um at a minimum we're talking about getting some additional right away thank you guys thank you overall I think a Clos meeting would be would be a decent idea yeah it has to be closed yeah yeah doesn't have to be well yeah it doesn't have to be but if we're talking any number should be offers it needs to be we've made that mistake a couple times okay so ises that take care of item J then yes for so just for clarity um the direction from the council is as far as the the road is to essentially I'm going to call it straighten out Rush Creek Road Rush Creek Road um this would be a a one-way stop sign essentially um and then to pursue a Clos session and discuss purchasing the property or the petty Court property and then any other there's an appetite if there's even an appetite yeah not to purchase it but if there's an appeti to do so sure yes we have Direction okay item k um good evening mayor members of council head of the County's future roadwork discussion we do have um Carla here with the county Carla wants to come up to the mic you can maybe answer any questions if it's called upon otherwise you can hang out out there um we do appreciate Carla stepping in and helping out with the conversation as there was multiple questions asked they did send those off to the U Council as well so that you had those answers from henen County uh we were approached by henen County I want to say roughly a month ago or so related to some proposed projects from H County they received some additional funding and they are looking to do um potential a few projects on Dayton River Road or County Road 12 um they are looking at doing segment three first I know that seems a little a little weird to do a segment three but they are looking to do segment one first as in that's in Champlain um that does not touch date in which no conversations happen between Champlain and Dayton about that but they're looking to do segment three first in um Dayton that is a full reconstruction and then potentially do segment two following at the same time so on and so forth with timing they're unsure about that I we need to have further discussions which is why it's a TBD on the um uh what do you want to call it the little the map shown and that is a rehabilitation project not a full reconstruction project that would be all the way through um all the way into Champlain um I did provide some information to the Council on projected costs this came from the county as well this is our participation costs I don't know what any of the numbers mean or the right away crn I have no idea what those mean maybe Carla can answer those questions CU this came from her department but um I know I did receive questions about what is all those um uh words mean and I said I have no idea the main thing that I'm looking at is how much does it cost St at the end of the day for us to be able to um do a rehabilitation project um what this provides so this is the segment two so I want to make sure this is the second portion of the um project from hman County and I we need direction from the Council on what we want to do we want to pursue it um segment two will likely happen either way from hen County however our portion is related to the trail so if we want to have a trail along the Aton River Road it will cost the city roughly $2.98 million um that's roughly $300 foot for for the trail it's about 10,000 Ft worth of trail that is overall a pretty pretty fair price for putting a trail in um per Jason um in our as a city engineer he gave said that's pretty fair price for a trail overall again it would help overall with the connection points between the trail we have not had further conversations with through vers Park District so I just want to make sure that everyone knows that we have not had any discussions with three Park District but we do need direction from the council if you want to pursue something with a trail before we spend time City staff talking with r Park District about that cuz this is where three Park District wants their Trail um this is where they want they would I I'm not going to speak for th Park District but every time we talk to them they say they prefer it not to be on the roadway if they don't have to be right okay they would prefer not to be next to the road that doesn't mean they wouldn't take it next to the road they would just prefer not to have it next to the road but I'm not going to speak further than that on three yeah that portion of the roadway is going to be very tough to get away from the road cuz there's houses on the other side unless they're looking to go along the river along people's back of their homes I don't know if that's going to happen to be honest with you but well there's a yeah I would say my only thought on the path on this is there's a small chunk between the Champlain border and Bam yep that the parks um commission has said makes sense to connect that up to Ballam okay but other than that I don't see a need for any tril on this J that was to cross not to cross it's because then if we look at the other chunk we're we're planning proposing to doing on the north side of Dayton road further down then you can get through that whole neighborhood over there so you could technically bike get ice cream if you want to with your kids if you live or they going to drop bike on Daye road to get to that chunk so I'm going to do you have any more comments on segment two otherwise I want to go to segment three because that might lead us back to segment two for conversation my only question is is this is an addition to the mill and overlay they're going to do this year yeah yes yep they're doing a Mill and overlay project this year when's the last time the county did anything with Dayton Road and why are they going to tear it up I'm getting there car do you know that answer the last time dayon of road was redone or done anything with with Mill and overlay or reconstruction or before I moved here it's got to be 25 years hold on oh yeah sorry come on up car 30 some odd years I don't ever remember Dayton Road being finished from start to from the downtown Dayton all way Champlin border Mill and overlay other than like crack ceiling and stuff and even that up until recently when we complain enough has been iffy on how well that's going thank you they gave us a roller coaster that was fun that's not direct did you thank you Harla Stevie uh County engineer for hen County thank you for having me tonight yeah so what was the question when I I can tell you I guess where I'm confused is I feel like nothing's been done a Dayton Road for let's just say 20 some odd years now we're going to do a millon overlay and then according to this within the next 5 years you're going to completely rehabilitate the road a second time after doing nothing with it for 20 plus years I'm guessing why not just do this and save the mill and overlay money and just do it right the first time like that's I guess that's where my heads I don't understand why we're doing this twice yeah so my my understanding that's a good question my understanding is that the mill and overlay they're doing a a thin Mill and overlay just to preserve the roadway for now until we can rehabilitate it so uh CU that does take some design time to design and to uh construct that so that's my understanding is they're doing a very thin Mill and overlay just to kind of keep it together until um we can do more significant the Reconstruction and the rehabilitation and if they don't do the M nor L it's going to crumble in the next five years I'm not I'm not an expert on the pavement it is my understanding that that that is the recommendation from our pavement management team that uh a Mill and overlay be done this this coming year and how much does the mill and overlay cost in the county I don't have the exact numbers for this segment for the mill and overlay I can get that to you Jason approximately what would it cost a Mill and overlay all a date in row Ball Park oh um I don't even know where to guess to be honest okay greater or less than 10 million six miles less than 10 million greater or less than 5 million you going to get down to the 100,000 no I just want to get a general understand in reality the county doesn't care about money he not there okay yeah they okay you go section three now I got my decided to do this so yeah yeah yeah so segment two will happen either way y they were going to rehabilitate the road they're not sure on the year yet but they are going to rehabilitate the road it costs us $0 as the city of Dayton to do a rehabilitation of the road that does also include the county said that they would potentially look at we did some intersection inventory analysis at the last meeting they said that they would do again we will use Pine View as an example we said we could do a cheaper fix on Pine View to make it better I think it's like a through lane or a dedicated right the county said yep we most certainly could look at that as part of the rehabilitation project that's not a significant increase in cost that's roughly in the rehabilitation project so we appreciate H County working on that aspect of things and being able to work with those things so we appreciate that the $3 million is strictly for the trail if we don't want to do the trail we do not have to that's is not required by the project it will still happen and be rehabilitated in 2020 whenever they decide or 2030 whatever the 3 million would pay for a roundabout at Dayton Road and P so the $3 million is our cost for the trail doesn't does not mean that we couldn't utilize through Park District and you know kind of like I would say maybe even we don't even pay for any of I don't even know but pay some portion of so that's not as critical for us to know about information I don't think from the County's perspective of do we need to know if we going to spend the $3 million on that project because that's a little further out I think the more important one is segment number three which is the total reconstruction yeah yeah we'll we'll be wanting to get feedback for sure on the rehabilitation and what we've been learning um as we've been doing Rehabilitation projects especially in more rural areas those projects last much longer than Mill and overlay so um some communities have wanted Trail facilities with the rehab knowing that we're not going to come back for 20 years after a rehab project so some communities have wanted that if if Dayton if that's not something that Dayton is interested in then that's just good feedback for us to know that as we begin the design uh do I think for that for Segment two for that other than that small Chunk from ballon to Champlin I don't see a need for that because you can get through that neighborhood very easily biking that's how like we Rapids all the bike trails you had to go through neighborhoods and down like very un busy that's normal to go to do that and so we used to it all the time when we take our daughter biking so that'll be something the council wants to think about if you want to provide information now great I appreciate the C trolls responses but if you want to provide me an email with a response that's fine too I don't have problem partnering on some of the uh some of the intersections that's where we would they were not looking at doing intersections we did propose that to the county at this time from the segment two again that's from North Diamond Lake to our border I'm going to say um at this time they're not looking at doing intersection reconstructions at this time yeah so definitely though when we're doing our rehab projects knowing that they're 20-year projects um we are looking you know for low to medium cost safety improvements or or connections like you're saying short connections um we're looking to incorporate those into the rehab projects as well so that would be good to know sorry did you give the county the list of most dangerous intersections in the city I don't know if Jason has sent that off yet report is not finalized yet because one two and three are all on Dayton Road right that's correct yeah the three okay so we would we would be looking at those to make some lower cost safety improvements probably not a roundabout but if the city wanted to um we do have a cost uh we have a a pro or a a program for city-led projects that we could talk about if you're interested in like a roundabout at Pine Pine View that caps that caps at $500,000 correct that's that's kind of our soft Max but yes generally that's what our Max is but if we do at the same time you're R doing the road you potentially give us more than that because you're gonna have to put some of that money to fix like to just pay repay the intersection anyways right she just said soft yeah yes okay so that's a discussion that can be had I mean when it comes time to do that sure in 29 or 30 we're going to need to do that discussion like now though because it takes four or five years for the county to which is why Carlos's in front of us today is because conversation today will dictate what we do in five years so I just want to be clearer I guess that the the per segment three is really not phase three no that's that's a higher priority and is that first or second in this of these three that are that we're looking at I can tell you that segment three was last reconstructed in 1953 uh segment two was last reconstructed in 1991 so segment three is a much older segment the you can tell when you're driving it um it's I live on it so I'm pretty familiar it's in need of a full reconstruction where Rehabilitation would not be as effective on that segment and so if we're talking about dealing with North Diamond it looks like that is is in that that in that that is in segment three so segment three if we want to transition the conversation yeah so that's the $ 5.38 million request and that's phase two so we're talking about 29 that's going to happen so 5 years well that's what we're targeting right now um it can be you know we can slide we want to we wanted to have this conversation early with the city because we know that it's a big investment for the city it's a big investment for the county so we wanted to make sure that we're having this conversation early um we would be presenting new projects to our Capital budgeting task force this summer so this would be introduced as a new project then for the county and what is that crn number oh the that's the construction amount so it's the top line is the design and then the RightWay the construction and then the construction Administration and the contingency and so the construction is Big numers that's for the construction of the road though correct yes and the trail so that will come with the trail okay and this is a very high level cost estimate this is just a per mile very high level cost estimate once we start um working with the city and working with the residents to establish what the Future Vision of the roadway is that would be refined based on the future design my question is is so I pay County taxes right and part of my County taxes are to maintain and repair County Roads I pay city taxes to maintain and repair City roads so if the city's paying for the to repair part of the County's Road technically I'm partially paying for you guys to take care of that road twice correct because my taxes the county should take care of it my tax City should not be going to County Road that's why the county gets taxes so why is the that was my question is that $3 million is that the trail Well it can't be cuz it only cost us a million dollars so we're budgeting about a million for the trail so my guess is some of that's got to be the road you got to remember the trail would go all the way from North Diamond Lake Road up to Vicksburg oh be the full length it is the full length of the trail that was my first thing was like no I'm not doing that yeah but now that I hear it's Trail I I would like to hear from Three Rivers before we bought into this but yeah cuz it's a big so typically on the project which Carlo responded back with is that we would pay for the trails the Landscaping the lighting so on and so forth and the county pays for the road costs it just happens to be that the number is roughly the same amount as like quote unquote redoing a total intersection right which is what we've budgeted for for North dond Lake Road and Dayton Road but well and we do have our cost participation policy it's adopted by our board um so that's where it outlines the cost that would be specific to the county and then the cost that would be shared by the city cor so is the city being asked to pay for any of the roadway construction um not for the roadway itself no thank you but certain elements of it um The curban Gutter that is one that's shared um some of the RightWay costs some of the storm sewer costs it's all laid out in the policy and I think I sent it to you but I don't know if I got the policy but I got through your responses which I read through those that's where I got this how much of the 5.3 million is for the the road that the city's being asked to papay for sorry I'm seeing no that's right that's not my question so I don't have it broken down by element um and it and it's like I say this is a really high level cost so we would be refining this we would be coming you know we would be working through um through the city to develop the design so you would be part of the discussion to develop the design and we would be coming to you for municipal consent on the design so all this would be further flashed out we just really wanted to know at this point if the city wants to partner with us on this project not necessarily well instruction unfortunately that I think that's kind of the answer is maybe the answer is I think the answer is maybe like the trail if Through Rivers wants to get involved they're the they're pushing for that trail then they we want to get them involved it's just hard to imagine that I mean it might not be their preferred option but I don't think their preferred option is realistic cuz I think I think they want to buy every home on the river and Trail through it and you know that that's not going to happen in several generations of people not yeah I mean not even thinking about myself on this one um trying not to but I got myself off turned around here I would like to if you could have a copy of the policy around the cost sharing I couldn't find it online I found Scott County and Dakota County but I couldn't find it is available online too but I can send it to Zach so that he can share it and and these numbers don't do any sort of traffic control at North Diamond um it wouldn't well like I say it's really we haven't done any design yet so that would all be conversations with the Reconstruction that's that's the awesome thing about reconstruction is it's a blank slate and you have a lot of opportunities to change the whole Corridor so mayor C City staff is pushing for a roundabout at that intersection that would which has been discussed with the county well aware of it so yeah and and yeah and I know County does like to they do like to burn down the ones that measure bad and that one measures bad the pine one does not measure bad so I can see where they yeah so those are those are the design type of design elements that would be that would go into the Reconstruction so what we need tonight from city council um which I got mixed messages on when I sent it out in an email um is do we want to have hen County pursue this project and say yep we're going to participate not knowing what R Park is going to do or do we want to say nope we're not going to do that and we're going to project are you asking for us to commit a dollar amount or just say yep we're interested in this but it depends on what the dollar amount is um more looking for if the city would like to partner on this knowing that it will be there will be a cost share that will be the city's cost participation but not on a specific specific dollar amount yeah well it's our cost participation policy is generally 8020 but it it's very dependent on the elements that go into the project so that would all be worked out as we're working through the design so I've got one more question when uh Kevin Anderson was here he was talking about how the Count's really big and trying to make sure that all roads are walkable and accessible by all if that's a big priority for the county why is the county asking the city to pay for all the paths so we seems you're pushing the priority on us well we do have a complete and green streets policy so we you know we are looking to expand our Trail you know our sidewalks and our trails along our system but we do partner with the cities to make I you answer that and that I mean we're not we're not unique in that I mean mot has a cost participation policy that's similar all the Metro counties do that are similar wri County as well so I can tell you right County for new Trail and sidewalk I believe their costs are 100% um City costs for new trails where ours are 50/50 so we do cost share in those with the with the local agencies and I think it's great you guys are paying for 50/50 what I guess my that's it will be nice to see a little better breakdown of the numbers yeah we need and to know I I suspect I mean we can take a poll but I'm pretty sure we're going to be interested but it's really the the gotcha is how much how much sure and what do we get for that how much for me I I think that I would say that I'm definitely interested but I think it's too early to say you know is our is our level of interest five million doll or some other number or you know how the cost sharing breaks out and there's and you can't answer those things at this point I understand that because there what design are you pricing and U you know and what amenities are we looking for we would have to walk through all of that I also had sent you an email asking about timing on which has nothing to do with you but timing on some of these T tip districts expiring and and some of our other uh Bond obligations coming out coming off the table and looking at what our financial situation would be like at that point if we were going to need to bond for this work which sounds like is likely feel like that Tiff money has been spent six ways to Sunday everyone spent it their own way at this point in time we need five times a TI money really make it work make sure I'll get that I think I said it often if I didn't I don't have a problem with looking at some of the options like the the roundabouts or the intersections but I'm kind of like with Matt on County taxes pay for County roads that I mean that's where I'm coming from I mean just cuz every other County does it that way and you guys may do a little better doesn't mean it's right if everyone jumps off a bridge you can jump with them I totally understand where you're coming from as a as a city resident as well not a city resident of Dayton but of a different city I'm paying for a millon overlay on my road right now and I pay taxes to the city regularly but I'm being assessed for that so it's similar to how cities assess for projects as well because just because everyone else doesn't doesn't mean it's right and that's the stance we I'm giving it as a comparison I understand we could set up a cost sharing of City roads with the colony but I'm pretty sure their is get we don't yeah yeah we we could reverse it and say we want you to pay for 20% of our our roads they have to use our roads to get your roads so I take you we're interested I'd be interested we need official Vote or it's just I just need to provide car information so sounds like we're generally interested in both segments so sounds like interested and we would be working with you all through the design and as we do the engagement with the community so you would You' be part of the conversation about what gets designed and then what those costs are I really think we need to pull in Three Rivers too cuz I think if a lot of these Trails some of them like you said might not be ideal for Three Rivers but I think so I think it'd be really good for y'all to work with them and the three of us come to the table and kind of figure what this looks like cuz otherwise we're going up with more questions great car's got her Direction the last question that I have related to this um is the the last thing on my email which was um we want to do the trail project that we have currently started engineering on North diamond or sorry not North Diamond Lake Road from North Diamond Lake Road to clo Overlook along Dayton River Road we've began engineering um we have given direction to stch to basically hold off until I get direction from Council so we don't spend any more additional dollars although things that have been done already aren't lost y um they're just I don't want to continue to start you know um and there's absolutely no way to salvage at least putting it because it would have been nice to complete that trip but there's no way to do that for what sorry say that again to get cloet down to now with the construction of the trail that we are designing as we speak so so I guess I still don't understand why if we do that chunk of Trail what's the problem we're just going to reduce the cost for that well it sounds like it may have to be so yeah so we we've talked to end County and Carl look specifically about that say if we did this Trail now would that reduce our cost on this Trail later on they said no we' have to totally reconstruct it based on so if we have an existing on the design yeah if we have an existing Trail somewhere of the city you guys said to come and redo the county road it's in the trail we're proposing is in the city's RightWay so like we're not proposing using the county away it's in our right away and you come in you readed the road and you destroy our Trail in the process you would replace that trail at no cost of the city correct so um proba there's an existing Trail yes I believe that it's 100% County cost I'm we're more looking at it from a we don't want to introduce a constraint already if we're if we're going out engaging with the public about uh reconstructing this roadway and setting a new vision we just think it's the right thing to do to not what no matter who whose dollars it is to not construct something that then may be based on the design based on the community and the City Vision that we would rip out so but you're asking us to wait on something that could take you 5 years to get you possibly longer you don't know as you said yourself it it for 29 it could be we we would Target for 29 if the city is agreeable to that I I think we could deliver it we're not agreeable on the price yet so I wouldn't say we're agreeable we're interested but we haven't signed anywhere so I don't know I'm Jason right now what we're doing is we're just trying to figure out what's feasible for that trail and to get a general a better cost for that correct um we were authorized to do design so we we did collect field data um but we stopped with the design we did the white land delineations but that design could be incorporated to the new design and that piece just included in it I also feel like if we build the trail and then they come and rip it out they're going to it anyways and why should our citizens have to wait 5 years for the county for something that they've had on part on that particular chunk of Road they've had 70 years since they've done anything on that we should have to wait yeah I agree I would I would tell Jason to keep moving along at this point in time that'd be my recommendation to Jason sounds like you agree I agree yeah do you agree if it were me I would say no um just to be cost effective not sharing who's paying for feel they'll rip it up anyway I it'll be an obstacle it will almost certainly it it might not add cost to the project but it might not save as much as you think either because there might have to be other modific retaining walls others depending on how the design comes together much easier to design them together and construct them together that's the County's cost not the city's cost well except I mean in the end it'll probably be some am on the negotiating but if if we the end if we were to go this route and continue would we be doing this next summer I don't remember what we talked about but oh we could do it this year goal get yeara done this year if we people wait five years for SA people walk down that road all the time and and I'm not talking like adults I'm talking teenage kids are walking down that road on the regular yep yeah every time I see a kid on a bike on that road I just yeah shutter but or kids walking or whatever yeah another another thought if this were um probably this needs more discussion but we could look at doing something with more Meandering for example there's some challenges out there there's some BMS there's a lot of plantings in the RightWay any um maybe we even do like an egg lime or something to save costs so at least we're not putting down fresh pavement ripping it back up I mean we could do it lesser Improvement for example we could even narrow it up a little bit just to get at least a connection through there that we don't mind so much if it's yeah the scope hasn't been designed for the trail as in like we're just designing the trail getting field data yeah our plan because Three Rivers was a cast participant we were going to fall all of their regulations including design speeds and and other standards but we can maybe work with them um we might forfeit Three Rivers participation because it doesn't meet the requirements but we could probably get the cost down significantly I would I still think we move ahead with the design and get options on the cost and see what that looks like and and have a convers bring Three Rivers into the whole conversation for sure agreed have some to come that night that'd be my recommendation I don't know if we're still split or not but I think well what Jason just said you know makes me rethink my thoughts on but I you know I really don't want us or I want us to reduce throwaway cost as much as we can yeah and you know I I get where you're coming from if we don't know the design we don't know whether it's going to fit or not you probably don't design a highway around where the sidewalk is um so I get that but if if there's another alternative that we could get something in y and not end up you know throwing away the the money that we've allocated my original answer to the question was that we hold on on this and and spend that on on trail somewhere else in town that uh that the road isn't going to move on but uh if there's if there's some options to to lower our throwaway cost I I would be open to that and Marty we don't I mean we looked at the trails that the when the Parks Commission looked at the trails we looked at a lot of them and almost all of them have some sort of if there was one maybe along territorial but that could all move too with this like I don't know if we have a lot of Trail places right now to help increase connectivity that something won't move in the future so I'm trying to get it yeah so so where you at mayor sounds like I'm I'm I'm okay we're going what I'm going to do is authorized St to keep moving forward so they're going to bring back their stuff again they were on hold for know week or two weeks not like it's deliverable isn't going to you know delay two months you know um but we'll have Stant keep moving forward with their design and come back to us and then provide some information back in the council so you can make an educated decision in that time as well we're also talking with rers Park District cuz we have a lot to talk about couple of projects coming up here a lot of dollar and months correct and those those fit well on with r Park District's timeline because they were not looking to get any dollars this year anyways for us they were going to reimburse us next year at the earliest um in their head when we discussed it first time with them with our portion of the road Trail we're doing this year so this timeline of 5 years out works well with rers Park District so they can plan time away to do this so that might help as well for the overall project thanks thank you very much thank you for coming I did just want to add with the trail sure I just peaked at our policy so um and I'll send it to Zach so that he has it but if the trail is an in kind replacement so we're replacing exactly what's there it would be 100% County cost but if it's something different then it's a sh yeah we can do it now and they Place 100% when they redo the road yeah there's no reason not to do it right there no reason not to do it no I agree the only reason to do it would be if let's say they expand the roadway I was going to say if they expand the roadway now we have there's not enough rideway there now we have to take the whole trail out it would probably be in a slightly different location correct sh share I just from a public perspective sometimes it's hard to see something go in with your tax dollars and then be ripped out a few years later so yeah yeah just acknowledge that thank you thank you thank you okay uh fog seal item l do we need a long presentation on this one or can we just talk about it we can skip it we're um I'm on board I'm on board so am I I I see I mean that actually the email you said you ever given the emails you said were really good I thought I read through the scientific stuff and I thought it was really good yep that's all I needed to see was we we need a motion on that right yep it's all motion that we go ahead with the chip and fox I want some conversation here oh okay well I'll motion it we can get a second we can discuss there we go now we can discuss okay so we got Matt and Dave okay go ahead and discuss I don't have any problem with with doing the project that's not my issue okay I went to this to uh new to look at all this stuff then I I I think there's some value there yeah um my question is when are we looking at uh millon overlaying South diamond and that 1.5 you gave me does that go from City boundary to City boundary because you didn't state that I think it was um it was either boundary or was it zanthus I want to say it was City boundary though I'd have to look back at the Prett sure Jason from our conversations I remember it was being 1.5 million from the boundary to boundary in three different segments over I think over two different years in the plan but we probably do it all together we P the total cost to Mill and overlay South Diamond would be 1.5 that that's the entire I think it was just an overlay wasn't it it's just an overlay just an overlay we don't Mill anything up we just put an overlay right over the top yeah uh and when are we planning that I want to see it was 25 and 26 or 26 and 27 I'd have to look back it was over two years but again we would probably pull those to the same year we' either do them both in I believe it was 25 and 26 we would move and we did the we moved some of the um fog seal chip seal for forward so that we could bring Sal di Lake Road forward as well so it would be I believe quote me but 25 would be the plan time would be next year according to the map it's a 2in overlay not a one and a half correct it's the largest overlay option that we have in our plan that's correct and and that going over something like this does has no effect on longevity either doing an overlay if you did an overlay over oh no it does it it has structural benefit and has like yeah it will okay it's actually I wasal okay no it's actually more beneficial than a millon overlay because you're actually adding thickness yep the reason you can't do it typically is because of curves so you can't just keep Paving I noticed um and this is kind of a it's along these lines somewhat um I think it's um oal but there's a few of the communities that actually go to five inch roads what does that give you that go to what roads that go to the the pavement they had an inch oh well this is only two inches so it's not four no yeah pavement design is there's kind of a lot to it um on how much pavement how much sand how much class five um whether you have different types of fabric it it's all dependent on your soils underneath and then your projected loading so it's a there's a lot to it so you can build you could build the exact same strength road with 2 in of pavement or 8 in of pavement depends on how much gravel you have how much sand you have what your drain system looks like but if you add that extra inch does it give you a corresponding life that would pay for that inch and then um sort of yes um so without getting into too much detail so you get a certain strength or Longevity if you will out of materials you get it's called the granular equivalent so you build up to a certain number of inch equivalents so you get 05 for every inch of sand so you get 05 inches for every inch of sand you put in you get one for every inch of Class 5 compacted you put in you get two and a quar for every inch of binus that you put in so you're saying you're getting a lot of strength they might be putting more vinus in but putting less sand or less underlay but there's also minimums and other combinations but yeah so basically every inch of pavement you add you can put two and a/4 Ines less of class five what's cheaper pavement or class five uh class fives certain class for sure but you need you need minimums with it you can't yeah there's a lot another question pertaining to this project I think we had 8 miles of roadway that's getting seal coated in Fox deal right roughly that could be okay here's when I was talking with Bernie last Thursday Bernie said absolutely not I wouldn't seal cold fog seal any road unless it was at least 5 years old so my question is how many of these roads that we're looking at doing are under 5 years old I guess I'd have to look at them a specific probably not because well there might be a few in river or uh and his I don't know it might be border line they do recommend as early as one year I think that's too early personally I would shoot for the two you probably don't want to wait the whole six no no I'm not saying that I'm not saying that but so probably like a 2 to five year 2 to four year is probably a good Target just because that will seal in the oil and and hold the preservation it's a preservation tactic you're you're preserving what's there it does have a little bit of a restoration it's it's pretty minor um yeah I'm I'm I'm I'm listening from a guy that has been doing it for five 5 years now as the Public Works director there and he absolutely said I would not do it to a road that's under 5 years old which if you do that now and you just say that this seal coating thing lasts for 6 years Zanzibar should last for 10 year for another six seven years all by itself so we're basically doing nothing to Zanzibar by doing this fog SE seal Tua other than making it look prdy we talking all part of zanar or the new part an the old that's got to be over 5 years old right no no no um was done 2020 those are two years after cuz you know we pulled some of these roads up cuz we had the extra money this year so I thought some of them might fall just under the 5 year but I think the plan we got we got the detailed Road plan that was based on the 5year what you're talking about but I think we're just pulling a couple of them up because we had the money this year and we think that with the cheaper bit costs that it's going to save us some money that was that was my understanding why his opinion on like South Diamond it would buy a couple two three more years good now if it does here's my numbers I'm a numbers guy you really want South Diamond Lake done which is the road you live on correct well no I mean no not necessarily I mean it's going to be done next year in a Mill and area in an over I think he's saying push it out I'm saying push it out because you can save money it cost $187,000 to do the New Black Top If this B that's an annually uh cost $95,000 to seal coat it annually so those two three years that we get it's half the money that's my point so instead of doing fogs and Chip seals you'd rather just do Mill and overlays no no I didn't say that on South Diamond Lake Road y you could do it this year with this project and push uh overlaying it to 2027 28 so fog seal it now with this and then push out the mill but then you have all these other roads that are 5 years plus old that's Sly the chip in fog so another thing just to not get confused this is a preservation tactic y an overlay is a a benefiting structural y so even when you fog seal you're continuing to degrade structurally so there there is some risk I mean you could probably put a smaller Band-Aid a fog seal on it and and buy a few years but your structural degradation may go higher such that 5 years out you might be past the point of an overlay and now have to do a Reclamation which reation could actually there's risk of it I'm not saying that's going to happen on S I don't the Reclamation that was done there in 201 12 13 and 14 has only lasted 10 to 12 13 years that was a full Reclamation well and that's why the that's why the preservation this is a preservation to keep that to keep that going or could be a preservation to keep that going I kind of went against the method there I mean personally personally I would look at the roads that are under and I'm only going by what Bernie's telling me I don't know I'm not a I mean I feel like we got the really good I I keep trying to stay to the science and we paid money for that road study and I feel like it's one of the better studies we've gotten back in my opinion and I would for the most part like to I think we should stick with what that's telling us to do so that we're sticking less with Bernie's gut or Matt's gut or Jason's gut and more of what the science the road is telling us I'm going to say it this way and this is not sugar Co and anything the only reason that section is zanar got paved is because the Public Works building was there that's the only reason it's getting fog sealed now gets a lot of use I'm guessing too no it doesn't well how many squad cars and trucks on every single day just just just that just okay and the citizens that drive down that road I don't know I again I I'm trying to stick with the science of what that machine that we pay a lot of money to grow in the city and tell us where the roads are at and stick with that so that section of zanor was done in 2019 was it so that is five years okay it's five years good yeah just to make sure you have the information trying to tell you you're wrong I just give you information I I thought it was only about three feels like that I have an ask on the motion can we get something out to the citizens about CU we haven't done chip and fogs in a while correct I think it'd be good to get something out of like why we're doing it the purpose of it and then maybe lay out which roads are going to end up getting done so that way when it happens people aren't like what's going on and why are we doing this and that's my like I just think it's good it's always good to get information real information Communicator be a good way of sharing that or even direct mailers to the neighborh in the the B monthly uh you think the communicator's good I think the app's good I think you can take whatever you're going to write and put it on Facebook and everything else and then people can see it wherever they get their news information from probably not the newspaper CU I don't think anyone gets their news information from yeah we'll get it all yeah I think that'd be help hope we wrote up a couple paragraphs about it and the other roads that we're looking at doing on that map have been the 5year area okay yeah so we did move some forward I just want to make sure you know that we did move some forward so those might not be the fiveyear marks I think that what the science said was to do it around five years is my guess but because of the cost price of what we got for the previous ones we moved things forward that normally wouldn't have been there some of them might be four years some of them might be four years some of them might be three years but we moved them forward to get the most dollars so your point I think your point is five years should be the number which I think would have been worked out if we would have followed the exact sence but because of dollars we're trying to get as much in here as we can yeah this year that does that make sense because we move things forward from 26 to 27 to or 25 26 to 24 I'm look I'm looking through these roads they highlighted in blue and my guess they're I would be surprised if any of them are three how old is Rush Creek and I be they portion of it is over five and a portion of it's two or three okay Pioneer Parkway Pioneer Parkway parts of it are over five and parts of it are under there's that small Che section between River Hills and iron gens like okay this River Hills over 5 Years cuz some people have lived in those homes for over 5 years correct y That's why I was looking at the map trying to figure out 11 17th was done in 201 19 2020 something like that it was done with B Trails development 19 so it's another five years about the one over here through Hayden Hills feels like three years old I get umen Hills would be newer than bzy bzy would have been 16 probably yep yeah I mean I don't know when where course went on that's maybe matters more but all right so it's going to be I think they're all going to be close to five years guys I look at an honest okay so we got a motion at second any more discussion all those in favor say I I all those opposed say no motion carries forward to zero item M award contract for wellhouse right um I'll just run through real quick for a refresher wellhouse 5 is located as shown on the map in the River Hills development it's just north of Pioneer Parkway that was constructed uh near Wells 2 and four that's in River Walk correct I'm sorry did I say River Hills river walk it is in River Walk you're right and not to be confused with River's Edge and Edge water and all the other ones over there you got River's Ben Rivers Ben um so River um as council is aware the water treatment uh facility has been partially constructed that's next to well four um that's another concurrent project with this that's definitely tied to it the production well was drilled and tested that work is complete it's a high capacity well which is good news uh the well house which would house all the equipment and the pumping and and whatnot and the connections to the the treatment facility um was design was authorized over the winter plans were approved and and bids authorized in February U just a depiction of of the site and then the the blue line on the drawing that's the raw water line so takes the water out of the ground it does not treat it in the wellhouse like the other facilities have been constructed to do instead it pumps that raw water we call it to the treatment facility where it's filtered and then it's injected into the distribution system so the that does service both Wells four and five so bids were opened on April 30th we received five bids uh on on the project as shown low bid was Ebert construction it just over 1.1 million on it and then they ranged up to about 1.5 million on it um couldn't have come closer if we like we put the estimate after um I will admit there was a range in the estimate and this was the high end of the range um but it did come in as expected so the estimated total project cost is the same as previously shared it remains at the 1.4 million for the entire project is what we're expecting that 1.4 cludes Landscaping everything it's everything the site improvements so just to give you an idea of the the timeline if the project is awarded tonight we expect that Eber it would be ready to start up sometime in June Would Be Our Guest once contracts are approved and insurance is in place uh substantial completion identified for May 1st uh of next year and then final completion July um substantial completion means you can use the equipment for it's intended purpose so we would be able to use it at that point maybe the grass isn't growing yet but um it it's functional before that Peak use time is the the intent and this does align with our expected timeline on the water treatment facility which is scheduled to be completed the summer of 2025 as well any concerns with having two contractors essentially sharing the same site um oh uh between the treatment facility yeah between the treatment and this building so the treatment is at well four that's mag need construction um it's it's about 1,200 ft away so they're not they won't be on the site and actually the the the pipe identified here um this is already installed it's already installed um so there won't be any overlap of work areas if you will there access different than to that that site then yeah um the the water treatment they're accessing Direct directly off directly off Dayton Road at the at the treatment facility um they will be accessing through Pioneer Parkway here so there will be some construction vehicles um coming down but the the good part is they shouldn't have to go through any neighborhoods they can come Pioneer Parkway from River Road and part of the contract is they're supposed to take their semis down Pioneer Parkway since it's 117,000 cars over is equivalent all of all of all of their construction vehicles are to come down Parkway okay whether they do or not um we will remind them and then the question I had is we know we did value engineering with a2s on the wellhouse or the the water treatment does it make sense to do it to have them review everything on the me Costas what it wasn't that much like, 1600 bu it was like very little I know I like the idea of having a third party come in and review it especially if it's cheap even if they come back and say everything's fine I I makes me feel better because I don't know anything about water so I don't know that was the addition I was going to bring up today that we should talk about yeah you could certainly do that I just I will remind you that the bids are in the design is final certainly could do that maybe but they could at least point out any shortcoming flag for the cost I think it's them that's a side y um so that was to the the action tonight would be to award the I need a motion a second Scott I'll second but as long as we get the value engineer done to um Matt any more discussion all those in favor say I I all those opposed say no carries four to zero then what's done item n yep good even Mayers members of council I received a discussion or conversation from a council member about discussion of ordinance for employees on Council um this is all I have for this so um I provided a staff report just again more questions answers that we need from staff um this is where uh I want to make sure that Council knows that uh staff doesn't take direction from one council member from the entire Council so when something comes to uh brought to my attention I bring it back to the council so we can have a conversation on it yep just Ser everybody knows I brought this up so so I guess my question is this is only valuable for part-time employees because full-time employees can't anyways cor it's already State stat exactly so what is the impotence for this like what's driving this um in my mind it's it's too strong of a conflict of interest um you're voting on the budget of who you work for but there're but so for example I mean the elephant in the room is this includes Travis and I'm assuming commissions then too right so this will include John cansen on the Parks Commission who both of which are part-time employees who then would be no longer eligible for the positions I would say that it applies to commission so so do we feel that in Travis's almost four years here he hasn't recused himself from votes that would have directly applied to him and benefited him not in my opinion so if it's not a problem why are we looking to change the ordinance why no you just said he hasn't he hasn't he should have you think there's ones he should have recused himself from that he has not the budget the other thing is we we went to to uh other people uh the lighting company that used to do all of our decals and decorations he can't he we we killed that Amy could not clean the buildings anymore yeah I mean she volunteered to take herself out of it I mean I think that so it ties right along the line of this but that kind of gets covered in a different way around Contracting with right yeah a little different but but I think it's a I think to your point man I think it's a fair question without you know making it more personal than it is going to end up being um this is not my area of expertise which I seem to say a lot but uh I did League of Minnesota cities has got a class online about this which I took this afternoon so I know everything now expert there we go sweet oh that's pretty bold um but they also have a memo that they published The Talks around all of this and I and of course they they address this directly fire departments in their memo right they say City officials often ask if a member of the city Fire Department perhaps a chief or another officer concern on the council and the answer is it depends okay so my point in saying that is that you know this is not this is not something that comes out of the blue it sounds like it's something that comes up I don't know if it's regularly but more than once right and so I think it's fair but I think it it also that what I what I read and and what I picked up in that in that online class is that you know is that there's a there's a lot of variables in this and what they're speaking to is it not us creating our own ordinance even is this even legal today and the answer is still it depends um they strongly encourage us to involve our legal councel in in sorting through this and so that's something I think that you know I know Amy wasn't scheduled to be here but I think that that's got to be part of the conversation is you know is this is this even allowed as we sit today without us taking any action is it can we even is our situation that we currently have even allowable I don't think I know the answer to that everything I understand is that that is always up in the air and that's why so I only checked with two of the communities and they both don't want they just flat out let's nip this in the bud um and I can I think on the face of it I I see the logic to that if there if they're saying the state statute it says no if you're full-time if you're full-time right and so do those potential conflicts automatically go away because you're part-time well I don't think that's that's logical I mean the the issue still exists you know somebody from the fire department sits here and his boss sits over there that's the appearance of a conflict to me I think you could write that as the definition of appearance of a conflict you know how does it how does it get handled well we've been handling it for three years in one form or another right and so you know this is this is not an emergency I think that aha we just discovered that this is big problem I think we've been uh you know it's been there the whole time Travis has been here longer than me well all of all of us except Dennis by months I think I guess in some cases but I think it's I think it is something that we we should get clarity on U first through our our our legal people they even suggest talking to the attorney general I don't know that that's our deal but um there's precedent there that should be explored by Amy that Amy um and and let us know where where we're kind of sitting because it what has changed is that um in the in the LMC memo is they talk about people with supervisory responsibilities and it's my understanding that's a relatively new um position for Travis being a lieutenant and that was kind of my impetus to finally do something that the that his status has changed and I think that we really should get a a real answer it doesn't preclude what do we think we want to do over and above that but I'd like to know you know do we already have a problem that we're not addressing yeah um I just want to make sure I so I did read out out to Amy to make sure we had all information if we had any questions right away of any issues currently so your question is not out of line um her response is that we are currently with State Statute so we are covered but that doesn't mean that other communities do it but her legal opinion is that again her standing of are we but State Statute that's pretty clear it's it's the legal it's the legal precedent because they site in here three different cases where the attorney general has weighed in and the legislature has weighed in to try to clarify this and and it sounds like they didn't for the most part yeah I mean so her legal opinion is that we are not Li currently that doesn't mean that we couldn't change the ordinance to whatever you'd like but like I said based on where we sit today we don't have to have a resignation happen on Council that that's what your question is and that is that that's kind of my my take on it is is that it is it is so murky and that's why at least these two communities just said let's just be done with this so if we're going down that that same rabbit hole we approve money every year money time or resources right for dton Heritage dat is $15,000 as part of the budget yep and that money time and resources gets donated to the Dayton Community Foundation correct yes well time resour time and resources yep and my understanding is you're the chair of the Dayton Community Foundation and you didn't recuse yourself in the budget conversation either even though that's but part of the budget that that's true so I mean and so we could talk that logic can be applied further I guess is what I'm trying to say if if we're going to try to apply logic to it then we need to do it the next piece I would add is what about spouses Travis's wife now runs for example just because we all know who he is it's easy to point that way and she gets can she run and get keep in mind that and and this is this is why when I seen um uh Zach's information there I think there's a misunderstanding of how this works the city doesn't have control of who gets elected correct let just the city doesn't have control of who gets appointed to boards or the city doesn't have control over who or who does not have a conflict of interest but the city does control who it employees that's what we can control so if Travis's wife um were to run um I I I don't think that we would be able to take that and and and make the claim that we can further this and say that she can't be employed or he can't be employed two separate entities um so as far as spouses go I I I don't see how we would even legally make that work there's no mechanism okay and and with the rest of it you know we can we can talk about at what level a conflict of interest matters um but I I think if we were to go down that road I I I think Travis could have a hard time voting on anything at this point CU a lot of it has to do with the budget Andor the fire dep um I just think well I'm not s it before this I'm saying but that's if that's the logical stance one's going to take then then we need to make sure that we're applying that wholeheartedly and not selectively sure is my point more anything else I would agree yeah I think that's you know those are fair and I didn't write down the the questions but one thing that I thought was a distinction between somebody on the Parks Commission say versus versus is our roles um is that we allocate funds the Parks Commission makes recommendations along with the Planning Commission um I I stopped short on the on the Eda because there is some spending Authority there and and then so maybe the same answer applies as it would to somebody on the council even though they're not in an elected position yeah the questions were just Amy and I coming up with we just sat down a discuss said I I don't where this goes and I just want to make sure we have lots of food of thought of like it start stop with the commissions you know sometimes we have a hard time getting members there anyway so maybe I I I I would have no problem not applying it to the commissions um because I I guess you know Dave's right in the end the buck kind of stops this table so um yeah I I guess I don't so just to be clear Amy saying there's no she sees no confident say it sits today again she's going based off State Statute which is the only thing we have to use with I mean if we had an ordinance against no employees being other culture then we would technically be in violation yeah what she is saying is that she doesn't see a legal liability correct correct there's definitely a conflict of interest So based on State Statute there's currently no legal liability for us that says that you know we have to tell and for example currently C Henderson has to resign um because it he does we're not violating stat statute when he's like it doesn't mean that again the conflict of interest or the persuasion or the feel of the realm is totally different than the legal liability yeah you can make this ordinance effective January 1st 2025 I mean so that's one of the questions is got to resign yeah that's so that's part of the question was do you want to have to retroactive or do you want to be proactive as in retroactive of okay he could stand in Council until this time or do we want to say oh he can rerun again but no one else can that's the retroactive versus proac that's what the question are coming up as I would just say just food for thought January 1 2025 that's that that would be my opinion so he's never voted on a on a pay raise for himself though um yeah I don't know that that I he's never but my understanding is when I went back and watch some of the things I thought I looked at the counil minutes and thought they could be there was nothing that directly benefited him so when we say there's a conflict of interest I mean I see more I've seen other conflict of interest things that I thought people Rec them on that didn't that were bigger conflicts of interest than him just approving the budget knowing that he's not proving a pay raise for himself he is looking at his boss when he Bots that's big enough for me and I if you don't see that you and I disagree on what a conflict of interest is so are you insinuating then that you think that that he's being pressured to vote one way or the other because of what his boss wants are you saying he's in a bad position because of it I'm just I'm trying to understand your point of view because I don't yeah it's I mean it's definitely a bias it's definitely a pressure applied sure because he's setting he's voting to set a budget for his boss you think he's getting preferential treatment because of that is that where this you think there's a chance you're worried about a chance of that is that what this comes down to what I'm saying is there is a massive influence on his vote there could be depending how the situation is handled is what I would say for I guess for me I can't you know I can't know what conversations that Gary and Travis have AG or how they yep that's why how he whether or not he's influenced by it it's it's really clear to me that that that potential exists the appearance of the conflict and you know in my former world that means it has to be addressed if there's an appearance of it then it has to be addressed doesn't make it true but if I can see it then somebody else can see it and and we need to we need to deal with it somehow right now we're we're saying it it's not it's not an issue it's not something we have to talk about and I think we well I don't agree with that I think it is something that we have to talk through and we and we need to come to a conclusion on it um because that the appearance of a conflict is there I agree that the the appearance of the conflict is there I'm not saying that he needs to resign tomorrow I yeah that's not where I would go with this but to nib this in but you'd stop it at January 1 I'm a little bit scared on this uh piece of it as it well specifically as it relates to Travis I'm clearer on what I think we should do going forward do I think it should apply to him or not I'm a little bit buzzier on that CU I don't know what his plans are if he's planning to run for re-election and and that's you know that's his decision um but what I'm I'm concerned about is now our appearance and that is that we're in an election here and are we now making somebody ineligible to run um you know to pre prevent preempt the voters having that choice in the fall and you say if it wasn't an election year this would be a little bit different a decision to make it' be a m more straightforward it would take that out of my thought process anyway is are we interfering with an election I mean if this is not illegal and I'm not sure that we have that answer to my satisfaction anyway then um you know then are we are we you know then the voters should decide do they care about it or not and I guess that's what I I yeah so that's that's the compc for me because of the because of it being an election year and he's up for re-election now if he's not running then that's you know there's there's no answer needed there and we can decide what do we want going forward but but because this is an election year I have some concern that we look like we're you know we're sort of fiddling with who can be a candidate right in the middle of something and just thinking through that not obviously we' have to consult with Amy but since since you can't decide decide who the voters vote for yep if someone was on the fire department they then couldn't file for no no they could they could okay they could yeah City can't keep somebody from running they get elected by the that the citizens say you know we know this exists we want this person I have that in my notes too like do we not trust the citizens to make the decision they they may not necessarily know that so then what you're saying that they'd have to he'd have to resign as an employee have to resign as got it so but we we struggle to get firefighters how it is to some extent we also had you know we we also had a a an officer doing our electric lights and he might have been giving us a deal but we didn't like the smell of it and we know we were getting a deal in the cleaning now now we don't it's just um and and I like I said I I think this hasn't come up in the past it's come up in discussions but um I I think the problem was in the past was nobody really wanted us to to say this is wrong and let's fix it um and like I said once he became a supervisor I thought something had to be done yeah so I just want to make sure the questions I have there are more or less just things I need to if we want to move forward with the ordinance to not allow allow whatever and I can have Amy work on that too the questions are um Amy sorry double A attorney Amy work on the ordinance construction these are the questions that she's going to likely ask me or something in the fact of do you want to apply it to this do you want to apply it to that do you want to apply it to spouses do you want to apply it to Civic groups do you want to apply it to council with Civic groups do you want to apply to retroactively proactively do you want to allow people which is why the questions are coming up is between say Amy Amy and I and my my my thing with all that other stuff is is we have no Leever so you could make an ordinance on it well the same would apply right so if you would step down from the other position if you were deciding to be elected but let's say say um Travis ran yep or not Travis his wife ran MH okay and she got elected yep what are we going to do then well she's not an employee she's not an employee know but a spouse of an employee so that she would not the the employee would then have to resign because they are spouse of the of the person that's been elected because in my mind you have as much leverage that way as you do almost much leverage you do the other way I I I don't know I think the phone call to a lier would would would slow that one down cuz now you just you you I think that one is pushing it in a sense you and he might be able to in a sense the city does have control over who runs if you have this ordinance in place correct well well they would if they were willing to then if they resign right from their position right I mean technically if I was a resident and I was willing to resign in my position I could run right yeah right y this is the same thing with Civic groups this is the same thing this is why I ask those questions is um I will say previous cult members we've had have had same positions on Civic groups and that have caused conf conflicts of interest in the past um where either they were on the Civic group beforeand and then they got elected to council and or they were on Council and then joined a Civic group but you're always you're you're gonna which is why the tend to to do one do the others and I and again if we had a BFW which we don't but let's say we did yeah same thing what lever would you use there's no lever you can't preclude somebody from running so it would be the same thing knowing the ordinance you would be stepping down from other Civic groups why who's going to enforce that the citywood basic on the ordinance that's in place how you'd say that if you're going to be on Council you can't be on that Civic group based on the ordinance in place so you're going to dictate to a Civic group who they can have as a member corre yeah correct well not as a member but I mean as uh as probably I don't know if it would be a member maybe it could be I mean how would you dictate that see Amy is going to be all over on that one sure yeah I mean it's so mean so these are the questions that I've been asked and or that I'm thinking of of okay does it matter that you're not and we can use Matt's example that he used tonight of um you're part of DCF which is related to the budget which is related to now we're approving dollars for that budget Y and then whether you're a member or a board member of that Civic group you know have influential spending over where that dollars go to and then that means that you may or may not have the ability to prevent budget or provide budget either which way depending on because you're approving the budget for that event time resources whatever and I have no problem with you know it's no different than if if I'm Sam a realtor and we're making decisions um I'm just confused as to what you think the city has as a lever to keep that from happening the lever would be the ordinance in place write the ordinance correct yeah it's all about the writing of the ordinance what would you write it though what would you say in that ordinance that you can't be a realator no a c yeah a council member would be able to do well not we would take business in the community I think that's a little weird the realer one kind of throws me out a little bit CU I'm not sure how that directly relates to the city we going talk to Amy but my guess is she's going to say we would not have do you agree there's an equal conflict of interest though with the budget of what I explained and what you explained um no I do not okay not even close so you don't think approving the money to go to an organization that you share is is a conflict of interest um I I think it could be if if somehow it would translate to to somehow me being able to use it I suppose and and again we could have a discussion on conflicts of interest we can we can discuss that and I feel that's the whole impetus for this is there's a conflict of interest it's every other week and it's it's not just a small donation it's a significant dollar amount well and I think you know some of these I think that trying to apply it to all these other potential you know it's just a land you will never will'll never anticipate every possible conflict of interest that a person could have that runs for a council how do we even guide people who's eligible and who isn't yep when at some point in their fouryear or two-year term something's going to come up that that you are um directly involved in or affected by um I no idea that my neighbor was going to want to change the Zoning for the half a mile that I live on y right you know should that have precluded me from running for councel well that'd be silly you just excuse yourself from those recuse yourself from those those votes as they come up conflicts are going to come up and there's lots of language around you know what that looks like and and what you have to do which is you know not not vote on it not use your influence not benefit personally from something that you're you're in control of voting on so I for me I think that extending this to lions and nonprofits and cdaa to dentist point you know these are the people that that get involved in stuff yeah and and so they're the people that are likely to be the ones that are going to run for for office or be on the Parks Commission or be on the Planning Commission because that's that's their nature um and I'm not saying we should exclude them just to be clear that's not my draw a parallel I get that but I think there's there is a well for me anyway there's a Distinction on on controlling funds you know if if we're approving money for the Dayton Heritage Foundation or Community Community Foundation um then you know dentist probably shouldn't vote on that and you know that's that's easy to isolate and say here I think to Dennis's point we talk about the fire department all the time it's an important function of the city and you know and they consume lots of stuff and they and they need lots of stuff and so we it's a regular part of our conversations if not every meeting every other meeting there's something with the fire department and it's I think that's that's where the potential again comes into play and you know how are how are we addressing it it might be simplest to just say you can't that that full-time employees are excluded it's not that different if you're part-time in the in the potential for those conflicts and so we don't want to have it but and said that I I don't know that I'm a fan of of saying that this applies uh now or to to people that are in play today um just because I think that that's problematic too and again I think that we're in an election year and that that just gets complicated in in my mind anyway that you know we're juring mandering an election somehow and again it's I don't think we are but I think we're you know the potential is there again and that's what we're talking about what does it look like but so I you want to Chin in I as a I tend to agree with the funds if you're if you're tied to any kind of funds and you're voting on something that's where there's that's where there's a huge issue in my opinion I don't think it would be any different if one of us was a Deen police officer because we're voting on Paul's funding all the time no I think this is across the board yeah you know I think it's and you know in that LMC memo again you know they talk about um people can resign from that position if they want I I highly doubt that that would be of any interest to Travis I think that you know if I was one of Marty's lawnmowing guys which don't take me off your list yeah you know I'm out of this gig in a few years but um but you know that that's a little bit bit different decision than you know firefighting for a lot of people is is a kind of a career path not kind of it is a career path I'm asking you for this topic so I can't ask questions all right we normally do not do that we did for the intersection earlier for territory yes we did so do this we do my my name's boy wi 10921 10010 Circle just two questions and a comment sure is there an oath that city council member take in regards to their duties to the Constitution okay which covers this topic of conflictive Interest no no okay something to consider second you mentioned that there's two communities you talk to that do this that's not a representative sample of the state how many communities do this or have this endorsement in place would be a good question to ask I think that's a fair question that's a fair question right I know the two that I looked at do it which is two two out of two yep okay third is and and again we don't necessarily poll our other communities to see what our moral Behavior should but you you have mayor Fisher you pulled these two communities I I just looked at them yes I'm just saying that we don't normally why don't you go ahead and ear mentioned the council doesn't always follow what other communities do counties do that the council makes the decisions based on the needs of their citizens constituents and what's best for the community but you have PLL these other two communities and brought forth this endorsement and the reason why I'm here to talk about it is I am a part of the Civic organization I am on the board of the Lions uh I am familiar with DCF and the conflict of interest with the DCF and the fire department are parallel maybe not the same scale but as chair of DCF with your spouse as the treasure DCF who receives funding from the city that is a conflict of interest as well so did we receive any funding last year I don't think we did not monetary but it was time and resources so we do that with any Civic organization yeah it was time do that with the with the uh outoor play thing all the time yeah so there was no money B back here talking yeah yeah yeah there's a budget item for DC essentially I think it covered well whatever I again I want those are my two questions I do think that if the city is going to consider the endorsement that um a Travis should be here for this discussion because his name has been brought up several times and the chief and then determining a true representative sample of what communities do this and why before the decisions are made and I for one agree that Civic organizations are different but the difference between some organizations and the lions for example is we don't receive money from the city we pay into and support the community hence there wouldn't be in conflictive interest there but should we ask for funding or get support from the city I think there would be a conflict of interest there so I appreciate the time thank you yeah we have technically one more resident I don't if you want to have him talk or not might as well so Travis you can speak as a resident can you hear me yep all right state your name and address for the record please yeah just for the record um Travis Henderson 14050 Magnolia L north um just speaking to the matter that you know I appreciate all the comments um about me being uh a paid volunteer firefighter for the city but also serving on Cil as well and seeing that this is a conflict of interest through some some eyes but uh I guess um where I get where I get where this could be an issue but I also understand where this is kind of I've targeted is probably the best word I could I could use but uh um I mean morally Dennis I did this stuff for the betterment of the residence it was nothing for you know personal gain or anything like that it was just to understand the the politics and policies better for what I'm trying to represent and serve y so I mean and I I don't know that I question that to say that don't please don't interrupt please uh to say that like I am just in Gary's back pocket like I started this stuff before Gary got into his position I assumed all the risk and stuff when Jason was sitting in that seat and it wasn't to play favorites it was just a better understand serve my neighbors on a better front so I think it's kind of un you know you didn't have a discussion with me why um any of this stuff was coming up you just said that you were going to do it and I said all yours to do but um you know I just I feel personally a little attacked by you without having that discussion first so I mean obviously I can't C cast a vote or anything like that but I felt since I could chime in when I could when I had the availability I felt like hey it was perfect time to just kind of you know put my two cents in there so but uh I appreciate uh everybody's uh talks discussion and I appreciate those that stuck up for me and uh and in the matter I think this is going to get uh um obviously it'll get uh its attention that it deserves but um it just it sounds targeted and looks targeted just want to put that out there thanks thanks Travis yeah I I I guess the part of the reason for for um I did let you know that this that I was going to push for this but the reason I didn't necessarily want to debate it with you or discuss it with you because I don't see it as pertaining to specifically you now you are are in what would be you know this ordinance would certainly apply to you if you decided to rerun but this is not why um I felt that employees even part-time employees should be on the council um to me that's just a it's just a baked in every twoe conflict of interest so I think at this point I'm kind of repeating myself yeah so all we need is City staff we need direction from a majority of the council here tonight voting of what you want us to do I most certainly can have Amy Schmidt draft an ordinance with whatever you want added subtracted whatever um but that's what city staff is needing which is why it's on the um agenda here tonight so City staff just needs direction of what to do and then I can provide that direction to Amy Amy will be here at the next meeting she most certainly can chime in with any of the comments questions concerns complaints that you may have and then we can discuss those two at that time but um the idea would be to hopefully bring back an ordinance the next meeting while she's here so she can answer any questions if that's the direction that the counil wants to go if the direction is to not move forward with the ordinance that's fine too but she can most ofly still address the questions if they exist well I I I agree that there is there's the opportunity for conflict and the only way toh take that out of the equation is to have something done up so I would propose that we make an ordinance that if you in a funding situation or on councel you cannot be a paid employee of the city and I would have that not take effect IM me but January 1 2025 I would not apply to commissions correct okay no I mean they would not be able to run for counil this next round because it would be effective as of January one okay want to make sure I understand the writing I got that's I mean you got to pick a day I mean that's me that's I just want to make sure I understand what you're asking well the verbage again the verbiage won't be that they can't run for Council because we can't control that if they choose run for counc they would know they would have to resign from corre yeah okay yeah word it that way sorry yes that's what I meant to say apologize about that I didn't include that part so I got one so it dies yeah I would I would be I would be okay with seeing that I think that we've got a lot more discussion to have on this on who's sort of who's in and who's out you know the the spouses thing and the other Council or the other commissions yeah I'm not a fan of including that but I um I think that as it relates to positions that have funding funding Authority or the ability to direct funding I think that I would like to see what that looks like and I would also like Amy to explore further not just the State Statute because we can all read that and it's pretty clear it says fulltime but there's other legal precedents that have been cited um that confuse the situation and also say it that way that I would like to hear her address as well and she can look at the same LMC information that I'm referencing um I'm sure she's got better sources than that um but there seems to me there's legal precedent around this and that every situation is somewhat unique and so I would like to hear more clearly where we stand today before we before ultimately before I would vote for or against a change in our ordinance to exclude people so you're you're indirectly you're saying you want to table it until we get some direction from me well no I I think that drafting an ordinance helps further the discussion because it puts it in on paper in front of us what do what does this look like who does it include and then we can beat it up somewhere after that so I'll have her draft an ordinance with that in there I would like anything else you want me to add make sure you let me know when I can make sure to add it or subtractive at least highlighted or something in the ordinance I think the one thing DAV brought up that I had thought about is the Optics of it happening during an election year or right before the possibility of election I think Amy should weigh in on that too CU I don't want to open us up to something somebody could have been waiting for a year to do this and all of a sudden we do it now it's like well you know you draw line somewhere but it looks like we could be trying to direct who or who would not run or discourage people from running so I'd like her to weigh in on that they can run they just have to then correct discourage is the word I use y yeah and and actually um when I brought this up with Zach before I I thought we should do it as early as possible because of that well unfortunately we're in the month I thought it opens up so it was not the city was not quick enough um yeah yeah so again I think the timing of this is not good at all in my eyes and so I think if it was an off election year the conversation probably L different it's my two sense yeah on the timing but we have a motion don't we have to second the motion to vote no didn't you motion I did motion but I mean it didn't a second so it died okay it was discussion at this point from direction we're just given yeah there's no actual action here you're not approving any ordinance it's just more or less direction of we want to provide City staff City resources to be able to provide an ordinance at the council at the next meeting you can vote on yeah that would be the that would be the direction that I'm getting and I've gotten two and I'm assuming May or you're on the same boat as Scot SC thank you thank you I didn't hear anything else for other questions so I want to make sure I got we just want to talk about employees Council and that's it okay and then before you get too excited we do have that add oh y don't leave want going to jump to that we were I was already closed it mod 21224 yep motion to approve agreement second with the state way to go Dave Dave that any discussion um I I would suggest that we very carefully read the fine print um um this one has no fine print I've already verified everything basically all done is just yeah we need to apply the Grant and the grant wasn't allowed to be done until the adjusted of the language which the language approved on April 26th and signed into law on May 1st right so that's why I had to wait for it and then I got the dire so you going to leave that as like an underline and then cross out or just change it nope I'll leave it as an underline cross okay then second was TR yes that's signment the next I got to get back to the state ASAP any more discussion oh in favor say I I those oppos say no motion carries 4 to zero and unless there are objections we will be adjourned and we're adjourned e e e e for