all right it's uh 5:30 so I'm going to call the meeting to order this is the uh work session meeting uh for city council Min Trista May 20th 2024 we have a number of items on our agenda we're going to talk about the water treatment plan timeline water treatment plan infrastructure upsizing project update discuss city code blah blah blah absentee ballot counting board The Tuxedo boat launch dock discussion constr construction parking ordinance huness Crest fifth edition Outlaw D um and then council chambers it equipment so we have eight things so we're going to get started right away who's going to take the water treatment plan timeline discussion I can do that jper yes oh do do I need to do introduction so we know who's all here me all right so present this evening myself Lisa whan um the mayor council members present are uh Kathleen rkin an McGregor Peter vicory Claudia Lacy staff present is a director of uh Peter Peters Gary Peters um Ali pus and meerhof um also our city engineer um Aaron Ain vulmer thank you I got the Aaron right um Jasper krugle Ryan Grim David Abel Sarah Sans Sala and our chief of police Paul Falls so with that uh water treatment plan Jasper yes madame mayor members of the council um I'll try to be succinct in some of the the conversations here but this one might take a little bit of conversation um to kind of work through but essentially the intent of this is to um talk about funding mechanisms for the water treatment plant that we've talked about quite a bit over the last year or or longer um talk about the different pros and cons of each um talk about the timelines of each and and kind of go from there um I I will add uh we've been going after outside fun ing um I think if everybody's following the state legislature they they um convened or they ended their session yesterday um without passing a bonding bill so uh we likely we won't see any money this year with that we can always apply next year um we'd have to get new bills written I think for that for that session um but depending on our Representatives we would we we would pursue that um federally we did make the cut for um Dean uh Phillips and ab kashar short list of projects they each get to pick 15 um so we did make the short list on that now no guarantees um I think Dean Phillips is recommending $3 million for us um Amy kashar isn't recommending anything um I think we requested 5 million um total so I don't know if they they'll reconcile that if they if it gets farther along so that's in the mix too um that's kind of on the the PFA path if you if I will um to talk about that but it it does take some time for that Federal money to be procured or secured um so so what we have in front of of you is um kind of two different J just real quick so the the federal dollars are not tied to PFA funding and correct it they are not okay and we would be able we would probably find out or won't find out um if we get the federal funding until December is maybe even January somewhere November December January time frame so okay that's all than correct but there are stipulations that I believe the EPA on how how you need to bid and do those things that take time too so and there are federal requirements um similar to PFA so there are some of those if we would accept those those monies it would be essentially following the PFA rules maybe a few more rules so um so yeah so what what you see in your packet um is kind of a a breakdown yeah there there's a nice infographic on here kind of breaking down the two different options kind of the cost impacts of both obviously the big glaring number is the percentage um between the PFA and the bond we're making some assumptions that 2.1% PFA is um the current right now uh they kind of follow the market a little bit if so if there's a rate cut it could go down um but that's essentially what would happen with our bond um rate at 3.75 right now so it you know for this exercise looking at them what they are right now is probably pretty accurate um within you know a little bit tenth of a point or something like that but you can see the difference uh major difference is the um percentage difference between the two um and that's the the the big number you know the 3.75 million 76 million um over the 20-year life of the the plant or the the bond there's a couple other things PFA you only pay interest on what you draw so those things are good um but I will say there's no guarantee that we would get PFA 2022 they didn't PFA was not funded um so some of the cities that you know were eligible you know ended up having to get some exemptions do some some funny financing to kind of Gap financing things like that um to actually get it to work so really uh you know the timelines as you can see um I don't know Brian if you can pull up that um Aaron had put together a timeline that was requested from somebody um to kind of talk about the differences one of the big things that popped out at me when Aaron sent this was the construction timeline being longer than what I expected um at 2 and a half years um that I would say is a conservative number procurement of of the items that are that go into the um treatment plant are um there's kind of a contingency on there we won't know until we actually would bid it so the real number I would say look at the design um to the bidding you know and then construction at the at the earliest could start in um 2025 if we would go with a traditional route but as you can see the these construction timelines for substantial completion get out fairly far 27 um maybe even 20 end of 28 29 so there there's risks with waiting right I think uh everybody's familiar with the water supply plan and the firm capacity being above what our max daily number is um and every year we go out past that that Gap gets a little bit bigger now that's if our number one producing well fails which is well number seven um we would have trouble meeting the demand in the summer um we would that would that would be the case right now too if if seven would fail today or this middle of the summer we would we would run into issues in likely have to go down the path of phase two or probably phase three of the the watering um restrictions why constru this is just a question this first I've seen this sent to me earlier today I swear the last go around is construction timelines incre so much last time around it was 12 18 it was about 18 months months and this is would be what 30 months and now this is and that just seems a little over conservative overly I know seems too long to me I'm Rec state that I I I thought I looked at this and I said I I know for sure we did the other treatment plants in about 18 months and um so that this seems really long to me yeah and I can speak for eron a little bit he said he said a year and a half to two years probably but building in about a six-month window for procurement contingency so you're absolutely right you know the 18mon is probably the best case scenario two years probably what it will be um um two and a half is the conservative estimate okay we were to do the bonding do we still do the PFA to we would not NOP it's one or the other pick one any other money correct yeah you can't start a project for PFA um before you actually get PFA approval we tried we kind of posed the question of do some Gap financing of you know because of our the timing of our wells say hey can we maybe um start this project now and then apply for PFA in 2025 or funding in 2026 but that would open up a a whole different precedent for for PFA and everybody would want to do that at that point so the only how variable is the PFA funding you know it sounds like it's a real Rush that is is it usually fed was last year it's usually funded well it's usually funded if it's not if it's not connected to your growth in so in other words um if it's con if if you need a project to if you have to do a project because you're growing there's probably it it's less likely that you're going to get funding if you need the project now what what we're trying to do here is we're going to be doing the Wells then we're going to test the water in the wells and it's probably going to be high magines and iron so then we're going to go then we' go to PFA and say well we have it's not our growth that is driving this it's the water quality that's driving it okay so just so you know there's two different things the wells don't qualify because the wells are because of our growth so we know those don't qualify so just a treatment plant it's a treatment plant that we're thinking will qualify because we're pretty sure that the maganese because of the uh test Wells that we did that the maganese is going to be too high it won't meet um Minnesota Health standards has there been any movement with st Bonnie about buying water that seems like that' be really important to get that in place yeah so I can answer that um we're working on that the the meter that it's set up for the interconnect for one of them I think Gary how many interconnects we have with st Bonnie is there three three three so one of them with a project last year or two year Well last year at St b um will get that meter we kind of agreed to that but the meter was back ordered until June or July of this summer so um at that point we'll have an agreement between St Bonnie and and Minista for emergency use only if we want to actually purchase water from them that'll be a separate agreement if we'd never want to do that and they may or may not want to sell us water or even be able to um depending on how much they need well they're Capac they're under capacity right now so they they would have capacity we've already looked into that they would but they wanted ridiculous rates though right they did want some higher rates than what we charged so for the Emergency use just back and forth um so that that that could be an option uh we'd have to negotiate and and get that agreement finalized what would qualify as emergency use of that fire fire fire yep maintenance um if one of our Towers gets too low then if there's some capacity available on both sides then we would allow that um and open that up and we've done that from time to time in the past and the emergency cost is reasonable oh so right now there is nothing um in place it's just we give them a little water they give us a little water it kind of works out what the meter will do is allow us to kind of see what the flow is between the two cities and then the dollar amount that's agreed to in the emergency agreement is what we would pay on a quarterly or annual basis one way or the other we don't really know what it is we think it's probably pretty close at this point but we just don't know um but it'll allow us in the future to meter it one way or the other if we were to buy water from them we could then meter it which we don't have that capability right now the other thing I'm sorry oh no I just have a quick question um risk of complaints I think the risk of complaints would be pretty high if we spent $3.7 million more just going for the bond I think your risk of complaints is going to Skyrocket if something happens between now and 2028 when it opens and everyone in my neighborhood and everyone else in city water can't use as much water as they want in the summer that's true but there's the majority of people are on Wells but well but people on Wells don't pay for it yeah people on Wells don't pay for this the people using the water are the only on I of the council I will pay for this I know I know but I'm 2.7 million is a lot of money only one on this Council on City water on City Water right glad we have your perspective so the and so and so you want the bond so we can do this fast yes because there's it's not fast keep in mind fter than there's there's no guarantee we're going to get the PFA it could not be financed and then we're just delayed with no savings the cost of the supplies could go up which would negate the savings and if something happens to the King's Point Tower because we're not repainting it or repairing it until this treatment plan is up what if something happens to that Tower while we're waiting for years okay okay stop stop stop stop basically this is kind of silly you're the only one that represents the people that are going to all we represent all we paying for it but it doesn't matter we're still them she does well okay get but the bottom line is she does understand she really wants to push this and it's the people that she's representing that wanted but we as a city has to justify spending 3.7 million more to to everyone else it's basically a choice between instant gratification and paying more you don't it's the only people you have toy well are the people on the water more two of the city though 60% to two3 and it's it's a lot of hold on so what happens so just just so we all know um I I tend to kind of agree with Kathleen um even though I'm not in city water however however we also need to be cognizant and be aware of what happens if the water users can't pay for this guess what then happens then the entire city gets to pay pay for it so we have to be careful from that perspective too now a lot of times there's interfund loans or whatever but we have to be careful and we have to be um cognizant of that and that's maybe where that perspective your perspective comes into play but the other thing I want to point out is the likelihood that we're going to have to bond 19 million is probably not real High um I've heard I could be wrong and I'm not g to put money on it but I have heard that Dean Phillips is usually pretty um successful in his requests for bids for projects such as this so let's even if we assume and this is a gamble I get it but even if you and I don't have those numbers and that would be good to have but we'd probably be looking at somewhere around 15 to 16% plus the 19 million million not the 19 million also has a pretty deep um um contingency built into it so again a lot of this is going to be flushed out within the next year before we would even go to build it um the design as and eron maybe you could confirm this as we get the design nailed down we're going to have better numbers for this so um right now I don't think we have to make a decision on whether we go PFA I think once we get closer or finished finished with the design of it that's when we have to make this decision and that's probably not going to happen until the end of the year January time frame probably let's look at that time frame again but I think what staff is doing is giving you a heads up saying here's here's the options or possibilities um you need to be prepared to make these decisions and we need to be prepared to make this decision probably in December January of coming up yes that's I mean that's a great point if I may um yeah we're trying to get the information out in front of you because this is a huge decision for the community right we're talking millions of dollars one way or the other um we will know likely by November or December if we get the congressionally directed spending dollars right you know and what that amount is so we'll have a little bit more information um at that time plans and specs I think uh a2s is working on getting a task order for those either on the June 3rd or June 17th meeting to get started on those um you know one of the big things I think that we have questions about is the the soil quality on the site you know we we have to figure that out to figure out you know to kind of start the engineering and start the design so those things will all be baked into the the task order to figure that out but you know really the intent is you don't need to make a decision today we just want to make sure you get all this information um kind of weigh the options a little bit and get this in front of you so you got some time to look at it um we really could go to December but there will be a time in December which uh you'll have to say well do you want to put these plans and specs on a shelf and and wait a little bit for the PFA potential or or the congressionally directed it's not a little bit it's it's literally another year like it's not a couple months it's it's a full another year with no progress being made right and the other thing is if we do delay it and the PFA that also stops any new developments because we can't approve more developments to keep our um housing permits up if we don't get this plant although I should ask Sarah because I asked that same question um so let's let's just say PFA is what the council decides and we don't have enough water so can we put a moratorium on because of that or is legally what would our abilities be um Madame mayor members of the council I mean it is possible to do a moratorium I know Lake elel was kind of having this same issue and with water and I told they did put a moratorium on but then it ran out so you can only put it on for you know a one year yeah a short period of time and then it goes away um so that that's the issue with that right and then you can't keep put they wanted to put it back on then and I said no one time is enough and you have the one chance and that's right all you get so that's that's the other issue um they did put together a premature development ordinance which talks about if there isn't enough City water supply and then there's other things in there too that are listed they can deny a plat um they do have that tool they haven't used it recently um but it is an option for them but they keep moving forward with the proving the the problem yeah with no water problem with the moratorium or even not approving as you know we need more people on our water system so it's counterproductive so to speak to do a moratorium because if we did a moratorium for um let's say a year um look at how that's going to affect our planning department and and we we have over6 700,000 a year that we bring in because of our new home construction permits I think the number is around 650 750 okay and now all of a sudden you do a moratorium that money goes away or Mo a lot of it goes away not all of it but a lot of it goes away so that's another factor to consider um we and then what do you do with your employees we have building officials we I mean you know that's another whole issue so um quite honestly the 3.7 million in that that number is going to come down isn't going to be that big if we decide to hold off and do a PFA okay so just keep all of that in mind um there's a lot of other things that we have to consider before we make make that decision and maybe we could um bring back um I'd like to see the numbers one um I'd like to see the numbers with a let's say let's say $15 million Bond then what are we looking at in terms of differential um what is the uh Delta between those to I I think we should um I mean it's going to be less and then if we had to do a moratorium what would that look like for um Revenue stream and what would that look like for Staffing I think we need to look at that so so we may be better off because we need those those area charges those whack charges and we need the connection charges as well as the use charges how does work with the Woodland Cove David if um you know we just they're doing their final plots there do are we going to get money in for that and then is that going to it seems like that's going to be a bigger risk for the water supply as everybody in puts in their yards and all that have you thought about that in terms of this water issue yes okay yes we have yes so here's so yeah well so what we've done as you know now all of the the subdivisions that now are the phases that come in and that has happened for a couple of years now they have to for irrigation those homes all have to be connected to the storm water ponds right I understand so that's that but we have enough capacity to um provide all of the homes and correct me if I'm wrong to Woodland Cove and the final phases through the Final Phase so we capacity for that yeah they would be fine so that's built into this discussion already and Erin do you want to weigh in on that right and then and then like Jasper said you can also Implement stage two of our water restrictions which is twice a week versus every other day which would still be fine for most Gardens and grass and stuff like that it's just would be another phase so one of the things that'll help to is we talk the budget process we bring back updated stud type worksheet we'll probably have David drown help with that you know Char few hundred bucks to get an independent source to help you know update those numbers I a couple years ago it was 14% rate increases for a few years obviously things have you know we need get those updated because the numbers have grown from10 million plant to 15 or 19 or whatever it is so I mean 20 30% for rate increases for a couple few years shouldn't shock anybody on what we choose for financing and all that's just got to be out there to right the council decide and go faster go slower and just so every would you be able to bring those rates back depending on on PFA or regular or yeah yeah because I think even just internally we've looked at that PFA versus regular would be like 8 10% difference in the first you have you need like another $180,000 which right we bring in about 1.7 million so that's you know 10% you know whatever so instead of looking at a 20% increase the first year if you use PFA it might be a 30% increase and everyone's just got to be fine with that if we choose to go that route and know that we'll I know we're wor about phone calls on blending water a little bit but there's phone calls if rates go up too quickly too so way I think we're going to get some phone calls just jary gets somewh for and need get them or whoever so it's sort of a right horse a piece I guess you know different challenges for different decisions right Erin anything else you want to add yeah okay so you're not looking for a decision tonight we'll bring back more information but it's good information to have and a good discussion initial discussion so think about it and then think about your questions that you might have for the next for the next meeting too any other questions when you bring it back can you pull the old water rate study we have done I think it was in 2022 just so we can see those numbers yeah um and can I just recap the timeline just you know some Keystone dates like I don't know if it'll be June 3rd or June une 17th but that'll be when you can evaluate you know authorizing a2s to proceed with um developing plans and specifications I'm not sure the timeline on that to get to a substantial place but you know as those develop as you can imagine the numbers will get more refined um so hopefully I think we're all hopeful that they all go down and not up um right it's all uh but December you know this December um we should know if we get Congressional funding and that might be another driver to say well you know we can pursue PFA maybe there's a three million do um benefit to that and then we got 3 million from congressionally directed spending and that's 6 million is that okay are you okay with that for the risk you know and you just have to be okay with that and if not then we have to proceed with the traditional financing piece so we'll know more um but yeah again we just wanted to make sure thinking about this and you know talking to people and um you know trying to trying to get this out as early as we can okay and I would highly recommend that we increase the uh area charges and the connection fees substantially the area the connection chart is I think we have some capacity to grow there I know the area chart is I think we're on the higher it's not going to do any good if we have a moror exactly that's my point [Laughter] exactly David David usually doesn't say much but when he does you [Laughter] know and and we we are doing a um staff is doing a survey of area charges and connection fees just to see if where we're at so we're we're in the process of doing that right now and that's good point all right thank you David um so now we're going to talk about about um upsizing the project yes I can just um it's it's fairly self-explanatory um through the memo and and there is now a a a slide that shows the area that this is going to be in um I think that was omitted originally from the the packet so we apologize for that but um in order to put the treatment plant where it is we need to do some upsizing of the utilities um the ideal time to do that would have been when the the pipes went in the ground initially um one question I got from Council rkin was you know the areas that we have on this map you know were they put in recently in the last year since we've been talking about this or you know can you put is the map up there oh I think it's in the packet um we can throw it on mine if you want I didn't see it in the work session P for some reason it's not showing just yeah we can try um but there's an estimated cost of doing this um uh of let's see if my computer works there we go I mean it's kind of hard to see but of about $750,000 to get this done and this is this is necessary in order to convey that water from the new treatment plant to our system your system right um it's it's you know i' say unconventional to have a 12in main run in parallel with an existing 8 in main but um you know in order to to replace the 8 in Main completely you'd have to have all new service connections and that is problematic to reconnect all of those so um what we're proposing with this and this will be another future task order um and then authorize plans and specs and bidding um because of the the cost of this um and we'll devel develop better cost numbers too as plans and specs are developed too so um I'm not sure Gary if you know when those Mains are put in um trying to think that had to be probably two years ago if not yeah probably about two years ago that everything went in the infrastructure I would say roughly roughly roughly in there I mean kind of this wasn't thought of because the water treatment plant was going to go by the new to I mean that was the whole the whole thing so I mean we ended up hey there's no Aqua for great so we had to move it and that's why we're here so um we did work with um their engineers at Jr Hill and we have upsized all the piping already going in in Phase 11 a 12 in to get us up to this point so that's good news the only reason I mean a c around 16 inch would be better but we only have a 12 in running down um wood and coold Boulevard that's where going that you know that's our main trunk line through there so we're going to have to tie into that so 12 yeah 12 Ines you're not going to go 16 down to 12 right so so this is really just a heads up because this is something new that we haven't talked about um we talked about it but we talked about it I mean we've kind of known that we have to do this yeah but we got we have some new numbers but in the future you're going to see a council agenda item um for this I just don't want to be a surprise to be like oh we're doing this now too um and now we have to also pay for this so and then just one real quick question how much money or how much cash do we have that we could put into all of this okay Brian we do we do have not not if we want our water fund balance to be positive and like some of our neighbors I'm not saying we're going to deplete the fund balance I'm just saying maybe when you bring this back you can also give us a realistic number in terms of what what we could expect to be using Cash Wise I don't know I mean I think this would be better just so I think Gary's got the note in there to wrap this into bond this with the wells I mean it's a large enough chunk where I think right now our water funds at 1.7 1.8 spend it down to a million and we basically already have about a million of annual expenditure and almost a million of debt payments which we're going to be adding to at some point that you want to keep you know at least you know around a a one to one ratio of you know fun balance on hand at least in Enterprise funds you wouldn't want to go 1 million would be too low if You' want to try to pay cash for this I guess what I'm saying I'd like to keep it at one and a half million okay so maybe 300 or whatever I I'm just asking I'm just saying if there's ever like a small water m b you know sometimes there's something that comes up 50 100,000 that's where you spend the cash on something bigger like this just bond for the whole M no I was talking about the whole project if the whole project has1 19 million how much cash are we going to put into it I I don't know yeah I'd say we just want to we just bond for it okay spread it over 20 years okay all right all right any other questions all right thank you so then we'll move on to the next one t is that the vot launch um it's the ordinance um amending city code I can do that one the mic um we received an inquiry a few months ago from a resident pointing out that our current city cold language doesn't quite align with State Statute as far as absentee um ballot board so City attorney Cala drafted an amendment to city code to reference State Statute is to cover any future changes um that the state would make so this will not impact how we administer absentee boning just clarifying the code language so it is here for discussion otherwise we have it on a business item tonight there any questions should be pretty straightforward it is so do do we even want to have well it's already on the business item I was going to say okay um we move into consent yeah so I just point of clarification any ordinances I've been putting on business because I've been directed that way from a couple M so that's why it's there even though we talked about it at work session all right that's okay we like easy business items too sure all right next we have the tuxedo boat launch dock discussion Gary yeah M Council if you had a few residents in the past ask and I've had more than ever this year I've actually had uh five different residents call and ask if we can get a bol um a dock out of the boat launch and talking to David um don't know why never one and one was ever put out there we don't know why but uh looking at it doing some pricing rolling docks are hard to find everybody wants permanent Ducks um I did get a um nickam duck did actually not nickam the um new one that's in ton can't think honey anchor I can't remember who they are but they gave us the one for anchor dock here up in out of um anandale they do have them they only carry aluminum um which I don't know if they'll be strong enough for what we want I mean the mcor one that we have presently at the Hallstead dock in 20 we bought that in 2012 and that thing is Built Tough I mean it's you know really holds up well um I think since I've been here we've only put a few minor repairs on it so it's a really good build dock I would definitely spend the extra money and go with that one with the Galan ice steel frame with planking and that type stuff if we're going to do it so um I know that uh you know it's a little bit but you know I think this will be at least a 20y year investment if not more um I mean we're pushing 13 years on the 12 years almost 13 years on on the other one so I think they'll be around quite a while so yeah and so Gary you had said you know getting it next year you know what get it this year I mean that's my opinion because we're going to be taking it out of the park dedication fund anyway and we have funds in there so whether we take it out this year or next year why not just do it this year it's your decision yeah I'm fine with that so what so the five residents I'm assuming who want this all live in that area yes are they aware that if we put a dock in there more people will come use that boat launch then it is fairly busy already there's very minimal parking but there are there's a lot of people that use I don't live there and I've used it and it's it's really bad because it's kind of a tight area there's not a lot of parkings you know but but even the water is a problem too so you boat out there and then it's like where you got to hold that you know keep it up from the Rocks you know there's no Sandy kind of so I think it would really be a good thing to have it it would speed up people being able to get in and out yeah yeah well and also just be easier well you so you could pull your boat over to the side of the other on the other side of the dock and somebody else could be coming in or going out yeah you can't do that right you can't do that now right so it would really speed things up yeah I I just again if we're going to do this then you might as well do it this year because get it in do it do I need to bring something back next time just order go ahead and do it or we'll we'll bring something back on the third just to just to make document it we'll put the order in because I'll put it in then we'll bring some back official for you right okay yeah you all okay yeah just if those the five residents that want it start complaining about the increased traffic please remind them they asked for it um construction parking ordinance uh ordinance discussion yes um I can take this Madame mayor members of council this is a been an ongoing discussion so at the previous work session we talked about kind of this is about Hard Scrabble um Road and some of the complaints we've received about construction parking in that area um one of the the direction we received from Council at the work session was to bring back an ordinance that kind of addressed the issues that we have to try to maneuver something that maybe we had a little bit more control over construction parking um in the future now this doesn't address the current um you know complaints that we've received at at Hard Scrabble um but would in the future um create an Avenue to have that conversation with um you know somebody taking out a building permit or somebody doing a lot split um some of the basic um terms of the ordinance uh could be and these are just suggested that planned unit developments will be exempt from this ordinance um as parking considerations can be negotiate or described within the development agreement so that would I know there were some concerns about Woodland Cove and how tight it is and um you know the parking in there um being maybe different than than Hard Scrabble that's something you want to do you can you can put that in the the ordinance um construction including renovation parking will occur on site unless the property owner or representative can demonstrate a hardship so that hardship would be something like topography Wetlands trees or other features that make it difficult that actually park on the site um staff would have want to keep the staff having Discretions so that every building permit doesn't go to city council where there's a question of where people are going to park um if off-site parking is request or required staff would determine if an escrow is appropriate so in uh hard scra on Hard Scrabble there's an escrow I believe it's $225,000 that we've received for that project in case there's some Road damages I know there were concerns of Hard Scrabble just being resurfaced um and then some large equipment being on there so we have that um if it's determined that an escrow is appropriate that would go staff would determine that make the recommendation to council Council would have to approve the escrow um if no escrow is determined the Builder is they're still responsible for any RightWay damage um for other ordinances so those are some basic terms that I kind of took away from our work session um now there will be some challenges administratively that's the biggest challenge with any ordinance or any code is the actual enforcement of it if there are issues so um right now the current strategy is complaint-based so you know if we would pass an ordinance there would have to be a complaint or an officer or whatever would have to be driving by there and notice that somebody's parking and then make contact with that that that person so um just keep that in mind when if if you would pursue an ordinance you know enforcement is a challenge um that's all I have um on this um looking for Direction uh Sarah's kind of ready or our City attorney is ready to to develop an ordinance I think there's maybe some basic framework that we can use from other cities but this is somewhat new I think um there isn't much out there that that does this uh that I believe we can find so take any direction um questions I just don't like the comment it's hard to enforce an ordinance because then why have an ordinance it has to be enforced and why have it if you're not going to enforce it I don't think we need it so here's I think um it would be better we would be better served if we were to address there's several situations and um staff has been dealing with so there's a situation Woodland Cove with construction parking and I've gotten calls I've gotten complaints and there's a lot of complaints and we've gotten a lot of complaints regarding this Hard Scrabble issue as well so I think rather than saying we're going to do an ordinance Citywide I think um we could have a policy that when a building permit comes in we ask about the parking number one and explain in certain circumstances that you should be and they have to spell it out but that could be a policy that could be just something but I I think the bigger issue is on Hard Scrabble and in Woodland Cove and what I want to do is eliminate staff time that is dealing with this it's difficult so um in um on Hard Scrabble I think if we just said no parking or we had one you know 5 600 foot area in on Hard Scrabble that's parking everything else is no parking that might solve the issue um in Woodland Cove and and this is what happens and I've been out to both places numerous times and what happens is you have a dumpster on one side then you have utility vehicles working on the other side and then you have construction vehicles on both sides and I have a small car and I was on Woodland Cove Boulevard which is the wider Street and I had a hard time getting through they didn't like me I as actually got out and told them to move their vehicles but anyhow um but so here's the thing I think in Woodland Cove everything think at least we should be putting up temporary no parking signs on one side when a when building is happening because what they were doing is they they have the the dumpster over here and then they have the vehicles over here so I think when a building code when a building permit comes in for a house or a or a unit we NE need to tell them everything on the side where it's being built and put no tempor at least no parking temporary no parking signs up across the street so that everything has to be on one side that'll alleviate a lot of the issue there was one area on wolfberry I couldn't I mean it was like squeezing my little car through there so that could be avoided and like I said if we just put permanent no parking signs maybe with a small area on Hard Scrabble where they can park everything else is no parking we'd be our staff would be probably be very happy police could enforce this the problem right now is so hard to enforce these these parking issues and these situations because there is parking allowed and if a big vehicle bigger vehicle can get through um they can't really go out and ticket people so I think we could eliminate that and they could actually do the enforcement well not to say anything bad about your officers but on my street there is no parking on one side of the street and people Park on it all the time and these are residents these aren't workers these are residents and I I weave through the cars and move on because it's not worth their time to come out and ticket them so it's still going to be an Enforcement issue and a complaint issue um dumpster shouldn't be on the street and if it's the one that was there Friday I we called the police station and the HOA and got it moved off the street very quickly um but if there is a complaint and there are no parking signs they can enforce it if there's a complaint and there are no no parking signs they can't enforce it so there's there's a difference there Madam mayor and councel I just want to clarify that certainly it helps to have no parking signs in some cases um if if we get to a location where they're blocking the road and we can't get emergency vehicles through we can still enforce that we don't need a No Parking sign for that um the challenge with making one side of the street no parking that works great in areas where houses are far enough apart but when you're in an areas where they're building cottage homes on both sides of the road they're not going to be able to park anywhere then we're going to we're literally going to force them out of that area onto somebody else's street because there's construction so close together on both sides of the street but we if we do um if we do temporary no parking signs and so it's on a um how do you say unit byun basis um then we could address that that that situation that's a possibility I I just want to be clear about the expectation here and first of all to be very clear heart Scrabble and Woodland Cove are apples and coconuts the problems are not the same um as far as I'm concerned the problem on heart Scrabble is not it's a it's some it's one person's displeasure with the situation is what it is it's not a public safety hazard it's not a concern whatsoever to me I've been out there a million times our staff has worked very closely with the construction folks they've been nothing but cordial and yes they have a job to do it's a challenging location I get that but it's small enough where there's even another way in and out so uh for the most part that isn't a huge concern to me Woodland Cove is a completely different animal and we do go through there as a result of that we're through there every single day and we self- police a lot of that stuff staff just goes out they don't wait necessarily for a a complaint because there's a lot of construction on a daily basis so we're out there managing that even without issuing citation we're managing that very routinely so I certainly understand that the temporary no parking signs we just have to be careful about how we I don't want to create a situation where Street a is is the construction zone but now we're forcing them onto some street that is already done and now those folks have to deal with it because we made the problem worse right so it's it's a little more complicated in when the Cove just because of all the different types of Housing and things going in there so on on Hearts gravel that was a huge lot was it that it was uh wet or why couldn't those all those Vehicles park in that on that lot well that's a great question so the bottom line is that lot was they built two houses where there was one so there was a lot of work going on in there so you just couldn't get construction vehicles in there um when you're doing grading cement work these are big vehicles um for the most part those Construction companies did a really good job of trying to keep all of that stuff in front of or near their well that's the construction zone my experience when I went out there and then the other issue is yeah you talk to the Builder and then maybe for a few days they comply and then they're right back to what they used were doing before too so there's you know there's that but there is I I think part of the problem is if it's a it's a the reason it's a parking zone is because it's wide enough to get vehicles through and we've instructed the complaintant in this case when you see something that you think okay that's getting a little narrow probably can't get an ambulance through there call us and so what would happen is he would initially call us and then he stopped because he didn't like the answer he got we'd ask people to move they would or we'd say okay we can clearly get through here I I understand you're not happy with it but nonetheless they can get through there so then he just stopped calling us because he didn't like the answer well one the other issues and this isn't just Hard Scrabble is um when these big trucks come and then they offload on our street right you know um these huge heavy equipment or you know rocks and gravel and stuff like that happens everywhere that happen with res and like Superior dumped a whole bunch of rock on W Co Parkway two weeks ago right that's a whole different that's technically enforce go through a state ordinance there is no dumping in the RightWay right I mean but they don't they won't put in the people's driveways I mean I don't know how many times I've called the see Sol to come out and talk to him get a move but that's what wrecks the roads more than these cars parking on them is these loads being dumped on that's a whole different issue I'm all in favor of whatever the city can do to avoid that as far as Vehicles offloading maybe other vehicles or things like that as long as the driver is right there that's a that's not parking that's that's just unloading something um as long as if there's an emergency they're going to move that thing because they're standing right there and sometimes that gets called in as a parking comp PLT I don't like that they're blocking the road well that happens everywhere when people are moving they're block on the road for a few seconds while they're maneuvering equipment and things like that so but anyway that's right and offloading is is different it's just but the um damage it still does to the to our roads especially on hot summer days and there you know I mean that's that's an issue I mean um Madame mayor a quick question just to clarify when you say temporary no parking signs are are you saying that the city would just put up regular no parking signs in that area or are we talking about developers putting up paper like wooden Stak type SI no I think it has to be by the city so it's enforceable correct okay right so of that um there was a complaint on the neighborhood Facebook page just this week someone who lives in the neighborhood got a ticket for parking where it says no parking and was Furious so the cops the police do not know the difference between a construction workers vehicle and a resident's vehicle so so if they just start going through and ticketing everyone who's parking where there's no parking the complaints from residents will Skyrocket but if it says no parking I'm not disputing that they shouldn't be parking there I'm just letting you know when the complaints start rolling in to Chief and staff like this will be why again it happens on my street I just move past and a lot of Woodland Co is already not parking on one side the developer went through I believe two or three years ago and installed all kinds of signs on one side of the RO almost throughout the entire development because it's narrow roads and it makes it tough there's two cars parked on the street you're not getting through even with a car so that's why they did that so I mean that's already been taken care of out there that's not you know that's not a big issue out there right you know and the same thing happened I and I'll say when on I don't know how many years ago it was but um the ones on there was a couple houses on 44 one of them across from Maple Forest is was doing a remodel and they parked up Maple Forest all the way to Stone Lan the Stone Bridge Lane I mean it happens all over you there's no place for these people to park I mean you can't put on the property I mean you just can tell Builders hey one person a day I mean it it's for for the I mean I'll be honest the person that's complained did the same thing when they built their house exactly I'll put it out there I'll put it out there they did the exact same thing it's on the aial I got the aerial up yeah okay um Council I don't think we need an ordinance we want we want staff or the officers to go through and start titing everyone parked in your parking zes fine but there will be lots of complaints for residents not just the construction workers well send them a note saying they're going to start getting ticketed if they Park in no parking zones right and I like the idea of policy I like a policy here's your policy don't do this I live on a luring Drive is is not really wide and these big trucks will come and they'll Park directly across from my driveway I have to do like a 5p turnic get on my driveway just don't park directly across from someone's driveway you know it'd be nice I like the idea of a policy on a side note for the parking um tickets do we get the income from that or does that go to somewhere else mayor and Council we we would get a portion of that I don't know what it is exactly but small portion it's a small portion dang well then I don't care for Ticket okay um any other comments I like the idea of the temporary see if that works and if it doesn't there okay so we'll kind of do so any any other discussion regarding Hard Scrabble I don't think you're going to have a a very happy individual well we put the No Parking On the one side so you should be able to still get through I think when we approve a home to be built we're approving them to park reasonably to build that home just just done that project's another home there's probably another it's probably another year maybe and then there's another a lot for sale or another home that's for sale that might be torn down and also done re rebuilt or subdivided I mean that's a whole another issue so um I just think if we can make a resident happy by doing something reasonable um why not and if we do permanent No Parking On One side and or have some kind of area where they can park um when you look at all of Hard Scrabble there's got to be an area that you could allow parking especially for cons and really the only parking on hard scrubble is construction parking people don't you know residents don't park on Hard Scrabble because they're D Contractors do daily right but where where do you want them to park like where where would you put the construction traffic because they they can't park on the property when they're Excavating and digging up and doing all of that they can't park on the property so where would you put them these are huge Lots I don't understand how they you could I mean they could park all along the um what is it the by the Wetland there they could park all along there there's not a lot of room through there though that's pretty there's no shoulder area where they Park as the most shoulder room there's not a lot of shoulder room in there to park a vehicle and if you do then you start you know you start really narrowing down the road where par is the best spot it is the widest there's Rock shoulder I mean that's honestly the best spot they could park yeah they have picked the most reasonable spot they can possibly Park I realize this problem's probably going to happen again it's going to happen again but you can see the the tree cover mayor and Council uh on all of these Lots I mean that's a challenge in it of itself this doesn't show topography most of these lots are heavily slanted towards the lake so there's all kinds of challenges with getting vehicles in and out of there especially in the spring if it's wet you can't park on the home side because it's all like said sloped and it's you know all landscaped the only spot you can do is in in the inner area of the nature Conservatory the only other option would be allow parking on the inner side not on the outer side yeah that's what it is now right now through that area well through there yeah yeah the only option I'm I'm all for making a resident happy but he's not going to get what he wants we're not going to say they can't park anywhere on Hearts travel like it's it's his request is not something that we can do when we approve them to build the home they have to be able to park their workers somewhere and I mean some of these guys are carrying stuff they're not going to walk you know half a mile to the site carrying whatever they're carrying no but they could off they could drive over there jump drop it off and then Park they could I mean there's different ways of doing it too but um yeah like I said if there was a section that they could park and that otherwise you're going to like I said you're going to end up with that same situation on in on other Lots on Hard Scrabble because they're going to be subdivided or um new homes being built so just trying to avoid more stff time and headaches and yeah Madame mayor and Council I to my knowledge at least on our side there's not been a single complaint from anyone other than the one individual yeah um which in my mind certainly I feel for him I understand this is upsetting to him but that to me tells me that nobody else has a problem with this but him and there are other I realize it's close to him but there are other residents in that vicinity as well that haven't said a word um well the the one resident um next to the two that are being built that's the one the elderly couple I might be on the market soon that's my understanding and then there's the gentleman that's been complaining and then he owns the other one um next next to him as well so then the closest one that could that one there that could po eventually be a complainant is further away from the from the construction zone and the construction parking sure probably a th feet or more so just just kind of but they all drive on the road right right there's there's no good scenario unless we're going to pave a big area somewhere construction workers can park which I don't think anyone wants to do there's no there's no good scenario there's there's no nothing we can do that's going to make him happy other than saying they can't park anywhere but then if we do it no park anywhere that includes your lawn Cruise everyone like people doing all your yard maintenance and if you put gutters in or you know anything that you want to do on your home they can't park there either anymore right and that occurs on a daily basis in this neighborhood because again those driveways are very very narrow um I'm all for trying to come up with a solution to this I just don't think the solution for heart Scrabble is the same solution for wood Co I think we kind of have to dissect those if we're having issues in these two different places we have to look at those things differently because it's very different that's all all right okay so if you can think of um another solution please let us know what does the homeowner that's complaining want them to do no parking anywhere on hard gravel well I think primarily no parking and within a reasonable distance of because of of his property I think right but you said same thing why doesn't someone just show them pict you know say you did the same thing all right so let's move on to the next one and that is the council chambers it no I'm sorry Hunters Crest fifth edition Outlaw D discussion yes uh Madame mayor members of council I'll make this brief this is a uh just an update from uh a developer that met with um David and I I don't know probably 3 weeks ago now um about a sewer line that crosses out lot D in Hunter's Crest um I'll pull that up real quick so you can see it so it's a sewer line um that goes across here there isn't a drainage and utility easement that was recorded um I believe this was about 18 years ago uh when this this was platted um the developer has has requested um kind of more like demanded that we move that we move it um we've had a legal opinion recently reviewed um I believe it was originally um developed in 2018 and then reaffirmed here in 2024 that we have prescriptive easement rights in this area it was reviewed in 2018 well it was it was that was when I think initially it was looked at by legal council and then more recently 2024 reviewed and and reaffirmed that that um our opinion is that we have a prescriptive eement right on this um the the idea with this whole area was that 9,300 you can see on here um if that parcel would sell there'd be a few as you can imagine Road Connections in that area that line would then be moved um and then that would no longer be going across that Outlaw so um I'm not sure 18 years ago the the the idea was that that was going to happen quicker um than it did it obviously hasn't happened yet um but that would be the driver in our opinion um that the veler would then move that line so we wanted to just let you know um that that's our strategy with this is to continue to have that prescriptive easement right um declared for this this seore line um there may or may not be anything in the future with this uh but I wanted to make sure everybody's aware so that if there is something in the future uh it's not the first you hear about it why do they want mov well it's it's kind of an idea that we would use um um our ability to use to use eminent domain to take some of the land then sell it back to them we would move the line put the road in and then they would build some lots that was kind of what was pitched which isn't something that we've never done that before yeah and and an imminent domain may be a hard cell because there's already a prescriptive easement over the correct yeah so we're just reasserting our prescrip ement right in the area what does prescriptive be so it means that we had our we have like a public utility in an area for I think well Sarah can probably describe there's there's a certain time threshold 15 years 15 15 years go ahead yeah Madam mayor members of the council um it works kind of the same way if you've heard of adverse possession so basically if you're occupying a property for 15 years it becomes yours unless it's torrin's property you can't adversely possess torrin's property this property is not torns um it's abstract property so um that makes it a little bit easier here but um the city has had that line in there for more than 15 years so there's a similar line of legal reasoning that if you're an easement in 15 years similar to adverse possession you you have that prescriptive easement instead of adverse possession you have prescriptive easement over the property the easement has to be open and obvious so that means they have to be aware of it in this case there is a manhole on the property so I think it's pretty obvious that there's something there it's not like they didn't know about it because there's nothing there so um and it's definitely been well over 15 years so we think that the city could prove that it has a prescriptive easement and like the mayor is saying you know I mean if they ask us to move it I mean we're just going to condemn the property and you know keep the easement there so that and probably assess them for the cost of the line so it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to to do anything with the with the line by moving it or you know compensating them for it thank you any other questions good all right hearing none then we'll move on to council chambers it equipment all right I'll make this real quick um so as you know this is kind of an ongoing discussion about how our AV Equipment here has been failing um recently we had to replace an audio board because of a power surge along with a few other things um at the police department but this is related to the AV Equipment um it's it's going to fail I mean we're kind of at end of life we've we've gotten some quotes uh for some replacement costs of in kind what we have here um roughly $60,000 um the feedback we got from city council was that's too much for the 30 to 40 viewers per year um well per per council meeting council meeting so um what we've kind of come up with we have to replace it with something and start planning um what I'm requesting is uh you know kind of a budget of $15,000 not to exceed to kind of develop something here it won't be the same it'll be different um we're going to try to you know be crafty with it and and do the best we can it won't be a longterm you know it'll probably be a fiveyear solution is what we would say is good um this one is eight years old so it's not much older than what I would say something that or 10 is it 10 so it's near 10 2014 2014 okay so it's near 10 um 10 years old let's say um so about half that but um yeah uh the you know I had a vendor come in and tell them kind of our budget and I haven't received any followup from them so uh you know I think we're going to have to kind of go at it alone and and and figure it out so I'm just requesting um authorization for a budget not to exceed $15,000 to look at replacing what we have the idea would be we could do a little redundancy um between our current system which we just got up and running again here probably an hour ago two hours ago um and then we can have a little redundancy throughout the summer and maybe the fall if we're okay with it make the switch and we would use cable fund dollars to do this okay so you're not giving me a really great sense of confidence know exactly what to do oh um so I think I sh so I sent out a survey a little while ago and kind of maybe sent a link of what I did in my previous city um it uses like go-to webinar which I think if you were here during Co you're familiar with using go-to meeting similar um there'd be a series of maybe two or three cameras throughout here that you know you could choose and look at different different views of the city council something like that I've done it in the past it worked still working right now um and that was 2021 so we're going on three years so from a tech standpoint I would concur say's figure it out it's yeah yeah um and we'll see you know it's we I think we'll be able to get it figured out it's just um you have to be okay with maybe a little bit different style of a council meeting it won't look the same but it'll be just as effective and if at some point we get more viewers and we want to spend more money we definitely can this is kind of I'd call it a stop Gap um for you know call it a low cost but it's still expensive I think it's $110,000 more than it needs to be I really think you can do it for five I know you can do it for $5,000 because let's what about this so let me ask you this Jasper um so you're going to look into this and you're going to bring back options to the council then if you'd like if you'd want me to do that I could do that um you know one thing that we're gonna that I would have is a a monitor that would be able to have like say Sarah be on there um and so she doesn't have to drive an hour two ways right she can just be at home and and attend our meetings um so there you know there's some monitor there's some AV stuff so it's it's not just a one camera or something like that it's a little bit more elaborate with that getting the microphones to all sync up um be a couple computers you know involved with it too so it's I think it'll probably be around 10 15 is a little contingency if I need to get somebody to consult with you know did you talk to the person I told you to talk to I did and what was wrong with that so that system so I think you're the the church um is just the camera with that just live streams um that has audio into it that doesn't necessarily with the survey that we sent out um allow for us to do kind of um interactive meetings with staff that's the main difference is it one camera so this isn't just City Council meetings this is other interactive meetings with staff so like if if he wants to be able to remote in yeah so let's say can't go do remote meetings no yes we can't but the staff can't so like if if Sarah wanted to do a city council meeting remotely do we save money when Sarah doesn't drive here I believe so I mean I don't know if that's part of our retainer retainer that's retainer I will say I mean you there are certain implications for the council too I mean if you're out of town or whatever you would be able to attend the meeting remotely as long as we can see and hear can't vote no you can vote we can see and hear you and you can see and hear the council and the public right so you just have to sit in a Starbucks or something you have to sit somewhere that's available to the public and we have to identify your location and that's usually the kicker because people are like well I don't want them to know where I am right I'll just B out of but um you know it is but has that changed or did they change I know that there was talk at the legislature this year to change that to make it a little more you see but that didn't happen no I mean there's another caveat on there if you're sick or whatever you can have a doctor say that you can't be in a public place and then you don't have to disclose your location okay and then there's also for military personnel as well if they're deployed they can participate and they don't have to disclose their location for obvious reasons okay so um there are some exceptions to not disclosing the location but for most people you have to disclose your location that's usually what people don't like and then say never mind but it I mean it does a lot of cities do allow it on a pretty frequent basis say we've had here recently with some of our development applications because it is more common they've asked us if there's that option um this recent sketch plan they're from Colorado as you know and there was some somewhat of a conflict and I know if that were available they would have used it not you know end all be all but just it has been asked of planning staff here recently yeah I could see it working for staffing issues or you know staff meetings or whatever more so than Council meetings although it would be nice if we could have have it available for Council meetings for staff so Sarah or yeah one of the other things is that this projector you can no longer get bulbs for so if it goes out we would have to replace the proor those are also expensive so it's it's it's kind of a lot of different it AB type Hardware um so it's not just a camera so um do we have the money in the um media in the cable fund we got like 35 40,000 left in there after get all the Broadband stuff obviously but probably that this would take probably okay so 10 10 to 15 so where's the 15,000 coming from from the cable fund from the C fund and we have right now it's going to run out at some point just you have it I would say bring back a plan okay so try and stick that 10 15,000 well if I can have a meeting somewhere else might be worth it all right all right BR back uh that concludes so we have 15 minutes before our meeting starts and if you're hungry you can go back there so a motion to adjourn is an order thank you Kathleen is there a second second thank you um Claudia made that second all those in favor signify with i i all those opposed motion passes 5 V