Acy, Peter Vicky, Kathleen Refkin, myself, Lisa Whan, and also staff present is Jasper Krugal and Brian Grim, David Ael, and let's see, Deputy Chief Craig, no wait, Deputy Chief Pat Cummings, Chief. Okay, you guys. Yeah, that's Craig Squires. And that's it. So, with that, um, oh, and then is an I think Ann Meyer. and Mayerhoff is. And then Gary Peters, are you there, Gary? >> Oh my gosh. >> Yes, I am. >> Hi. I hope you're doing better. But thank you for joining us. I hope it's not too painful. And then who else? Sarah Sale is here as well. Uh those three are um joining us remotely. So we have a number of items on our agenda. We have our street improvement project for 2027. Then we're going to talk about the Bosma property and then utility billing process and then an update of Boulevard tree replacement at Hunters Quest if we have time. If we run out of time, I'll just add that to our regular meeting under business items. So, we're going to start with street improvement projects. I'm going to hand this over to Allison right away. Thank you, Mayor Whan. Um so Mayor Whale and council included in your packet is a summary of some project areas that um public works and engineering has defined as as some potential areas for a 2027 street improvement project. Um preliminary discussions on budget for 2027 range between 6 and 700,000. Um, so council, we we do um acknowledge that there are there is a project area, the Painters Road, Painters Creek um area, the rural residential area that exceeds that amount, but we did want to just bring that to council's attention that that is an area that we've talked about previously and what the current estimated budget um is for that um for that project area. That is a a reclamation area based on pavement cores that were taken back in 2022. Um, another area identified is Ridgewood Cove just off uh County Road 110. Uh, it's an older area uh and the street uh based on the street condition score, we're assuming it would be a reclamation. However, we did want to bring this um to discussion for council uh because there is no water mane within that roadway. Um, so if this is a roadway that the council uh would like to consider for a project next year, staff would like to have a conversation on um what we, you know, what we would like to see done with water man. Should we engage with the residents? Um, you know, do we want to look at open cut versus uh like a traditional installation method for the water man or would we want to look at a trenchless technology? Um, there are pros and cons to each. I don't want to get too much into details, but just to let council know that there have been a lot of conversations about this and and we just want to make sure that we're doing um a thorough scope um when we look at bringing these um potential project areas up to council. Uh the third area is Marina Drive uh just off Sunnyfield Road over by the high school. Um that one would be we anticipate would be a full depth reclamation. Um, again, we would need some pavement cores to to confirm that. Um, and then the last area, which hits right around um the the high end of the budget um that the council had been considering is um the island except for Tuxedo Road and Enchanted Lane, which was done in 2018. Um so those roads out there, uh they're ranging between 43 and 67 for pavement condition scores. Um, and we're anticipating full deck full depth reclamation of that area. And then there was also, I believe, and I don't recall the name of the street off the top of my head. Um, but there was one one road that we may want to look at um, paving and I I I think Gary might be able to speak to that if the council would like to to discuss that. But uh in short, those are the four areas that we um as staff have been discussing and we were just at a point where we wanted to bring it to council for discussion and um to answer any questions you might have and get some guidance on what you'd like to see for a proposed project next year. >> Thank you. Um couple questions for Brian right away. What do we have? Um what do you anticipate that we will have in our fund balance for road projects such as this? because we're going to be um levying more dollars next year. But right now, what do we have in in the fund balance available for next year? >> Around 2 million in and that's what's sitting in the fund balance right now. We're leving 400,000 this year because we sort of dropped that down because we did the 2026, but I think right in the fund balance right now there's just shy I think of like 2 million, 1.92 million >> and we're not using that for projects this year. We might have to tap into it a little bit because we're leving 400,000 depending on what we, you know, do here. Um, you know, if we if we picked this, you know, 600 600 700,000. I think originally I think it was like we did the bond project last year, we were going to do a little less, you know, this year or whatever. But >> I just wanted >> how much the council how aggressive they want to be and if they want to save some of that fund balance for 208 or 29 or not have to bond as much in the future. So, I mean, I guess yeah, to your original question, there's about a little about 2 million in funds >> and then Okay, so 2 million right now could possibly roll over to next year and then next year we're going to be um levying possibly if we do the same at least 400. So, there's going to be 2.4 million. >> Yeah. If you add in Okay. The reason I ask is because every year these projects get more and more expensive and it doesn't seem to make sense to have a fund balance sitting there not doing anything when we should be spending it. That's my opinion. Um and we should be doing as many roads as we possibly can especially since we're leving specifically levying for them. >> We are. It just depends on how the council wants to look at year one, two, and three and if they want to. >> Yeah. As mentioned earlier, not maybe bond as much, you know, use some of the fund balance and and depending what the scope of the projects are going to be. Like in 28, 29. I mean, we've had years in the not too distant past where we did was it 23, we did like 6 million worth of roads or whatever. So that's >> how the council just got to look at it more globally as far as whatever you spend now is something. I mean, to your point, Mary, I mean, obviously things keep going up in cost, but whatever you spend now is what you don't have available later. So, I guess that's the flip side of it, I guess. So, >> yeah. And I thought we were trying to build it up for when we have to do Hunter Crust and everything in 2028. We were doing less knowing that we were going to have the big projects in two more years. >> Well, the other thing I was looking at is when do our bonds, some of the um existing debts for the roads that we've done, when do they fall off? >> None really any soon. I think we have 29 comes off in 29, doesn't it? >> Isn't there one >> like 2030 31? I mean like game farm road drops off like I think in 2030 31 island drops off but we're using state aid dollars. We're not using tax levy for >> right. So that's kind of >> I just sort of got it. >> Yeah, we have >> just been we have some equipment certificates falling off this year which are 101,000 roads. >> Not road related though. >> Not road related. Um, Highland Road is going to fall off next year. Then the next one is equipment certificates and Kingspoint Road falls off in 2030. So >> that's not very much. >> That was just the non-developer portion, water, sewer funds. So yeah, really the next road one is probably Beam Farm Road really in >> I mean it's it's kind of a horse a piece really when you look at it. I mean, you either spend the money now or you save it and don't spend or don't bond for as much in the future or you spend I I don't know. It's it's it's a horse a piece. It's it >> Yeah. >> Oh, yeah. >> Can I ask a question on the island? So much of that is mound >> for what we're doing. Do we match up with Do they fix the roads on the other sides at the same time? You know how the islands all kind of cut up? That's different. I' probably >> Trista comes in a really weird spot on the island. >> Gary Alison, it seems weird to make it pretty and then have it falling apart on this end and this end. >> Are they planning on >> They've already done that. I mean that >> so we just is brand new. It's just a few years old. >> The tuxedo. >> Gary, did you want to pipe in? >> Yeah, the mountain roads are already done. >> Thanks, Gary. Okay. Well, that area is pretty dense, too. You know, there are a lot of houses and um drove through there this afternoon. I can tell you >> do some research work on that >> on a road dollar per house basis. That looks like that's the >> Yeah, that's if it's going to be a reclamation or reconstruct, then there's going to be assessments. So, I think to your point, then it would be lower assessments per household or per property. >> Yeah. Right. It was 1973 that it was built. So, >> what's staff's I mean, do you have any Gary Allison any recommendations? >> Um, mayor, I I I think that staff in in my opinion, staff's brought brought forward some good recommendations. Um, and we just, you know, wanted to put it in in council's the council chamber is here for discussion. I don't know if if Gary has some opinions on from a maintenance standpoint if they're seeing um his if he's seeing his crews out in in one area more than others. >> Uh my staff saw a lot on the island. Um of course there a lot down there on Painter Circle too that's kind of falling apart, but um most bang for your buck. I think the island would be nice to get that done. Mhm. >> I mean, the island fits in the budget for the most part, assuming it's not underpriced. >> And it will be an accessible project. >> Any So, do we know approximately how what the assessments would be? I mean, would they be like 3,000, 4,000? >> Uh, mayor, I don't know. I didn't do a unit count out there. Um, we can certainly if that's something the council would like to know, I can I can bring that back for an information sake. But I think if if I'm hearing council, you know, and seeing nodding heads for in support of the island, our next step would be to get those um get some cores out there to see uh, you know, maybe maybe there are some areas where we can get by with the Milan overlay. um so that we can really hone in on what the scope of the project would be and then staff could provide um a unit count out there for for council to to see what the um so the whole road was built in 73. Do we really need cores because presumably wouldn't we just do the whole thing and make it all brand new and nice at the same time? >> Um Mayor Mayor Whan Council Member Ruffin that's a great question. So part of the cords, not only do they tell us what um what kind of street project you want to do, but it's also important information for the contractors to have so that we know what kind of um how much um how much reclaiming they need to do because if an area has been heavily patched and it has a significant amount of um pavement on it, it costs more for the contractor to grind that up. So we want to know that. Um so we so we still would need some information out there. Um but to your point, yeah, the older wrote a 73 from 73. I would I would recommend just fixing and redoing all >> I think what they're recommending. I think >> she just said some of it might need a million overlay. So just you know maybe we just Yeah. cross fingers. >> If we're going to do it then fix the whole thing. >> Exactly. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any >> just one question on the just kind of for information on the Ridge uh Ridge Rididgewood Cove are is there any requirement to add water um or I take it they're all on wells then and um >> correct so they're all on wells um I'm not aware of anything that would require the city to extend water um but when you look at doing a street improvement project where if it's a reclamation project the intent between the reclamation and the maintenance that the council has been supportive of. We're we're trying to get 40 year old, you know, streets to last us for 40 years. And so the question becomes, do we want to do a surface um pavement improvement that'll last 40 years, which then says for the next 40 years you won't have water extended? So, so it's a and it's never my experience is it's never been the right time for everybody to get the water extended, right? You've always got some people who are ready for it and others who have just spent money on their wealth. So, >> I think most people want to keep their wells >> and that and that could very well be and that's why staff wanted to bring it to council for for discussion if if you know if that was something that if council wanted to start looking at a street improvement project with that in that area then we would want to have that discussion of well what about water main extension? I just remember when we did Jennings Cove, they said absolutely not. And it was a pretty unanimous no. A pretty firm no. I don't know. >> Um Well, that's not the case for Enchanted, though. There is no water out there. >> Correct. There's sewer out there, right? But there's no water anyway. So, >> yeah. I don't even know where Mounds if Mound has any through there. >> I don't think they would want Mound's water. >> Okay. I >> That's a fair. >> Okay. Um so um is is is that the direction I'm hearing is to to come through. Okay. So our next step will be we'll um we'll get some cores ordered out there. Um I'll work with um with Gary while I can here to to make sure we're getting the scope right and then um we'll come back with that information with to council with a unit council so you can kind of get a flavor for what you'd be looking at um for potential assessments. >> Okay. So, just a quick question then. If if it does end up being 720, does that include engineering and project management and and the whole kitten kaboodleoodle? >> That's correct. That's a budget number. So, that includes construction. And >> then the question is, what is um the Hunter Crest? What are we estimating today? What it would cost to do all of those roads? >> Goodness. Do you remember? >> I don't remember. Is it 4 million? It was 4.6. >> Sorry, I was off. Um, so, so my question then to council is you're still going to have to bond for 1.5 1.7 million approximately or two, I'm sorry, two three. >> Yeah, three closer to three. That's if you want to burn. >> Yeah. So, I'm just asking, do you want to do more? So, I guess you can look and say 3 years out we're going to bond or 2 years out we're going to bond four 4.6 million or you bond 2.8 or 3 million and in the meantime we're sitting on $2 million that we're not spending. I mean I'm I'm just putting this into context. So the question is besides enchanted and I'm not pushing any road on here cuz obviously um I'm on painter road I'd get assessed. I don't care but I'm I'm not pushing that. I'm just saying do you want to do maybe another one that's 250 or or you know you want to consider that >> mayor if I may. Yeah. Um so Hunter Crest keep in mind originally I think that $4.6 $6 million number was there were some milling overlays right >> throughout there with some reclamation and key areas. Now I think it it is with some cores. We'll likely have to reclaim almost all of it. Um we'll have to see because that was in 2024 I think when we originally came up with that number or 2025. >> Yeah. Within the last year or two. >> Yeah. So we'll have to look at it again. That might all be reclamation which would all be accessessible at that point too. So there'll be another revenue stream there. But the 4.6 6 might not be >> it might be late. >> Yeah. >> So even if it's 5.2 and we have 2 million in the in in we're still bonding for 3.2. So I'm just asking if you know if if you take the 2 million that we currently have and we don't use any of that. I'm you're okay. I don't care one way or the other. I'm just throwing it out for thought because I mean I think we set a budget for the 2027 and we should try and stick with it. I I mean and this assumes that the estimate of 720 is accurate for all we know. It can come back and be a million and then >> it's not going to be a million. >> I'm just saying like we set the budget. We should see if this comes in within the budget and then possibly go from there after the engineers look at it. That makes sense to me. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah, that makes s uh into these the 720. This is the the total, right? So, technically it would be less out of the road fund because of uh assessments to the houses. Correct. >> And we'd upfront it and then we'd get assessments, someone would prepay, someone would come back. But yeah, basically it would be less than the 720. Correct. Okay. >> Generally in Minatrista, we've seen about a 40% um prepaid assessments. So about 40% prepaid. >> Yeah. So if it's 100,000 assessments, we get Yeah. 40 right off the bat and then 60 over time, >> which goes right back into our road fund. >> Yep. >> So >> So I like Kathleen's idea. So we see how the assessment prepaid assessments come in and all that if we've got some >> Well, you can't you can't wait till that for that because those prepaid assessments aren't going to be coming in until next November. Next November. >> Right. But we can get the engineers out there, do the cing, get an updated assessment of what they think it'll cost and then decide >> what the cost is, but not not >> well and then we know how many homes too will be assessed. So that's a good idea as well, breaking down what the city's fronting versus what the residents are paying. >> So we have done that in the past where all of a sudden we think it's going to be a million and the engineers estimate and comes in at 800,000 then we add more to it for 100 or 200,000 or whatever. So >> Okay. All right. Is there a second place area that you guys would maybe want to, you know, if if we get to that point that we look at like a the next >> Well, if you're going to look at another one, then you'd have to look at the next least expensive one, which would be Marina, I think. Marina Drive. >> They're both pretty gross. Marina or Rididgewood, I guess, depending on which one needs it more. I mean, they're within a more homes on it. >> Well, I think Ridgewood has more homes. Marina Drive only has about 10 houses, isn't it? >> Yeah. Yeah. So then Bridge >> Ridge Bridgewood would make more sense. >> Yeah. >> I I think mayor and council that the the challenge Well, I maybe it's just in my eyes is is if Ridgewood would be um if there was a desire for water, there's a little bit more discussion with that one. Whereas Marina Drive >> um you know it's already got utilities in um there is that development on the south end that has not yet extended their utilities um but their utility plan shows it coming up in um within their uh the the mid um along the backyards and sideyards there. So >> yeah, >> it's a little bit I think Marina is a little more straightforward than Ridgewood. >> Okay. Can we find out if people on Ridgewood would want city water? >> We certainly could reach out to them. I think that um in my opinion, we'd want to see if because if Ridgewood then becomes um extension of Water, then we're not just looking at necessarily a reclamation project. Um which would, you know, if we did a full reconstruct like we saw on um Morning View area. Um now now the the cost for uh reconstruction is is more than um more than the reclamation project. So we're looking at an even higher >> potentially higher. >> So I mean that'd be good to know then if the residents are interested or not because if it's not then it's substantially cheaper. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, is the direction from council then to to go and reach out to residents of Ridgewood then to see if >> if there's a desire for water extension. >> Well, I think that would be the next step. Let's do the first step first, the island first and then see where costs and and assessments and all of that come in. >> Yeah. You don't want to get people's hopes up almost. >> Okay. I just wanted to make sure I was getting the the order of operations right. >> Depends on the wording >> and and I don't know if we're going to be able to drill down and get more accurate numbers. Um really we won't have accurate numbers until we get the um um the bids back which won't be until February. That would be too late to do a project then in 27. But if you could drill down a little bit and come back with if you can refine the numbers a little bit more. I don't know, but then maybe we can make a better decision. >> Well, Mayor Whan, I I I you know, when we look at we're in May here talking about the the next year's project, so we are ahead of schedule, which is great. Um, you know, I think Gary's done a great job of of getting these projects in front of council sooner rather than later. if it if it's palatable with council, we could get an earlier start on a feasibility report for this area, get some more refined numbers, and then within that feasibility report, you would have an updated estimated cost. Um, and then at that point, if we play it out, it would be probably late summer. Um, you would have an updated cost and then at that point um to go and make uh to revisit Rididgewood and um and see if there's a potential for a project over there. Yeah, but you're still not going to get it out for bid in in January. It's probably going to be more like late February or even early March. >> It'd be it'd be further out. Yes. And that's that's the challenge with with the timing of it. >> So then the question would be >> um so let's just say we do that. There's a cost to for the feasibility study. So then if we decide not to do it in 27, would that then be on the radar for 28? And that's a council question because I wouldn't want to spend the money for a feasibility study, not do it in 27, but then not do it who knows where when. So I think you'd either have to say, okay, we're going to queue it up for 28 if we don't do it in 27, or else we don't do the feasibility study now. >> Well, I mean, that's fine. We can budget it for 28 if it we can't do it in 27 because we have the money. So >> yeah, and that's when that's the other one that was 1973, too. So >> those are the two >> extremely old roads. >> Okay. All right. So that's what we'll do. We'll check with Ridgewood people if they want water or not. Um we'll do the feasibility study for Ridgewood Cove. bring that back hopefully August. >> So, just to make sure I'm clear, are we doing is the request to bring in um a proposal to do feasibility study on both the island and Rididgewood? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Right. >> Okay. We're we can certainly do that. >> Here's what I'm synopsis. We're going to do the island for sure. >> We're looking at Ridgewood Cove as a possibility. So, we're going to do the feasibility study now to determine if we're going to do add it to the 27 or if it's going to go into the 28 project. Thank you for the clarification. I was just looking it up because if if my memory serves correctly, a feasibility study is valid on a 429 project is is considered valid for one year. And so if if we if we do the feasibility study this year and the project is not a 2027 project but a 2028, I'll have to refresh my memory on that. >> I thought it was 18 months. No, >> we start the 429 process early and just say the project's not going to be done until this time. I mean, >> I think the best thing to do is is um I've I hear what the council direction is and then we can I can I can do the research and get that exact date. See, is it 12 months or is it 18 months um and then bring that forward for council and and you know, we like I said, we certainly have time to do it. Um and then um then I've got all the correct information in front of council. >> Okay. So, feasibility study for um Island for sure. And you're going to check on the uh Rididgewood Co. feasibility study. How long that's good for? >> Correct. >> Yeah. All right. Thank you. >> All right. Um Bosma property update. >> Madame Mayor, members of the council. Um we have an update with uh that we've included in the packet regarding we'll call it the Bosma property, but it is uh the property located at 9550 West Hill Road. I've talked about it a few times. Um on April 17th, um the police went out and and did an inventory with their cameras and and grabbed some stills out of there. Our building official team or building inspection team was also out there as well. So, I think we're to a point where I think we've documented all of the items that are on the site. Um I think from the video, if you look at it, you can see it's pretty un unsightly. Um I can pull those up if you'd like. >> Please do. >> So, I I can do that. this dead animal carcasses. >> Yeah. Um so what what we need to determine tonight or what staff is looking for direction is just how to proceed. Um if we want to declare the site a nuisance, that's one thing. If we want to then proceed with a nuisance abatement order, that's another thing. Uh we did invite the property owner to this meeting um to maybe engage with a with the in a conversation with city council about what what they're doing and what they've done. I know that uh police chief Squires was just drove by there today um to see once if there is progress being made. So he could possibly provide an update on that. Uh but really looking for a timeline if we do want to declare it a nuisance and then if we do that then um abate the nuisance. >> Okay, let's see the video. >> All right. >> Who's the producer? No, I'm just kidding. Are those tabs all expired? >> It's >> There's more than I thought would be that are current, but the majority of them are expired yet. Wow. >> I mean, these aren't just cars. This is I mean it's Wow, that is a lot of stuff. >> There's a log splitter for you. I was going to say the fan works. >> Looks like it might work. >> Well time, David. >> That was Larry's day. >> I didn't see the mayor in that truck. >> I don't drive trucks. >> Wow. >> He recycles. >> What would this cost? I mean, why wouldn't he? Because there's got to be a lot of uh like what do you call it when you get rid of scrap metal? >> Scrap metal. >> Oh, this is Can you imagine the roads? I don't want to. >> Oh, man. >> That looks really expensive. >> Apparently, there's longer versions. >> All right, D. Yeah. So, what we're looking for is just direction on timeline because I think um the video itself shows there is probably a nuisance that could be declared. In the packet itself, you can see all the definitions of nuisances in our city code. >> We'd have to look at it and determine which ones of those are in violation, but just from looking at it, it appears there's likely numerous. Uh so, looking for direction. We have Sarah here to answer any specific questions. To my knowledge, I don't think we've done a a nuisance abatement here uh in Minitrista. So, it's quite the process. It does take some time once it happens. Um it we'll have to go through that process if if that's what we want to do. The soonest we could bring something forward is likely uh June 1st if that's what the direction is, but we're looking to to get that direction. >> It's a nuisance. >> I know, but I feel bad for this person. Clearly, they don't have the funds to and the ability to take this on. Is there any kind of organization we could call to try to, you know, if if it's ultimately going to cost, let's say, $100,000 to clean it up, if we could even get some scrap metal place to take 20,000 of it, I'm just making up a number here, that would help, wouldn't it? Well, what what we can do though is we can say you have to have it cleaned up by such and such a date and and then so they would have the option of calling somebody in or taking it to a scrap metal person themselves. But as you can see, there's more than just >> Yeah, >> there's there's garbage here. I mean, there's no other way of putting it. >> Yeah, I get it. >> So, just I can't I mean, you've met them clearly. Is it are they elderly, infirm? What is the >> Yeah. Um, Madame Mayor, uh, Congress, uh, Councilwoman Lacy, they, uh, the gentleman who owns it, I believe, 87 and then he has kids who, uh, help him out too at the property. Um, so there is family that that can assist him with it, but I I believe they all kind of work together. scrapping. So, it's kind of I think a family business. Not officially. >> Doesn't really look like they turn it in anywhere. >> No. >> Okay. >> Well, that's unfortunate, right, Brian? >> Yeah, I think it's a nuisance. >> Yeah, >> it's definitely a nuisance. >> All right. Um, so if we go down this path, it may cost the city um pretty penny and the only way we would ever get it back is would go on their taxes. They would have to pay it. Um, so they might Yeah. And it >> So I think what the the mayor is trying to say if it's 50 or 100,000, we obviously don't have anything budgeted for that. So that would have to be decided by the council. I mean, I can give recommendations, I guess, but as a council, we have to decide where are you pulling that money from cuz we don't have a nuisance scrap pile of money, I guess. >> Yeah. >> And then do we wait till they die to reclaim it or I mean, do we just make them sell the property to pay it? >> Well, there's different ways of >> I can kind of go through the process of what could happen. You know, we don't we don't know. we could declare it a nuisance, go in and and have somebody abate that nuisance. That would be hiring somebody to to do that, similar to what you said. And a lot of times what they'll do is they'll take into account what that might be worth, and they'll be able to, you know, bring it make some money off of it, right? Um once that happens, we get the bill, we have to pay the bill, the city does, and then we say, "Okay, property owner, you have until this day to pay the bill." And if they don't pay the bill, then it gets assessed to their their um property taxes. They then have one year to pay that off, I believe. And then after that, if they don't pay, then you start going down the tax forfeite process. Uh that could take anywhere from 3 to four years for that to finally get finalized. >> In that meantime, then we run the risk of them, you know, let's say we abate it, they could bring in more materials, >> right? >> Uh so it's it's it's a sensitive thing. We want to move fairly quickly if we do uh get it. So, we kind of start that process. But to Brian's point, it it could be I talked to a a junk hauler about a year ago now, and uh they were estimating between 50 to 100,000 uh to move it without just looking at the air photo. U so they'd have to get on site to get a a good We'd have to get quotes and and whatnot to find somebody to do it. >> But but has someone said this is the process, what'll happen? Do they know or because just saying to them, you got to clean this up, they they clearly don't possess the skills to do that. So, do they know what the city's going to do next? >> They do. So, they know if if they don't do it and we declared a nuisance that we can come in there and remove it and then assess it to their property taxes. >> If all this stuff is, >> you know, well, you know, they'll think about it. If all this stuff is removed from the property, the property will be a whole lot more valuable than what it is today. And technically or or they could maybe go and get a loan to pay off the to pay pay it off. I mean, I'm just saying that >> it's it they might have options. um they maybe even could come can they come to the city and work out a payment plan or does it have to be >> within a year? >> We could come up with the terms of the assessment if we wanted to, I believe. Um but just to kind of wrap it all up, if if they choose not to pay it and it goes into tax forfeite, they forfeit their land, the county will then auction it off. It'll hit one of the county auctions. A lot of times, and we don't have to agree to this, what the county will do is ask the city to remove the assessment that's that we put on the property so that it's more sellable. >> No way. >> And we can say no. And then they'll say, well, we won't be able to sell it. And then it's off the tax roll anyway. Uh, so that's kind of the process. I don't know if Sarah, if there's anything I missed that you wanted to add, but it's it's takes a long time. It's unknown what the actual outcome will be uh at the end of like a 5year period. We we hope that it's good, but you know, I think there will be progress made. It's just unfortunate that it they they probably have a window to to bring more material in if they would like. >> And if I could add one thing, too, uh he does have an attorney, so he is being consled on everything that's going on. So, he's aware of the consequences, both civil and and criminal. >> Do we have the ability to do any kind of like civil settlement agreement with them that to incent them to at least start the process? so that it's not the city driving it that at least they have an opportunity to. >> Yeah. >> So, we we kind of have that not in writing, but we've been working with them for over a year and and saying you got to start making progress. If we wanted to have something they agreed to, it just be another thing that we'd have to kind of make sure they're following, which I don't know if we feel they they would >> and then we'd just be back to square one. Um, but I think it'd be it's something to to discuss with them if if we could come up with agreement. They say, "Well, we need two years, right? If they say we need two years to clean this up," that'd be something that we could consider. Uh, it's been this way for 30 years. So, uh, if we have to wait two years for it to get cleaned up on its own accord, I think that would be something to consider. >> I don't Not for the neighbors. >> Yeah. >> I I think it needs to get cleaned up. >> Yeah. >> Someone bought the property, they could clean that up really quick. So, I I mean, I want to I want to help them. I really do. I I'd spend a day making phone calls trying to find some way to mitigate the cost of that, but and I feel terrible because he's an elderly gentleman, but at two years, no. No way. >> Well, and I don't think they've made any attempt to clean it up. Like, they they haven't started hauling stuff away since this has been brought up. They're they there's they don't appear to care. So, it's not like they're slowly hauling it away and it's like, "Okay, it's just taking longer than expected." Like, they're not. And the one neighbor who was here last time said it's getting worse. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> Is the uh county involved? Is it because uh they tax taxes come from them or they send out tax base? >> Correct. Yep. That's our mechanism to recoup those costs. Is this through the through our tax process? So they really end up owning the property then if if the people default on paying and that's why then we don't have a say in selling the property. So >> essentially so they're kind of the um steward of the of the property once it hits forfeite and then they have the the responsibility of moving that hopefully getting it back on the tax roll. So they're kind of the intermediate. it's in it's in their best interest to get it on the tax roll as well because then now you're collecting taxes um for the community. >> But if it's been cleaned up um a 10 what is it? How many acres? >> 10 acres. >> 10 acres. It's a 10 acre parcel in Minitrista. 10 acre parcel goes for what? 350 400. >> It's assessed at 3428. >> So 350 next year is 3433. >> Yeah. So >> they bought her for $69,000 in 1978. >> Yeah. So, what I'm saying is if if it's cleaned up, yes, they could bring more stuff on, but if it's cleaned up and they don't pay the the 100,000, let's just say, um, then it could be sold and it could be sold for 350,000 or >> it's cleaned up. Nobody's going to buy it. I mean, like this. >> Oh, no. >> So, we would actually be doing them a favor. >> Yeah. But we're loan we're spending a lot of money to get it back in four years or something, you know. >> Yeah. >> But I think it's our responsibility to >> Yeah, you're right. >> You know, like you're saying with the neighbors and >> the city in general. >> Okay. >> So, next step or >> what we could do is bring a um a nuisance declaration resolution on the first. That would be a business item. And then also we could have the the um abatement order drafted up. I know Sarah has a template for that. And then that's essentially allows at some point in time describe how it's described in the abatement order. Allows us to get an administrative search warrant to access the site and then then we would be able to do it. So think about terms, timelines, things like that as far as what you want to put in the abatement order. Uh likely it'd be probably executing the abatement order. You could do it that night if you wanted or you could do it, you know, get the terms and bring it to the next meeting. So, kind think about like your time, your window that you want to see something completed. If it's two weeks, if it's a month, if it's you, >> you mean having it abated? >> Yes. >> Okay. I mean, >> just uh curious too if how much liability are we taking on if we do abate it? So, say we get there and find there's a bunch of waste oil been dumped on or some other super fund. Is the city on the hook to clean that kind of stuff up? >> Right now, it's strictly nuisance based, so it's aesthetics. Uh the environmental stuff is is something that would likely get worked out if there would be a land sale where hopefully somebody would do their due diligence and and do an environmental assessment of the property, but not that I'm aware of. I know Sarah turned her camera on. Maybe she's got something else to add. >> Sarah. >> Um Madame Mayor, members of the council, I don't have much. Um, just to clarify the process, um, we would be, I mean, this is a huge cleanup effort. So, um, we would want to make sure we bring in action in court that would allow us to evade it and get on the property before we because I mean, our ordinance actually says we can just go on the property and start taking stuff away. And I would not recommend that. I think we need a a court order to allow for that. So, once you authorize the abatement, um, we would serve that on him. And then if he doesn't respond or doesn't clean it up within the requisite amount of time that you give him, then we would bring a court action to basically ask for an order that would allow us to go on the property and abate the the nuisance. And then, you know, that way he can't say we went on the property illegally and we took things that we shouldn't have taken. And um you know, it gives the city some protection. >> Okay. So Sarah, then in your opinion, what would be a reasonable time frame? Like if we um notify him, let's just say after the uh June 1st meeting and we say you have to have it um abated by August 1st, is that a reasonable time frame? >> I I don't know. I mean, I saw the video. >> I mean, but then you don't want to give them too much time. I think you kind of want him to be feel some pressure, >> right? So, I don't know if 90 days maybe. I mean, obviously we can negotiate. Let's say he does respond to it and say, >> you know, I'd like more time then we can talk with him about that. >> Absolutely. >> You can they know they've known forever we want this clean. I don't think we need to give them that much time. They know. >> But you need to hire a huge >> I know. But but now but but when we've been saying, you know, you need to clean it up. You need to clean it up. And they know that. But now with this abatement order, it's like you have to have it cleaned up by this date. Otherwise, we're coming in. >> Yeah, they've got big trucks. It doesn't take 3 months to bring that up. >> Well, I guess the timing depending on when if we'd want something on the property taxes for next year would almost have to be notification of this is going to be certified. That's got to happen by September, October. Also, just I guess as an FYI, if we want it to be like, you know, a lean or money against the property, it would have to happen by late summer, fall here, the the proper notifications and stuff to >> Okay, Madame Mayor. >> Yeah, >> Madame Mayor, members of the council, um, one other thing I'd like to point out is I mean, this is going to have to go through the court process and you kind of just finish this up with somebody else and it's going to take some time. >> Okay. >> You're budgeting for it for >> It doesn't have to go through the court process. It might though is what I think Sarah's saying. >> Um, he's got an attorney there to fight it. >> Okay. So, >> I would say I would say August 1st at the earliest or that's not even I mean that would be 6 weeks because if we meet on the 1st, we send them to notice. How long does that take? Um, another week or so. So, we're talking mid mid June and they've been given a date of August 1st. for no later than August 1st. >> Brian, >> concur. >> Okay. >> Seems pretty short to me, but >> they've known. >> Okay. How many are for August 1st? How many are for a uh September 1st? >> I'm for August 1. >> August. All right. There you go. >> Three against one. August 1st. That's the time. >> And uh >> we'll go from there. >> Lot of stuff. Look, I'll work with Sarah to get those things drafted up for the meeting on the >> first first. Okay. For the June 1st for our meeting. Okay. Okay. >> Anything else? >> All right. >> I think I do. >> Next, we'll move on to utility billing process and analysis. >> Yeah. Madame Mayor, members of city council. There's been a a lot of information shared on this topic uh both in the packet and then some subsequent emails that went out uh today and a little bit on Friday, too. So I think what we're what we're looking at for staff direction or we're looking for with staff direction is just how to proceed with this this item related to the outsourcing versus the internal printing of printing and mailing of bills. So I'll stand for questions. We have Brian here as well who's been kind of leading the project. >> Okay. Brian, do you have anything you want to add? >> Um not too much. I guess I I shouldn't miss too many meetings. No, I'm kidding. I was I was at a band concert for my daughter, her last one. So, it's it's a tough week or no, I was going to say she graduates Friday. So, hopefully I won't be too emotional. It's my baby girl. >> So, >> so that's where I was at last a couple weeks ago. So, I know I'm not as Yeah. tough as I look, right? Or sometime. >> So, I mean, yeah, I guess it um maybe to piggyback on Jaspers, I guess we've like done a fair analysis of the process. Um, you know, we're obviously not asking for any additional staff at this time or anything. We I think we'd all concur or that there's going to be some extra time in the utility billing process with going from monthly to or quarterly to monthly for the water users um just based on just that many more touch points and that many more um bills and you know back and forth with our residents I guess and good back and forth I guess there just probably a lot of questions and and stuff. So, um I guess when I compare it to other things that we um analyze sometimes if there's something that we can potentially outsource and make a little more streamlined or let's you know a company that does it more often more frequently can do it at a better um cost or price point. Um, I guess to me the decision seems like pretty um, logical to go with contracting with infosen to help with this, you know, small part of the utility billing process and going to that monthly change. So, >> okay, >> I'll leave it at that. >> And is it actually going to cost us less to go with info? I think they have fewer I mean their cost is a little bit less. Yeah, I think just economies of scale and stuff, it is it is a a better cost as well as probably a >> you know, just they have they're doing it all the time, you know, they can they they've promised they can turn it around within usually a day, you know, day or two or whatever once they get the uh whatever file, either a CSV or PDF file. >> Um we've contacted uh talked to New Brighton and Anoka and they both were happy with the uh the service they get from them. I mean, we've talked to some other people and they said, "Don't use Opus or, you know, there's been some things we've learned in the process as far as who not to use." Um, we talked to uh um Greater Minnesota Communications who we outsource our, you know, newsletter printing process, the local one. I know they do like more like smaller cities. I think like Watertown and, you know, my city mayor and Winston and stuff and they were a higher price point and plus not as quick a turnaround. They were more like, well, we'll get it out in three or four days, I guess, is what >> Yeah. See, that's my concern. getting it out timely um because people expect to get their bills on time and then also um making sure that they're accurate and I know that there's some um that they would want um enough time ahead to do a um practice run kind of thing. >> Yeah. I mean which basically um they said it's going to be probably you know a two and a half 3 month process to get everything you know coordinated you know hopefully closer to the two two and a half than three months but I know Rene's you know spoken with them and and uh they there is some you know back and forth and getting it set up so that's where there's some timeliness of hopefully being able to uh let you know them know you know sooner rather than later hopefully you know tomorrow that we can proceed. Um, so that's I guess why we're obviously looking for a >> okay an answer for that as well. >> What kind of excuse me, what kind of access would u we have to their system? Uh, so say if somebody's questioning their bill, um, you know, we would have the raw data, I would. >> Yeah, it's all our data. All they're pretty much helping us do is just disseminate and get the, you know, sort, you know, postage and and get them out. It's going to be pretty much, you know, staff, you know, mainly Renee is still going to be working with um the residents with I mean, it's generated by, you know, obviously public works getting the reads and getting it coordinating with, you know, finance and, you know, mainly Renee and getting them out. So, yeah, it's not like we're out off going to lose any customer service or whatever by by outsourcing it pretty much is >> and and all the data will live here at city hall. So, okay. And I saw a lot of uh discussion of the um hours that uh staff would take with you know different with this approach or say bringing it in house but I didn't see what the hourly cost would be and maybe I missed that but >> u roughly staff time what would that equate per hour? Yeah, just just for the outsourcing piece, we estimated it'd be about 8 hours to do the printing and and stuffing if we had the proper machine, you know, the proper stuffer. So about eight hours every month is what this portion is is what that cost. >> Oh, dollars. Um, so let's see. 45 the average the cost is 45 time 8. So whatever that is. Um, I can do that quick. >> 360. >> 360. So, $360. >> Okay. So, outsourcing it, we'd still have roughly eight hours of of cost u uh for staff time. But >> no, we wouldn't have those eight hours. >> We we would still have we'd still have staff time, but we wouldn't have the eight hours of staff time to to print and fold and mail. Well, they wouldn't. >> But how much time um I thought it was Well, how much time will u will the staff time be if we outsource it? Because there still be some >> they'll still have to do everything besides print it and put it in the machine to fold it and put it in the envelope. So, all the other stuff >> will still be staff time. Collecting the info, putting it in the system, putting it in the spreadsheet, all of that would still be >> that was the question of how much time is that? and kind of try to get a dollar figure there. >> Yeah. So, it's the net difference between what we do quarterly versus what I think we'll do in monthly, which we don't exactly know cuz we haven't done it yet. It's like 672 hours is the annually. >> That's the difference. >> That's the difference between quarterly to monthly is what we're estimating. Um, and a portion of that that 8 hours or that'd be 96 hours a year is related to the the stuffing of the envelopes and printing. So, kind of a small part. Most of it is customer service. People emailing and calling. Um, and right now just, you know, just quarterly we're getting about or we I don't I don't take many of these unless it escalates, but Renee and the team up front take about 40 hours every time we send out a bill in customer service questions and emails and things of of that nature. Um, we're estimating that that's probably going to go up every time with the with the at least at first with the monthly bill because of a lot of questions and um more information. And they're going to be there's always going to be a little confusion. Uh so we that should go down to maybe 40 hours every every month, but that's still a significant that's the most significant portion of of our staff time for this processing. >> So basically we're trying to outsource the most painful part of the process. So, I guess there's going to be an additional hours based on just going to monthly or quarterly, but it's like the part just for finishing it off with printing and stuff that's going to come around 12 months instead of four now. And we're going to be doing sheets of paper versus postcards and stuff. I guess when we looked at it, it was more efficient, more cost effective to outsource a slice of the process than do the whole thing inhouse. That's I guess what I would boil it down to. We're sort of getting into 600 hours versus, you know, is it 100 hours of the 600? We're making this a little more complicated, I think, than it needs to be. I mean, just I'm I'm trying to be, you know, I'm trying to just keep this matter of fact and logical. We're just trying to help our staff be as efficient as possible. And it's still going to and they're able to obtain a better rate for finishing off the process than we are internally. So that's >> But the other thing that you're missing is the redundancy. We have no redundancy. So if Renee is sick and then then let's say she or she has or she's not able to do this then then we have to have other staff people step in and then they're they're having to do double duty so to speak and and then if the machine breaks down and then you have to wait a couple days for it to get fixed. All of those things we don't have that redundancy and that's that's a big issue. Plus, if they can do it cheaper, if they can do that last step with the last step is what we're asking them, what we're looking at for outsourcing. That last step, they can do cheaper than we can do in house. >> It's cheaper than let's do it. >> Yeah. We don't know that it's cheaper because we haven't done it. We don't know what the actual costs are. We don't know how many people will sign up for paperless billing. And apparently, even if they sign up now, they still have to resign up. So, we have no idea how many bills will actually need to be printed. We have no idea the time. >> We're not even trying it. We're just outsourcing staff's jobs. >> That's not their job though currently to do it on a monthly basis. And that's what's creating this this need to outsource it. And in the future, even if we did it quarter, continue to do it quarterly. We still might want to outsource it because it's still cheaper to do this portion. >> Just outsource all billing. >> That's what we're doing. >> No, everything. >> Ask Mound how that went. Call the city of Mound and ask how that's going for them. Yeah, >> it's not going well. >> I just think, you know, and here's the other thing. We're looking at we're I look to staff and I say, "Okay, tell us what you need." >> They didn't tell us what they needed. They did this, stuck it on a consent agenda item without council approval and now want us to approve it. They didn't tell us. They didn't come to us and say, "This is what's going to happen. This is the issues. We've looked at this. We've looked at this. We investigated this." One of the quotes we got, they requested on the 16th. So, here's >> that's not okay. And my issue, >> but I'm not going to I'm not going to sit here. Okay, here's the thing. They've done their homework and it's in front of us here. It's in our packet and the homework says and the the numbers say it's cheaper to outsource it. That's that's the fact. That's not whether they did something before or didn't do something. The fact today is here are the numbers. Here's the facts here. It's cheaper to outsource this. We don't have the redundancy. We don't have the capacity unless we want to maybe pay overtime, do this, do that, do a whole bunch of other things. So, I'm not going to get mad about something that maybe they thought they should have done, but they didn't or they they did something that they maybe you thought they shouldn't have done. Either way, I just look at this. I look at the stats. I look at the numbers and I say it makes no sense to do it in house. I'm not going to spend more tax dollars or more money from the water people than we have to. And that's what we would have to do. >> So, you're just going to blindly sign a contract without even trying for staff to do it? >> That's correct. Madame Mayor, can we incentivize our residents to sign some way to sign up for paperless billing? Is there a way to do that? >> There might be. But um I think too when you think about there's only about 20% of people that have been you know inundated with sign up for paperless billing, sign up for paperless billing. Not everybody does it and not everybody wants even if they sign up they like to get their paper bill for some reason or other. So even if we say okay 20% is are going to sign up for paperless billing even if it's 30% or 40%. we still have to outsource or we still have to send out paper bills, >> right? But I wonder like since we're if we agree to use this process, could we have a note on there saying, you know, you save $12 a year if you >> and we could look at something like >> a little note on there and then wouldn't it be great if after you know x at three years everyone signed up and then we can terminate them, >> right? And we can >> Is that just a crazy thought? >> If if I may. Yeah. Um I've done this in the past where you've done like a $10 bill credit. If you sign up for paperless, you've maybe seen it on some of your other bills that you've gotten. We could we could examine doing that. It does get some additional participation. Um ideally, if we can get 35 to 40%, that's about that's about as good as it gets. If we can get more than that, that's excellent. Um I think I alluded in one of the one of the correspondents that I I live in Savage. I talked to Savage today and um they've been doing paperless opt outs for 15 years and they're at 20%. And every single bill I get, I I have paperless, but every bill I see when I in my email tells you exactly how to do it. And we'll we'll continue to do that. We'll have that on the back side of the of the bills if we go with the the outsourcing or in in in-house processing. I just think if you had a little red asterric and red sentence at the bottom that said, you know, in January you'll get >> $12 off your bill if you sign up for paper. It's a dollar a month and it's about probably what it costs and >> and we can and that's not a bad idea. >> It's a sentence on the bottom of the bill, you know, >> I don't know, just a thought. >> If if that's something we'd like to do, we can we can definitely market it >> and we're going to market try and market this to, you know, sign up for paperless. It's um >> I think we have to trust. >> But we're also a growing >> cheaper. It's cheaper, >> but we're also a growing community. >> Is it cheaper or not cheaper? >> It is cheaper. >> Yeah. >> Do it for a living. This company does it for >> it's economies of scale. It's >> Yeah, >> it is. I mean, I just wish Well, I was going to say >> Brian does not Brian that Brian that Brian G um does not recommend things spending more money, he's always like, "No, we can spend less." So, when he recommends something to me, that's that says a lot. >> I want to be tied with him on that. >> Okay. Okay. I wish you would have looked more at conservation and and if we wanted to try to manage what residents uh you know we we signed a $20 million contract and we had more less discussion on that than we're having. >> Exactly. Exactly. I guess yeah >> I mean we're we're working on a $28 million um water treatment plant and we're we're talking about a savings of what? $6,000. >> Yeah. Basically 20 cents per whatever mailing or whatever it is. >> You shouldn't word it like that. That's what it is though. >> That's not what it is. >> What is it then? >> Okay. Well, where are the five where where is reaching out to other companies and finding out who else does this? Where where was that? >> Because the only quote that I saw other than this info one was the one that you requested on the 16th. So why didn't we reach out to other companies? Why didn't we do more research? Why wasn't it brought back with multiple quote packages saying here's what this company can do. Here's what this company can do. Here's what this is going to cost. Here's what this is going to cost. So, you can keep saying it's going to save money, and it might, but the background and the due diligence that should have been done before this was brought to council was not done, and I want to believe that it will save money because I do think you watch our money very, very closely. But I don't feel that way, especially now when I can break apart all the line items of things that are in there quite easily, and you just respond, I don't agree with that. So, to me, I don't feel confident saying this is going to save us money. >> We we've spent a lot of time on this. Yes, since the 4th. >> Let I'm sorry. Let one person at a time. Let >> all of the quotes that we got I'm not sure where you're getting this, but Brian's team has been working on this since March and they've been in communication with the the infoend greater Minnesota since March. So, we've been talking to them. They they've met with them. They've done the brunt of the work. So, I don't I don't know where that's coming from. >> I'm looking at the date on the email I got today for the quote. Oh. Um, >> from March 19th, I guess. >> All right. >> From >> So, you're not upset about the cost, you're upset about the process. So, here's the thing. If we want to get this thing done this year and we want to save some money, this is this is what staff is recommending. They're not going to recommend this if it's not a good deal. And they're not going to recommend it if it's something we don't need. And that's, you know, so we can we can but we can argue about the process. We can, you know, all you want and maybe that needs to be a discussion that you need to have with staff um off camera so you can battle it out. But today our charge is do we want to do this or not? That's the question. That's the question. Do we want to outsource this or not? And we can't sit here and keep arguing about the process because we're we're not going to get anywhere. And it's it's staff is telling us they've looked at other vendors and this is the one that they think is the best and it can save us $6,000 a year. So I I'm I'm just I'm baffled as to why this isn't a good thing. So that's where I'm coming from. Peter, >> I think it makes sense. uh because u uh you know when I think of office you know the problems we always had was with a printer or with mailings and you know those were the things that always caused trouble and so I really like the idea of having somebody else have to deal with that technology and they just provide the product to us. So I like that and I like that it it seems incredibly inexpensive to me and it and it frees up staff time. So, I I think it's a really good idea. >> Okay, Claudia, I guess what I'm maybe hearing uh Kathleen say is that we didn't see all of the other organizations that offer this service. We left that up to you and you did your due diligence and you came back with this is the best option. Um, I have to believe that you're used to looking at these things more than I am and that you would make the best choice and you want to spend less money. So, just as I do, so I understand not having all the information in front of us, but I do trust that the staff can evaluate what's the best route. So, >> okay, Brian. Yeah, looking at the analysis, uh, I mean, the math is the math. The only part that I think is probably not really tied down tightly would be the staff time, but even if you back out that to zero, it's still 20 cents cheaper per billing to uh, outsource it. So, I'm aligned with that. >> All right. All right. So it sounds like we're in line with bringing this back >> to this meet to the regular meeting if we can add it so we could do the the contract that was in the packet from two weeks ago with info send I guess if that would be amanable to the council. >> Okay. So we'll bring that back to our regular meeting. Do you want it under business item? >> That's fine. >> Yes. >> All right. Business item in in the bean in in between time then you'll type something a resolution or whatever. >> Okay. All right. And then we have an update on the Boulevard tree replacement in Huntress Crest and discuss potential cost share for replacement of ash tree removal. >> Madame Mayor, we could we can punt this to another work session too if we if we want to wrap it up or we can >> it's up to you. >> Well, let's do it. Let's get it over with. >> Okay. >> All right. >> A shorter break. >> Yeah. Allison is leading the charge on this. >> I can be very brief. Uh, Mayor Whan, members of the council's uh, public works staff has been removing dead ash trees um, throughout the winter and they recently were in the Hunter Crest neighborhood and some of the trees removed are within the boulevard and so um, in anticipation of some residents per calling in. They have, to my knowledge, they haven't yet. Um but uh we just wanted to bring this to council's attention um in the event that uh staff is approached with a by a resident or a homeowners association requesting a tree replacement if that's something that the council would like um staff to look into. Um I was looking at um just to give you an idea of what it costs to for a replacement tree. um back from a a previous street project. Um we are looking at about $600 each. Um so if council's amanable or wants more information, I can certainly provide it to you. Um one of the things that we would like direction on from the council ultimately if if council is interested in replacing some of the trees, do you want them replaced one? Each one removed gets replaced uh 2:1 is it as needed? Um, so just again just wanted to bring it in front of council, let you know what's going on. Again, we haven't heard any feedback, but we just anticipate with the ash trees going down as they are that we will likely get a call from a resident or homeowners association. >> I think we replace as requested by a homeowner within reason. >> We're going to take them, we're going to remove them if they're dead, right? I mean, so that's our responsibility. It's a matter of whether or not we replace it. And so if a resident would like it replaced, then I think there could be a cost share. >> Okay. >> Maybe a 50/50. >> I'm just throwing >> They might not want a tree there. >> Yeah. I mean, we can Yeah. >> Is are there any grants available from the state or the DNR? >> There are from Henipin County. >> Yep. There are. And we can certainly look into that as well if that's something that the council would like to. >> Yeah. And so a suggestion then to could be is that is if we start getting requests um we could start tracking those come back to council with you know what we're starting to hear. Um one of the things that public works did mention is if we are looking at a tree replacement that it would not be within the right of way that it would be on the property uh a private property so it becomes their ownership and responsibility not the cities. >> So if so we can >> all the better. Sounds like Gary. >> Ma, Madame Mayor, if I may, we did apply for Henipin County Tree Grant uh earlier this spring, but we were denied. >> Why? We need to talk to them. Okay. All right. Um I think there's certain Well, anyhow, I'll I'll talk to staff about that because I think that they have a lot of money for trees and not a lot of people are applying. So, I'm not sure why we were denied >> there. If I may, there are a lot of people that are applying because this is this is a common >> problem in most municipalities that planted a lot of ash trees 20 to 30. >> I mean, we have a healthy tree budget. So, I mean, if they call and want the tree replaced, >> then we put it on their property. Yeah. >> Um so, so if I may, mayor and and council, um an option is is to just if we start getting those requests, say at this time, we don't have an official policy, but we are tracking the requests and that once we get I don't know, maybe 10, yeah, 10 requests that we come back to council and say this is what we've heard so far. And it would also be an opportunity to update the council um where public works is at as far as ash ash tree removal um so that you know you know are they are they done for the year um because there are certain dates that I believe you don't do tree clearing anymore. >> You can do tree clearing anytime during the year but you just don't want to plant them correct anytime. So okay yeah come back with that. >> Okay. All right, that concludes our work session items. Um, is there is a motion to adjurnn? We can be adjourned until 6:30. >> So moved. >> Thank you. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Thank you, Peter. All those in favor signify with I >> I. >> All those opposed. Motion passes. I vote. We'll >> reconvene at 6:30 for our regular >> council meeting. Oh, yeah. Here. All right.