I'll call the um meeting of the Roseville city council to order March 17th it's 6m and uh Pat TR will you call the RO please council member Bower here council member schroer here AC mayor gra here mayor row council member St thank you and may Arrow said he would be absent this evening as did uh council member St um first on the agenda um I would like to introduce our City attorney Rachel tiany on my right at the end of the Das Das and on my left is Pat trudon our city manager and we have various uh department heads in the audience the first thing we will do is say the Pledge of Allegiance so if you are willing and able stand pledge Al to the flag United States of America and to the it stands one nation indivisible liy and justice for all next item is to approve the agenda are there any items to be removed from the agenda by the by the staff or are there any no no nothing no changes acting mayor is there anything from the council Robin yes um remember short yes I'd like to um pull um item F the scoreboard and that's under e under 10 yep okay we will move that up that was on the consent agenda so that will be put up under item six when we consider items that are removed from the consent agenda I might have to be reminded of that okay is there anything else any other changes hearing n I would entertain a motion to approve so move second any discussion on it all those in favor say I I opposed we have an agenda for this evening and we have public comment is there anyone from the public who would like to comment on something that is not on the agenda tonight I'll ask one more time is there anyone from the public who would want to comment on anything that is not on the agenda tonight seeing no one we will move on to the next item which is recognitions and donations and we will have our Parks and Rec director Matt Johnson present that item thank you acting mayor and Council uh acting mayor that throws off the whole preparation doesn't it um I'm here tonight with really an exciting uh couple of items here um and that is to accept some extremely generous donations um from folks in our community to an important Capital project that we are planning on the one council member shorter just talked about which is the replacement of the scoreboard at the John Rose Minnesota ovil um that is an extremely important part of our infrastructure over there it's used by all of our different user groups um many of them have their own volunteers trained to utilize it for their specific events and activities so as we moved forward um kind of mobilizing towards the replacement um we reached out to each of our user groups to find out what it was that they needed in the scoreboard and to make sure that we were meeting their needs over the course of those conversations uh a couple of them came forward U most notably uh to begin with the um excuse me the friends friends of the oval foundation and have proposed um donation of $40,000 to really allow us to go forward above and beyond what the city was capable of doing on its own um to create to donate to a higher definition scoreboard and a slightly larger scoreboard than we were planning on as a reminder the friends of the oval Foundation is one of our three foundations that really exist to support our activities at the oval in addition to contributing regularly to our capital projects they also annually contribute to our operating budget through an annual donation so they're great Partners there and we couldn't do our great work at the oval without them the other group that came forward and expressed an interest in supporting it and has now donated $56,000 to the project is the Midway speed skating Club the Midway speed skating Club is one of the largest speed skating clubs in the United States they do offer a worldclass speed skating experience right here in the Twin Cities and a lot of their club members are Roseville residents they also are largest ice renter over at the oval um a larger scoreboard will benefit their operations it'll make it easier to read times when we hold our larger events they're currently actually renting aboard when they have larger events so it really will impact them positively and because of that they have contributed $56,000 to the project combined total of the two donations is $96,000 um I should add that really our entire um oval Community will benefit from these projects whether it's Bandy hockey public skating summer programs if you're there for a summer movie it's going to be such a better experience because of this um and so we are really really grateful for these donations um and they do really uh it is a great way to highlight how Roseville continues to come forward to support these outstanding projects and um with that as staff we're certainly recommending um acceptance of the donations and we do have resolutions in the packets so I'll turn it back to you acting mayor thank you very much M Mr Johnson um is there anyone from the public who wants to comment on this seeing no one we'll move on is there any discussion from the council council member Schroeder I just want to say I think this is great that we have such um these organizations to help out like this and to have that kind of donation come forward to to a project like this I just wanted to make sure and thank the organizations and say this is really awesome so that's all I wanted to say thank you council member bow second with council member shter estate also wanted to State I just think how wonderful it is working having the city work with residents and with groups like this to come together through a common solution uh that does benefit everyone and I would Echo those comments I think it's we're very fortunate in Roseville to have the active uh groups that support our different this the police foundation there's several of them for Parks they uh do a lot of work that makes it possible for us to do more in the city than we could on our on our general budget um is there any other discussion otherwise we could have a motion so move second moved by council member schroer I got to make my notes Here there are two resolutions is that for both resolutions or just yes it's for both yep do you agree with that I agree with that any further discussion if not I we call for the vote all those in favor say I I I opposed thank you is there anything else we needed on that Mr Tre nope that should B it thank you next item on the the agenda is to um is our Arbor Day so every year we have a proclamation on April 25th is Arbor Day and we have a proclamation to read and then we'll discuss it um whereas roseville's tree trees have been a significant element of our community because of their beauty and importance to our environment and whereas trees are an increasingly vital resource for Roseville enriching our lives by purifying air and water helping to conserve soil and energy in serving as recreational settings and wildlife habitat of all kinds and whereas activities such as construction damage and pollution as well as drought and disease have damaged and destroyed many trees which are therefore in need of replacement and whereas the City of Roseville seeks to positively impact our environment by planting trees and ensuring that these trees are nurtured and protected and whereas trees in our city increase property values enhance the economic Vitality of business areas and the beauty of and beautify our community and whereas trees wherever they are planted are a source of joy and spiritual renewal and whereas trees assist with drainage and flood mitigation and reduce City costs for sewer and water treatment and whereas everyone is encouraged to care for our trees and plant as as many trees as possible now therefore be it resolved that the city of city council hereby declare April 25th 20125 as Arbor Day in the City of Roseville County of Ramsey city state of Minnesota USA do I hear a motion for that Proclamation so moved second moved by council member Bow seconded by council member schroer call for a vote on that all those in favor say I I I opposed that carries item six thank you so we are to the one that was removed from the consent agenda and it is was it number F yes the um scoreboard scoreboard mhm I'm just going to page back to it so I have it referenced mhm and you can go ahead and discuss it I guess okay thank you um actually I'm in support of this I just wanted to point out a few Corrections on this um that I believe the council um just needs to be aware of um first of all this some small things on on the original um uh our uh request for Council action underneath budget implications um the first paragraph it talks about the um Capital Improvement fund of 233,000 that should actually be 223 okay so there's a correction of 10,000 there Y and then in the actual um agreement um this is um and I don't know if we need to have this corrected before we vote on it or not that's why I wanted to pull it forward if you look under the um the the agreement you have the under number three the contract price is 34,500 and then under the payment procedures which is number four when you add up those payments it's $3,550 $539 so the payments doesn't equal the contract amount and so it it needs to be corrected so which one is the correct amount were you to the three the 300 and4 500 so the the contract price is correct but the payments seem to be off so I'm not sure what the procedure would be in the contract oh Mr Johnson come up I think we should not it's part of the motion of entering in the agreement what that correct amount is but Mr Johnson can talk we we would not pay beyond that total amount apps in a change order so um what it amounts to is that was retainage and a lot of numbers moving around at the end of the day and so um we can either strike that we which we would do prior to having the vendor sign it okay um and just have the total contract amount but regardless we as the city would not award more than that total contract I just think it'd be important that they um equal each other so before it gets signed I think it would some it needs to be where however it needs to be adjusted we can do that so I guess what you know it when we move to approve I would say once it's corrected might be the wording on that absolutely and that and then my final question and I'm glad you're up here thank you you can ask on the um exhibit two there's a chart on the a summary and um the only I just have a question on if you um are looking at the columns across it looks like the total committed doesn't equal that 300 359 500 but it's the total of the quoted total and I just want to make sure that that's maybe that to the quoted total is a separate correct piece from The Columns that are in here yeah so I'm I'm shooting from memory here so I'm going to pull it up the exhibit but um what it is is what is in there is there is a quote that we received related to sound system updates which they essentially had informed us this would be the time to do it we have not committed to doing that work um we're holding back funds for contingency first and foremost so it would it's on the budget but not actually any sort of commitment to doing the work it was just on there as our overall candid I probably should have struck it before it went to you all it's an internal document but um that's yes the so the total committed which is really if you add it up is 334,000 um the total well and that includes the contingency which actually is not committed right right so should it be um so that's that's why I'm wondering should that be 300 well the the total that's committed will be 34,500 um we include the contingency for note just to ensure that the council knows that by coming forward with that that doesn't necessarily mean we're done if there is contingency items we wanted to hold that back so that 5% construction contingency was intentionally left in there for potential change orders okay which um we've been notified of two potential things that could come in but okay if we thought there was a high probability we would have included them in the contract okay yeah because I got confused by that yeah no it's it's I lesson learned I'll be more clear on those charts thank you yeah though and like I said those are just the items I wanted to bring forward thank you for the clarification anything else Mr B nothing else acting mayor uh are we able to vote on that one yes so I would suggest the motion would be to enter into an agreement with think digital LLC for the purchase installation and training of a new scoreboard at the oval for a cost not to exceed $34,500 make it very clear yeah someone willing to to make that motion I would move um with that motion so I don't have to repeat it okay is there a second second any further discussion all those in favor say I hi hi thank you thank you we'll go back to our agenda so we would at this time we'll uh receive information is our guest here yet I wonder uh AC mayor I do not see the representative from representative mcc's office um perhaps he is running late uh I would mention that it was just information sharing about uh some potential uh funding Community Project funding for projects um for uh cities that potentially could apply it I would note that nothing has been decided for fiscal year 202 so it's still uncertain on that but I think the office just wanted to make us aware of that information for any potential projects we may have and there probably more to come uh as as it develops as far as whether or not it's going to happen in the future so I think that's all he really wanted to share so uh with that and I'd be happy to share other information if I get from him um at a later date and if they should be just running late we can add it into later on the agenda y thank you Mr Tron next we will consider adoption of an ordinance implementing the Roseville local sales tax and Mr trudon will go over that for us thank you acting mayor um so as we've discussed several times we need to adopt an ordinance to officially implement the local sales tax as a refresher on November 5th 2024 there are two questions on the ballot for our residents to vote on one was to Institute a 05% sales tax for maintenance operations center and a second one for the license center as you all well know uh question for the m as operations center sales tax did pass the license center did not we have discussed the uh implementation of this ordinance several times most recently at the end of H February and the council indicated that we should bring forward for adoption the implementation of the sales tax for the maintenance Operation Center we need to do that before April 1st in order for it to be effective starting July 1st 2025 so in front of you tonight is an order is drafted by our City attorney that uh complies with all legal requirements that the Department of Revenue needs so we ask for your um approval of that would also note in the staff report we did ask for uh approval of a summary ordinance so we could publish a shorter version of that ordinance that requires uh super majority since we only have three members tonight we cannot vote on that so I would ask the city council to vote on the regular ordinance and then what we will do is we'll bring back the summary ordinance at our meeting next Monday the 24th on the consent agenda for the council to officially approve that the reason we do the summary ordinance is because uh it's shorter to publish in the newspaper and saves the city dollars in publishing in the St Paul Pioneer Press so with that I'll be happy to answer any questions and like I said we're looking for adoption of the ordinance tonight are there any questions from Council is there anyone from the public who wants to speak to this item seeing no one um any further discussion on the I think we've talked about it yes it has been discussed several times so I agree um well then I would entertain a motion only for the first part is motion to adopt the ordinance to implement the local sales tax for Roseville so moved second any further discussion if not all in favor say I I I opposed that motion carries and then we will as the uh city manager said we will um do the summary next week at the city council meeting we will still come in before our April 1st deadline so we can notify the state next we have Mr freyhammer from the public works director and he will be presenting uh proposal agreement for the architectural services and we can discuss that further as we talk about that thank you Mr uh thank you acting mayor and councel so um bringing back this item before you um we did discuss this uh back at the February 10th meeting about releasing RFP kind of to take a step back and and look at different options for particular the license uh passport center and dance studio um so with that I'll do a real quick presentation and uh show you our recommendations for uh that those services so as I mentioned um at February 10th we did release the RFP or had Council approv that RFP um we released that on February 11th uh they were due on March 3rd we did receive four proposals which those are all included in the packet uh so hopefully you've seen them so phase really just real quick description of what was included in that RFP so phase one um the main tasks included provide an update of the cost estimates for both the uh maintenance operations center as well as the uh Civic campus um master plan so basically everything that was in that uh predesign project just get updated costs because as you recall those costs were put together in 2022 there was a lot of inflation tied with that at the time so want to make sure we get an updated cost on that um provide a cost assessment for a single story license passport center and dance studio uh the current option in the predesign was a two-story um as well as provide feasibility options to reuse portions of the existing maintenance facility for licensed uh passport center uh dance studio use um and then there was also an option to provide uh feasibility options to reuse a portion of it for other uses such as office space restaurant or event space use um and then with that overall there would be a provider report and presentation to council um that overall goal had that presentation to uh get back to council by May 19th 2025 we did include a phase two but basically everything in the proposal is based on uh fa phase one Services um if the if Council want additional information in the future we could go into phase two to look into further options that that's kind of how that was set up so like I said we did receive four proposals uh staff um consisting of the city manager myself and the parks and rec director uh reviewed the proposals so we had proposals from Bloom Haz and dobs uh bkv HCM and wal um overall based on the uh scoring criteria in the the the RFP um the overall best total score was bkv and that's who uh staff recommended uh they were also the uh had the the lowest price base fee um and then they did also include some optional facility stuff which we'll get into in just a second so staff overall did recommend going with uh bkv group uh they did have the highest scoring proposal overall um they met all the proposal requirements uh the team consists of ortell Architects and Krauss Anderson Construction um that is also simil that uh design team was also part of the Civic campus predesign project um they had a very detailed and thoughtful schedule um meeting our requirements and and looking ahead on on how we want to move this project forward um overall they did have the best uh From staff's perspective had the best project narrative and design fee um we staff overall thought their familiar with the project was an overall benefit um even though the scope was a little different in the parameters than the predesign project um we thought they did provide good value U we did reach out to them kind of discuss maybe some concerns having the same staff look at it but um they mentioned it's very common in the industry to have new parameters uh thrown at them and then they look at it through a different lens which obviously with uh some budget concerns on the licensed passport center that's kind of what we're doing here so um so yeah otherwise um with that so staff is recommending um then they also did provide an optional Service uh bkv included optional service to complete a facility condition assessment so this is a little bit different this would actually be looking at the existing structure so for example if you kept the the shell of the building um this would really provide a cost estimate of what that how that existing shell um would look in your CIP does the roof have good um life on it what what would your future cost be because everything else would be kind of inside to remodel it but what life do you basically have left in the building so they proposed that an additional cost of $7,500 um staff overall thought if if you got if we're looking at the big picture of how how to um re uze that facility potentially that would be a good cost to know cuz um obviously you can reuse it but if you're going to have a lot of cost in 10 years to say redo the roof um I'm assuming we'd want to know that up front so with that staff would recommend uh the council approve entering into a professional service agreement with bkv for phase one Services uh including the optional facility condition assessment um so with that uh can open up to council for any questions uh that the council may have any questions council member Schroeder yes what is the age of the maintenance building so it does vary so the the latest remodel was done in 2004 so that's kind of the the offices for a lot of the admin staff over there as well as I would say the main um shop facility that was 2004 the north garage um which is on the very North End of Woodhill that's probably 1950s I don't exactly know the age but that's the oldest part and then the parks and wreck portion um that's been remodeled a few times but I believe that was built in the early' 7s so um certainly there's a part of it that's newer but there's also two very old much older parts of the building thank you ccil member B can you expand a little bit more on your scoring and what you mean by narrative yeah so each um each consultant provided kind of um how they would tackle the scope um you know what kind of details of what they would do for the individual ual tasks identified so just kind of their interpret or interpretation of our scope um overall like I said bkv was probably provided the most detail um into the narrative explaining how they what their process would be for that so overall we thought some of the other ones kind of just regurgitated the narrative um without getting into real details of how they would attack attack attack the individual tasks thank you um I assume on the 7500 if we go that route to an uh do an analysis of the existing building that would include uh checking to see if there's as bestes to be removed or other types of um I don't know if we would go into that detail um that could potentially be identified um I guess we'd have to detail that scope out yeah certainly would identify the age and condition but I think if there was something pretty evident that' stick out pretty easily but um obviously they're not going to peel up no thing but U obviously take a quick look at all the exteriors the roofs um the HVAC systems kind of the big key components that theoretically you wouldn't need to replace if or or you would just have to just modify if you convert it to a license Senter but just with that age the 50s very typical to correct potentially the the North Garage would probably be the most risk I would say um but maybe that's also the one that has the least opportunity to get remodeled um right then the other one Soul right well did you have anything [Music] else is there anyone from the public who would like to speak to this one they saying no um I think that was all the questions I had we have discussed this I did one ccil member sorry I'm a little slow here I just my that's what I was doing so the last I think my one concern about using the same firm again was we had those giant contingency numbers in there and I would want to make sure if we're if that that's not going to happen again that we'd actually have more actual estimated cost versus just this big contingency number so I think that would be important because in my view having those big contingency numbers really didn't tell us a lot and I know that was done trying to project into you know year build it in two or three years so I know that's part of it so I would hope that since we're talking about building it soon that the numbers would be much more concise that way yeah um yeah certainly we're only looking out potentially a year so that should be a lot uh tighter um obviously they know what the market is right now so which is a reason for the update so no that number should be a lot tighter there'll be some contingency on there but yeah shouldn't need to be contingency because you don't know what it's going to be like 5 years from now right thank you sorry that was it no that's okay I I did have a question they were going to consult with kuss Anderson it sounded like on that correct yeah so kuss Anderson would be one of their subc Consultants um that would be their one of their major tasks is to look at the actual construction side um KRA Anderson would also be the one doing the facility condition assessment right is there any other discussion not i' rain a motion would be a motion to approve the Professional Services agreement for architectural services with bkv Architects so moved second moved by council member B seconded by Schroeder any further discussion hearing none all those in favor say I I you can go ahead with that thank you very much Mr Fram thank you wait there's more yes well he gets to Mr fmer gets to stay here for a bit today so next we're going to the uh proposal for the um no consider water meter purchases and Mr fmer will present again uh thank you acting mayor and Council so um just a real quick background so the city uh currently has a a automatic meter reading system set up in place we did establish that back in 2010 so what that is basically is we could get theoretically kind of continuous meter readings uh one of the big advantages is it is theoretically a staff saves a lot of Staff time we don't need to go out and do the old traditional uh walk up to a meter or even do the driveby so it does save a lot of time the other key advantage of a AMR system is it um we get since we get continuous leads it does provide us the opportunity to send residents leak letters when their Waters they have toilet running so that way they don't instead of getting built quarterly uh theyd only get that once once every three quarters and all a sudden you're your bill went up with $500 because you've had a lot a toilet leak so that's some of the advantages um but our existing system and I'll get into the presentation here um we've we've had some existing issues with our system so we are looking to upgrade that so real quick about our existing meter system so we do have almost 11,000 water um meters in the system and that changes as buildings add and and houses go down of that the vast majority of are considered residential so just the the the typical 5/8 in uh meter here um so we use this both to bill for water consumption as also sanitary sewer consumption So currently we have a Neptune automatic meter reading system um this uh basically we have a radio installed and it sends uh a signal to the collectors and then we get that and we we uh take that data and uh base our utility bills based on that the current system uh Council approved back in 2010 so this system was started back in 2010 it was fully implemented back in 2015 so it took us about 5 years before we swapped out and got everyone on this system um and then to the right it's just kind of a layout of the meters uh sizes that we have so like I said the vast majority are the smaller ones we do have a couple larger ones uh the large 6inch ones we have we're actually hoping to get rid of those here shortly so hopefully the largest meter in the future will be a 4 inch actually um so radio issues so back when this was installed we went with What's called the r450 system um this system was supposed to have a pretty small failure rate it's actually had a lot of radio issues it's more of a hardware software thing uh issue but it's had a significant a lot of issues we did work with the vendor um back in 2020 we started converting these to the r900 system which was a different system we could have went with back in the day but we chose the r 450s to go with um the vendor did provide us the collectors to do that but we've been basically paying uh um a warranty upgrade to upgrade to the 900s because the 900s was considered a a newer better system at the time but we chose to go to 450s so as we've been converting them the 900s that has um solved the problem but um we still have we've only converted 30% of them over with that being said the current vendor has said the 450s is really no longer supported they're having a hard time getting parts so if we had a collector fail we'd lose those areas um the worst problem is we've replaced them randomly throughout the city so uh it's not like it's just one area isolated part of town so they've really recommended we convert to the r900 system um or look to a different vendor so most other cities who were on this previously 450 already either changed systems or upgraded so we're one of the last um so we when they brought that up to us we've started looking at what other options we had um with our current vendor our our 10-year warranty all all of our existing radios are are P their 10 year because the list would have been the last year and even them would have been on it so basically now we're going to have to pay the full upgrade price um and then just related to that we did replace most of the water meters back in 2010 um but they are starting to get near typically you you look for a 20-year design Life on um meters before you replace because as meters age they slowly start slowing down so that's literally that's less Revenue that we uh measure so it can lead to revenue loss I'm not saying there's like dramatic drop off but they do slow down over time so um so we did look into options so we met with with different vendors um and including our current vendor to look at options so option one number one that we're presenting is just upgrade our current uh radios to the r900 system kind of like we've currently been doing um we would still need to replace 70% of the radios um we potentially have to look to adding two more so one big key difference on our collector system so one key difference was the old r900 system uh one advantage of the old 450s was it gave out a longer signal than the the the the 900 so we basically replaced when they provided us four new ones we just put those in our current location but we do have potentially have a lack of coverage if we fully convert the whole system over but um currently just looking at replacing that in kind um and option A would just be to replace the meters uh at a later date more closer to the 20- year and then option b would be to replace the meters at at the same time so this is kind of laid out in both options for option b uh one of the key things is replacing meters and or radios is very impactful um we have to schedule appointments get a technician out there if we're swapping a radio swapping a meter probably only takes us 10 more minutes yeah um from prior experience both with the lead uh investigation that we did more recently as well as the meter replacement or just radial failures getting residents to schedule a time to get in their house to do a meter is uh a big pain uh can take a lot of work some residents are great send them a letter we have a meter and appointment scheduled the next next day others can take lots of letters to to get a meter um because we do need we do need to schedule a time to do that so um as you'll see later on the presentation we're recommending that we do both those for that uh kind of inconvenience as well as staff savings the other option is looking at a whole new system but uh to upgrade using what is from a v different vendor called Mueller um the new vendor their their system um is kind of a two collector system they ALS they the system they have uh does use a local collection system very similar to um our current vendor we put these collector sites out out and about they collect a signal and send them to us they also have a network as a service um that some cities also use this could be a a secondary um uh use in the future if we wanted to go to that there that is would be end up being a vendor maintained system and it also would be pay as you go we would maintain them but we'd have to pay a fee for us to send the signal out so right now we're just recommending going with the local collector but just wanted to point out that there is a secondary option in the future if say collectors became bad this system is a lot more adaptable than the current system uh the the other big key with this system it has two-way technology on the radios um that's really key because they can actually send upgrades out to the signals currently once we put a radio in a house right now that Hardware is basically the day it's put in um the new system if they found they had a software glitch or whatever we can Pro they can provide updates to the system um they have that technology for other reasons that we don't need um but it is a technology advantage over our current system so option a similar to option one would be we could replace the meters at a later date and just do the radios at this time um option b would be replace the meters at this time so we're just doing one appointment um as I mentioned be a lot less impact to Residents and then um the Muer meters also have some advantages over the existing meters which I'll get into so just a little bit of the pros and cons um obviously we can just keep going with what we're currently been doing and maybe just accelerate that which is really option a um it would be the cheapest option it does solve the the radial problem um and obviously it currently works with our existing system um some of the negatives about that would be uh the meters would need to be replaced at a later date we'd most likely be starting to schedule long-term meter replacement with residents over uh starting at about the next 5 years um and a big amount of additional staff time in terms of sending additional letters and also going out to their appointments for a second time um option two is looking to do a mu upgrade with Mueller um overall Pros staff feels this is a much more reliable system it's got a lot a lot more fail safe built into it um it is upgradeable and then um we'd be going with the collector system to start with for sure um option B replace meters at the same time as I mentioned we' recommend going this route because it saves uh impact to Residents as well as staff time um the other big thing that uh upgrading these meters are um the meters are more accurate um just a little bit of um upgrade with technology since they're newer meters um they're they measure a wider range of flows so we can actually measure down to a lower amount so we can detect lower lower leak levels so both but benefit to the resident but also theoretically we can um track actual water use a little more accurate and then another key advantage of this is we can actually measure uh temperature in the water so for us that's a real big key um we do have 200 residents that are either on tier one or tier 2 um the tier one residents we s we when we know the frost is going really deep we send them letters um if we had this system set up we could base it on their actual temp because right now we just guess um a lot of years we don't send letters out but if we know it's really cold we send letters out but once we tell them to start running water that we give them basically credit for everything that they're not using so any water they're running the city's kind of eating that cost if we had this system we'd be able to specifically say hey your water's at you know whatever threshold 37 degrees start running your water and we can do that one by one instead of sending letters to uh everyone at once um it also does provide us if we have people on our system that we're not aware of we can catch them before they get added onto the system because the only way you get added to our tier one list is you freeze so it's really an after Thea uh solution so that is one key Advantage um of measuring that and we'd be able to we basically get that reading the same time we're getting flow measurements in um obviously some of the Cons with this it is a larger cost to do all that at once um and then if we CH chose to go with option a uh it would be uh impacts to Residents twice if we decide to go to that option so real quick just on the costs uh the costs on the left are with our current vendor and the costs on the right are with our um with the Mueller vendor so the radios actually are cheaper with um the radios and meters are both both uh slightly cheaper with the the Mueller option so would be one key recommend or one key thing out based out of this and then the next kind of key is just looking at the cost comparison so uh we have both options 1 a and 1B um obviously both 1 a and 2A are the cheapest option those are looking at just doing the radios um adding 1B and 2B are with um all the other costs so the Muer one includes adding the collectors and project management as well as all the all all all the meters so overall um options 1B and 2B are very similar um but overall staff feels the advantages of going to a new system um are significantly more valuable so our recommendation would be going with the MU option so overall looking at the budgets um we we both pay for meters out of both our water and sewer budgets um most of it's in capital so a few years ago we started adding money knowing that we would need to do this so we have money set aside 2025 through 2028 as well as kind of long-term operating costs of $60,000 built into that so over the next 5 years we have just under $2.5 million um if we do go with option 2B the recommended Mueller option um there still is about $480,000 in capital that would either need to be added or we could potentially reduce uh one of the other line items in the capital like just water main or sanitary sewer Replacements um to to pick up that Gap um the other thing thing is we current the the the attachment one in the handout um shows it doing it over five a fiveyear period we actually the The Proposal they gave us was over six years so we do have a six-year cost we could also spread that out um that may actually need to happen if we go this route because um one of the reasons we need to spread this out is we are proposing to do all this with staff inh house um last time we replace meters in radios we did it mostly inhouse and then at the end we wanted to just get it done so we hired an out vendor but we' propose to do that in-house but obviously we can't go into 10,000 homes uh overnight so that's why we're sure proposing doing that over a fiveyear period but it potentially could roll into a sixth or that could be a budget reason too to spread it over six years um and then as I mentioned we could there there is a um another there's Network as a service that could be an option in the future um where this that would take the collector system off the city's hands that would be about a $44,000 cost annually but that would take that off we're not proposing that at this time so overall as I kind of mentioned before uh staff would recommend going with the Mueller system and replace radios and meters at the same time um basically approve entering into a purchase order with Mueller for purchase of radios and meters this basically locks in the pricing for six years um it does allow us flexibility if we you know we we kind of in that uh handout one we kind of showed what we think we could do but certainly if we can't uh do that or or or other priorities change we could we could delay that or accelerate that too as well um but we'd have we'd have the pricing locked in um overall this would allow for complete radio and meter replacement over six next six to seven years um as I mentioned allow staff to spread the work out as we'd be doing this inhouse um like I said one key thing we feel is be way less impact to Residents as well as save significant staff Time by doing it all at one install um and then we would have by the end of the replacement schedule most of the meters would are be already approaching the end of their life cycle so it lines up it's a little bit earlier than we would like but um if we need to do the radios it it seems uh logical to do it all at once so with that uh staff would recommend consider the six-year proposal to implement the Mueller system um approve the purchase order uh like I said we'll lock in the pricing over the next six years um and we'll begin the transition to the Mueller system so I know that's a lot of data that was thrown out so with that I will turn it over to council for any questions that you may have any questions for Mr freyhammer console M Power uh do you have is pricing locked in for meters other than the 58 in your presentation you knowe and all your calculations are based off 58 meters so if you look at this slide you have it so we only have the pricing on the the the the um currently on this this proposal yes just for the 5 a so then the calculation here you have 300 roughly $360,000 for Capital Improvement plan for 2025 but if we were to do this is there going to be more than that because we have meters greater than 5 a throughout the city not many but yeah not many there will be some um some of those meters though some of the really large ones we we will potentially just rebuild those um there are some that we just won't flat up replace um we would probably like all the Let's see we have the so like the 3/4 and 1 inch those pricing is probably going to be just slightly above what the current one is um but that is not locked in on this under this proposal so we we should expect the cost that listed later on in the presentation to be a little bit larger than what corrected so and yeah so the other thing related to that so yeah so based on this layout um none of those large ones so both the Mueller system and the Neptune neither one of those are accounted for so even if we wouldn't up to and that cost would be reflected but yeah long term they'll be a little bit for those larger ones as well do you have an idea what the um additional I guess like in terms of magnitude see we have so just under so a th000 for paying uh let's see if I had to guess like the 1 inch meters would probably be about 200 to 200 50 so um maybe another 200 300,000 and even a 3 in you think cuz we don't I mean the 4 Ines AR yeah we don't have a lot of them um and like I said some of the really really big ones they're actually beneficial to kind of fix them in place um where you can just basically pull the guts out and put new new components in because they there's so much material already in them so that's what we did on a few of the larger ones last time but that'll have to happen over a certain period oh I see so suggesting that we just we so like I said I know for sure like the the the one the um 3/4 1 in basically probably through the 3 in those would all for sure probably get swapped out okay with a different one the four or if we did the six like I said six is probably coming off the books hopefully uh in the next uh few months um but the for in will probably get rebuilt thank you council member schroer so would we be Runing both systems then until that was completely correct so um that one very good question so yes we would be running both systems um as we added one to one system we pull off the other so it's really not that difficult to run both we just have to run reports out of both so what we currently do is we grab the data from the collectors and then we push that to our current software basically we'd be doing that with two um really not a lot of more work but it is it is two more things to track as you add one you got to remove it for the other um so certainly that will be something over the next six years now as we at the way we basically pay for the software as we go is as we add one annually we pay to operate per meter as we add one to potentially Mueller you're pulling it off Neptune so this cost generally um even out but yes we would have to maintain two um in a perfect world you would do this over a one or twoyear period so that time would be less but we know that we do it we've already discussed this with Finance we've if we go forward with this we' probably tweak a few things How We Do It um right now Finance staff does a little more of the pushing and polling Public Works might do that for other reasons as well um but yeah we will be operating two systems potentially for six years we'll have to keep a close eye on that to make sure we don't have any errors in Billing yeah so we are pretty confident this the prom system would work um Mau very recently went to this they are on the exact same Finance system as we are so we're very confident it'll work um there's lot this is installed locally lots of other places but Ms view in a lot of ways is exactly like we're set up with the same system so we're we're very confident that we're not going to have any issues it's just like I said we are going to have to certain accounts are going to be pulled out of one and certain are the other but it all ends up in the same system so when it gets pushed out on Utility Billing the residents won't notice anything different from their end good and then how many conversions are you going to do a mon month would you say um cuz if you're talking like 10,000 homes yeah so I mean in 5 years that'd be like what know 200 a year so under a current a rough based on the on the budget the first year we're looking at doing about 1,00 okay so but we probably wouldn't start that till July so um that'd be about 200 a month wow so about 100 a week M so 20 a day you have staff to do this so talking with utility staff So currently when we do um right now we only schedule about four meter appointments a day but a lot of that we don't know which part of town you're going to be in if we go with this we will isolate the part of town that we go after we're going to set some criteria up on which ones we go we're going to go as fix this fail obviously if they have an issue with their existing meter we're going to fix those but otherwise we are going to try to be proactive we do want to get the we go with this we're going to get everyone who has is on a tiered list we're going to get them an upgraded meter so we can put that into effect right away um but then we'll just start going geome geographically by town when we do that we can instead of scheduling two two appointments in a three-hour window we can schedule four or five okay the hardest part is actually getting there once you're in to someone's house it can go really really quick uh 15 20 minutes we're in and out so um yes we will ramp up currently we just have one technician doing this we would ramp that up in future years we'd have more time to do it um cuz we'll have longer year um so um so for example we'd be up to just about 1300 in 2026 now the budget does go up in 2027 so we're up to about 3,000 so it will be a a heavy lift um but we're pretty confident we can do that especially if we like said we isolate the neighborhoods with current staff with current staff yep we for sure would do this all in-house we would not look to do that if you we got quotes from um our current vendor it's about $1100 per radio to have them install it so that's certainly a cost we don't want to incur that would add a significant cost to it almost make a million dollars just for installs yeah okay no I so but that's also why we spread it out um seemed ambitious that's why I asked yes but that's why we the orig the Mueller vendor originally most cities tried to do this like I said about a two or three year we're like that's not going to work because if we try to do it in two or three years we are going to have tired outside help our staff up and we know we didn't want go that option so um we think six years is still like I said five years we think we can do potentially needs to slide into a six um it might just artificially do that with residents potentially not uh scheduling appointments and whatnot so okay thank you anything else just looking through my notes I think that um for me the added have being able to identify the tier tiers is really important I mean the last people do expect to have water and it's pretty hard big hardship when they're without water for weeks at a time so I think that being able to te check the temperature is a real real Advantage for the residents and there are are significant number of them that will notice that change um do you think that we need to do anything with the CIP earlier than that to make up the $480,000 I mean certainly the that additional cost I mean we like I said I think that can be added at the end um I I part of it will just be ramping up um as we as we do that um certainly if we move it if we move things forward I mean it it it could happen but we're based on what we're currently looking at I think if we adopt it at the end that that would suffice for for what our needs are and then the warranty on this is how many years yeah so there's a there's a full 10-year warranty on everything and then it's a pro rated warranty for the next the the additional 10 years so you basically have War you have at least partial warranty for 20 years 20 years so which should theoretically get us to the next cycle so hopefully that's 20 or 25 years from now anything else that's power we talked about the you know Capital Improvement costs uh are there any changes to the operating uh side of this with if we between the two options so overall there should be there there theoretically is less so we are current maintain the Neptune system we're currently actually maintaining two systems we're maintaining a 450 system and a 900 system so we have eight collectors um the current one the current proposal is only three so we theoretically maintain less collectors that should be a little bit of a cost savings um long term the the software operating as we add one from Mueller and take one off of Neptune there's a little bit more cost um I think it was about $5,000 more by the end of 2030 or something like that so it's slightly more but um every year Neptune increases their cost so it's it's it's pretty insignificant but there shouldn't be any major um operating costs as we put a new system on board it should eliminate the existing issues we're having which is causing some additional staff costs um but out of what from what the budget is seeing I don't anticipate any major changes to the operating and the price increases are locked in for how long with um so our we're locked in on six years on on the the the all the purchase order and including including the um the software maintenance and then after 6 years can they so I I would assume typically what our with our current vendor we see about a 3% increase on the the software cost a year but we won't won't really have a choice to pay but to pay that correct but that's pretty typical or whatever they ask yeah or whatever they ask but they're they're like I said our current vendor that's been pretty typical um I don't know what the historic terms were but every year it goes up about 3% of what the previous year's costs were on the on the software which is pretty typical of all software that we run in the city just curious if there's a way for us to lock that in somehow we could certainly ask if we could lock that in over a longer period of time thank you and this system is upgradeable with uh yeah remotely yeah so they like I said it's since they have two-way technology if there's a like I said they find a software glitch or they find something they can push an update out to the actual radios um currently the only way to upgrade the current radios is go there and swap them out right that's what I understood any other discussion council member Schroeder well I I have to say I do um think Rosell does a good job of upgrading their infrastructure so so it's good to be looking at this before we have more fails so I think this is one of the infrastructures that um the residents uh you know look to us to make sure we have are working you know as acting mayor gr would say you know this is is is something that you know we you know we want to make sure it's running and and doing well and and so um I do say I'm glad that we're looking at it at this point it's a big number but um we built it into our um Capital Improvement you know plan that you know we would be doing stuff like this so I I think this is exactly what we should be doing so because it's not an if it's a when that you have to do this and that you can get on the front of it and do it in a um methodical way versus waiting for it to fail and have a big issues with our residents I especially with water we don't want to screw around with people's water that that's that's very key so so yes and again like I said we've already built it into our plan so um I think I think it's something we should do I would agree with that and um you know when you talk to Residents or what do they want from the city they want their streets to be plowed they want you know those are the these are the basic things that they their Waters and sewers to work so so I I think it's a it is a lot of money but to have a plan is important and and we have to factor it into our Capital Improvement plan so as long as there's a way forward and you discussed it with the finance department I think we we should uh discuss it and vote on it but Mr bber do you have anything yeah I would agree with my fellow council members um and I agree that I think it makes sense to combine both the meters and uh the radios at the same time is someone willing to make a motion we have I believe a motion at it is our motion let's see here um I would move to to um implement the MU meter system as as outlined in our proposal here and um do I need any more than that both the radios and the both the radios and the meters thank you that was the Ben I was TR yes I would move back that's move by council member schroer second second by council member Bower is there any further discussion was the maker the motion second oh I will that's that is there anyone from the public who would like to comment on this is there anyone from the public who would like to comment on this item seeing no one we'll move to uh we have our motion on the table and uh all those in paper say I I I opposed good discussion thank you all get back to my agenda so we are at the the council Direction on council member in well we aren't going to do that right now you can ask anybody we don't have anybody uh any items okay yes correct why don't we just move on to nine approval for city council minutes are there any corrections or additions to the minutes we have them in the March e let's see no February 24th Eda minutes were you both here for those yes I I think that can we move to have all three done at once or do we have to do you can do that I move that we approve all three sets of the minutes okay so that would be the February 24th Ed minutes the February 24th Council minutes and March 3rd March 3rd Council minutes second seconded by council member B any discussion on that all those in favor say I I opposed that carries we have our minutes approved and then we are moving on to that was very quick we got that all out the way the sent agenda and and U City Manager Pat Tron will review that for us thank you acting mayor uh agenda item 10 a approves payments in the amount of $ 789,6 79 item 10B approves two temporary liquor licenses one for St Rose of Lima Catholic Church for an event on April 12th the other for the Roseville rotary club for the taste of rosefest which will be held on June 26 2025 agenda item 10 C approves the purchase of new survey equipment for public Public Works and Engineering to replace the survey equipment purchased in 2004 and 2010 item 10d approves entering into a contract with Waste Management to provide Recycling services for a period of 2025 to 2030 as you will recall the city council approved utilizing waste management for recycling services at the October 7th 2024 council meeting and then finally item e is approving uh adopting a resolution in support of the Rice Creek Watershed District State bonding request for the Jones Lake Project that will assist with storm water management and flood mitigation in the cities of Roseville New Brighton and St Anthony Village the city council did previously approve a resolution of support for this project in 2024 and item 10f was already acted on when it was bu the consent agenda that's the full consent agenda thank you is there a motion to approve the consent agenda so moved second moov by council member B second by council member schroer all those in favor say I I osed that motion carries and we are nearing the end of our we are so efficient we are aren't we you're doing a good job thank you than thanks amazing what you can do when you don't have time to prepare right um so future agenda review by Mr Tron yes thank you acting mayor we do have a meeting next Monday we have a couple items on one will be a presentation from n North from the executive uh director Jeff anstead just talk about their activities in this past year we also consider a liquor license for luns and bares uh and their restaurant space is being reopened and then we have five Hotel licenses um thought maybe we would get to some of them tonight but uh these need a little bit more time to complete all their work so we have Avid Hotel Double Tree key in Motel 6 and Norwood in I would expect uh some might be fairly routined some might take a little bit longer okay for consideration uh on the 7th of April we only have one item as of yet uh that's potentially to discuss the massage therapy establishment cap we're still working on that uh information so but we're targeted that date reminder on uh April 9th we do have ethics training for all council members and commission members and uh department heads so that uh I'll send out a separate notification for that but just a reminder and then on the 14th you may have seen the community development director uh gunlocks um um email about moving uh consideration from tonight uh to the April 14th meeting for an ed meeting need to get the final uh housing needs assessment at Market study we need some more time to work on that then at the regular meeting um St D there at the end of work session sorry about that uh discuss the strategic planning goals and success indicators staff uh department has been meeting twice a week to start working through all that stuff so we'll be back at it again tomorrow and we hope to present kind of our status up to that point where we would um uh show you all the goals of under each uh strategic direction as well as the success indicators we're also working in the background on the objectives and the measures and and and metrics and all that stuff what we want to do show you the goals and success indicators to make sure we're on the right path and and we'll keep working on those details and bring that those back in a later day but we still want to get too deep into it if uh some of the goals we've come up with um you would like to change or not not consider so um we don't want to get ahead of ourselves but so great work uh the team has really come together and been putting a lot of uh extra hours in so I think you happy to see what we come back with nice and that is the future agenda thank you very much any from Council Members council member schroer uh yes uh I just wanted to mention that we've been working on the uh City manager's review and we are um getting that um all the um feedback from the department heads and the council has been taken into consideration and so we're going to meet again and hopefully then in a ail we'll have a date on the calendar also to do a a Clos meeting with the whole Council to discuss that very good on schedule yes did you want to add anything no that's exactly what I wanted to say as well okay and I did attend the uh meeting of the rice larpenter Alliance and I think there some movement there to change the format a little bit they have a board now and and they're going to be uh processing a little differently so good that's good to hear the mayor was there also and how did the lunch go for your um oh that's in a in May that's in May I'm going to be out of time are you I'm sorry May 14th is the lunching for NFS It's s Northeast youth family services for um providing mental health care for our youth and families so anyone who can go they were you better do a plug yes it's in Badness Heights at the uh Commons Commons y yes we will be bringing that up again mhm anything else no okay the only thing left is to adjourn so moved second moved by schroer seconded by Mr Bower all those in favor say I I I opposed we have oh thank you meeting adjourned takes it takes a village e e e e for