You need to look at the 6:45. I'd like to call the meeting to order. Um, Mr. Eley isn't here this evening. He had a previous commitment. Um, first on our agenda is to approve the agenda. Um, I'd like to move the order of city business action items. Um, let's see. Number five is discussion of operations and maintenance agreement for Prey Lake. I'd like to move that to number one, please. Anything else? >> Number one under action items. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Just moving it up so our guests can go. >> Okay. >> But behind all the presentations and reports. Um, well, that's what I was asking you about, Alan. We can move up the action items into presentations. So, after Mr. Schmidt does his, we can do that. >> Yeah. >> Okay, >> let's do that. >> Do that. >> It's just out of order, but it's obviously respectful for a lot of the folks that want to be here for that piece, I think. >> All right, then. Let's move number five under action items to number two or 1A I guess under presentations and reports. >> And I'll just let the uh the minutes reflect the fact that that piece of city business will be handled at that part of the >> Okay. Thank you. >> Anything else? And I also see our um in the consent agenda was an approval for Shelley Dopkin as our new Washington or White Bear Lake Conservation District rep. And I see her here. So could I also amend the >> Why don't you just pull it out at consent agenda time >> because I don't want her to have to. >> Well then, okay, then put it up front. >> I mean, if we approve the consent agenda, that's fine. I would just like you to meet Shelley. Why don't you just Why don't you just add her as a presentation? So >> that's right. Number one. >> 1.5. >> I'd like to put her first so she can leave. >> Okay. So 0.5 Shel. >> Five. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I just saw Shel back there. So let's do her actually one. We'll do Tom. Two. >> Let's say we give her 0.9. [Laughter] >> Okay. Did you get that Alan? So number one will be um introduction of Shelly. Number two is Tom Schmidt. Um number 2A would be our Rice Creek discussion. Anything else people? >> I'll move with those amendments. >> Thank you Kathy. >> One second. >> Thank you Bridget. Um all in favor I opposed. >> Hearing none motion passes. Um we're going to start with the open public forum. Is there anybody here that would like to speak? Okay, Barton, >> there's no microphone here. Okay, so Barton Winter 5 lane and uh I've been working on the hockey ring this summer and installing perimeter posts. Now I'm going to put some board replacement and uh so it's all been quite a big job, but I am very interested in the rink and u one of the things that's come to my attention is uh we're putting up netting at the west end or the end closest to the warming house and uh I don't know whether uh this was actually uh some issue that was approved by council or just the parks committee. I'm not sure. I know parks committee mentioned it briefly the last parks meeting in September and it seemed like it was uh taken with a a real lack of seriousness about who was going to be doing this work and Jim and Ron city maintenance employees have been doing the work. So, there's a few questions uh that I have about the posts that are being installed and whether they're uh sufficiently supported to, you know, undergo the stress that they're going to be subjected to. So, we're putting something up that's higher than twice as high as what we've had in the past and what has been supported in the past. So, uh my concerns are primarily the the heavy posts that are in uh two order positions near the gate entrance to the the end of the ring. Uh that these are being attached to the existing posts that support the chain fence and that the uh they're being bolted together. Uh and I just wanted to point out that you know the bolting process maybe this is good enough but nonetheless it focuses the stress on a small area and if you look at chainling fence mostly you don't see bolt holes and bolts holding chainling fence there is members of chaining fence so uh I'm concerned that there you know we're going to have stresses that could degrade our existing fence structure and could degrade the wooden posts and what I'm asking is that uh we try and put banding And u so we um broaden the uh the area that the stress is going to be under which is what you see on regular channeling fence. So you don't you see like um >> and uh you see bands and things like that, but you don't see bolt holes and bolts holding it together because it's under stress. and uh we're increasing the stress and my concern is that this is being done as cheaply as possible. >> Okay. >> And uh thank you and I'm hoping that we that you'll listen. I did speak with Marcus and I wanted to you know I commented to him and I'm hoping that >> we'll have Marcus address it >> can speak on this issue because we don't want to ruin what we have right now because >> somebody else said we need a fence down there. We haven't had a fence there for since its inception. Okay. Thank you, Barton. Thank you for all your work on the rink. We really appreciate it. >> Is there anybody else that would like to speak during public forum? Yes. Thank you. >> We're doing the the preview lake stuff during the public forum. The comments. >> Oh, that's okay. >> Go ahead. Just stay name and address, please. with my husband's wife and it's about baby lake which people fairly familiar with the history of it but I am uh really disturbed by the proposed agreement and the fact is that white rice creek district never got the required easements to send water into false marsh. We went to Washington County, looked at the records, there are no against that and I just think Birchwood should first of all compel Rice Creek to get the easements which are specified in their own rules. And along with the legal easements would be maintenance and there's there are a lot of false statements and disadvantageous terms in the proposed agreement and before Paul's mercy We really think we're trying to get advice from some more sources like environmental rights advocacy groups and an attorney with special expertise in state and thank you Ruth. Is there anybody else who would like to speak? Justin McCarthy 515 Lake. Um, so first I just want to say that I want to thank Butter Booth. So, you know, back when I was on the council, one of the one of the things they pointed out to me was that, you know, Py Lake was a problem, right? The outlet was a problem. It's causing problems for Um, and while I I agree with some of the sentiment that they express, I think that, you know, the deal as has been presented with the amendments, I think is a good is a good deal. Um, I think that could we get more? Maybe. But, you know, at what cost, right? I mean, I think we probably have to file a lawsuit. Now, do we have grounds? Yes. Do we have a good case? Maybe. Um, I think there's some facts that weigh against us, right? Because in the 70s, we were the ones to propose this project to Rice Creek. Um, so that that certainly weighs against us. Do they have easements? No, not that I'm aware of. Should they have easements? Yes, they should. Um, you know, the the issue though is filing a lawsuit's not it's risky. It's very risky. It's very resource intensive. I think, you know, getting the deal as is with some of the the amendments that Mr. Henkins has proposed, I think is a good deal. The two amendments I think are fair. Number one, the idea of getting the, as Kathy would say, make sure marshes. The marsh the the outlet of the the lake outfall project flows from the pipe where it dumps it into Halls Marsh to the lake. Um we can talk all day about local maximums, local minimums that that might impede that flow. According to Rice Creek, there's no possibility that the marsh wouldn't marsh. That's what they've told me when I talked to them about this. Um because you know back in the day it was me and Kathy working So that's what they told us. So for them, I think it's a no-brainer, right? Because if the marsh can't possibly not marsh, then it's no skin off their back, right? Because there's nothing they have to do. They just have to verify that to us. I'm not convinced because I I see the water ponding right now and it and in the 10 years or so I've been in that house, that's a new phenomenon. Maybe I just don't understand the hydraulics of the area. That's fine. But I think making sure that that is effective at doing what it's supposed to do is important. Um number two, the other thing I would say is um and and initially in all fairness to to all those involved, this is kind of a new position of mine, which is you know, we had talked about sort of this um idea of cleaning up the vegetation in the marsh. I think Rice Creek ought to help us with that. And the reason for that and the reason for my thinking about it. They are the ones that have caused some of the excess vegetation. And I don't want to say them. I And when I say them, I mean Rice Creek, White Bear, those that are dumping the stuff into the marsh. Uh because, you know, 40 years of excess nutrients doesn't, you know, isn't isn't free, right? That that increases the nutrient load and so it increases the vegetation. So, I really think those are very fair uh terms. And I think that um while I I agree with Bud and Ruth in spirit, I think that practically speaking, you know, I think we get what we can from this particular process and then try and pursue grants for some of the other things that we want to do. So I encourage you to ratify the the agreement as you know as amended by Mr. Henkins. Excellent proposal. So thank you. >> Thank you. Anybody else like to speak during open forum? I think is but in the the fact that they've never sought any me but usually when a wants to enter another person's property primarily for a business reason to get rid of storm water. They seek permission to do that and to me that's telling of an attitude. They don't ask maybe And the other thing is that the water that comes into into the marsh is often described by rice creek as being treated and they they describe it as such is because the road comes here but They never to my knowledge tested the water for quality in the marsh and city of Birwood did that several years ago and found that there were problems with some back and forth conversation in the 20 or 30 years this has been in existence I think it's time that owns the marsh or most of it we have but most of it and they own it by that convey to them with the stipulation that they take good care of protect it as a natural habitat in perpetuity. as long as they don't know as a condition of the trans. >> Okay. And we think that putting storm water into its treated most recent test is that it's polluted and so we want a better deal than what we have now which is basically you get the water comes with it without any responsibility. >> Thank you. Thank you Mr. Johnson. I apprec appreciate all your work on this. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um anybody else for the public forum? Okay, seeing none, um public forum is closed. Um Shellyley, you want to come up to the well where the mic's supposed to be? Come up to the podium. Folks, I've been told this is being filmed remotely. Whether that's true or not, I do not know, but this is what I've been told. Um, council, this is Shelley Dropkin. Um, she has applied or requested to be, um, on the board of the White Bear Lake Conservation District in order to represent Birwood. And Shelley, um, could you tell them a little bit about, um, your work in Maine? >> Sure. >> Thank you. Shelton for 30 virtual reports. Um I recently moved here about a year and a half ago from Massachusetts. Um our kids are here in Minnesota and we need to be here. Um we have a college name for over 20 years. Um along the Great Pond in the Great Lakes region and we had a an issue with phosphorus. because the lake and impact the quality of the water. And so about five about five years ago, I entered into a commitment to our board at the condo association go through what's called the lake smart process. And what that did was to help our basically help educate all of our if you will, around what the practices need to be to to ensure that we were mitigating phosphorus building up in the water around our lake and I'm really happy to report that for our for our association the first association to get the smart approval and I'm pretty excited about it. So when I heard that other look at the conservation committee, it's very much in how we maintain the quality of the so much experience. >> Thank you, Shelley. We appreciate you coming forward to take on this responsibility. >> Thank you. >> And thank you for coming tonight. So they can put a name to your face. >> I have a question. Sure. Um I do the newsletter for the city and we generally put out information regarding um potential ways to keep the lake clean via property. Can you please send me information that we could potentially include in the newsletter? >> Thank you. >> Thank you again. >> I suppose we should u move to approve her. >> We can or we can do it in the consent agenda. Um or we can just >> Oh, we just want to do it. >> I move. Why don't you make the motion, Kathy? Since >> I I move that we approve Shelley Dupkin. >> Um for representing the city of Birwood for the White Bear Lakes Conservation District. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I opposed hearing none. Motion passes. >> Get her indoctrinated. Allan, >> it is interesting that the organization that she's talking about y >> is an organization that was recently discovered by the district. So, we're very interested in that. Excellent. So, >> I could not hear what you said. >> The organization that you were speaking about out on the east coast, the conservation district, just, you know, so you're aware, I'm the attorney for the lake itself for the conservation district. And so, we've been in discussion about how to pull some of what they're doing into our group. So, >> Oh, that's that's wonderful. And I have Lake Smart Connections. >> You're just going to have to work on your accent, though. It's not very >> Thanks again, Shelley. >> And that meeting, by the way, is next Tuesday. So, your first uh meeting is that >> it's on my agenda. >> Very good. >> With hopes that I can get approved. >> Okay. Thank you again. Um Mr. Schmidt, thank you for coming this evening. >> Thank you, Madam Mayor. not to screw up your agenda timeline. We don't have a presentation per say making ourselves available to answer questions. >> Okay. Thank you so much. Um >> okay. Um I think Ryan, you had some questions. Um you can stay there or you can sit. Since there's no microphone, I don't think it really matters. Um, >> we had a work session in which we um discussed the agreement that was sent over and I think Ryan just had a couple questions about it. >> Might be more than a couple, but um I'd like to just go through the agreement. Um, and you know, first of all, thank you for coming in. Uh, thank you for putting this together. Um, >> can I get up? Sure. >> You know, I know this has been kind of a long process. Um, >> okay. Sorry, Ryan. Go ahead. >> Yeah. Um, so let me just start with the with the grants as kind of a general picture is could you just describe kind of in broad terms what grants Rice Creek Wershed makes available and for what purposes? >> Yeah, that's >> okay. Uh, the district has three programs uh kind of from the bottom up in regards to the amount of awards that are available. Many grants tend to be uh vegetative uh establishment grants typically native plantings this kind of stuff improve the herbaceous layer. From there we have water quality grants. That's the improvement of water quality means tends to be rain gardens most often. Teach park is receiving $10,000 that we have storm water management grants. Those tend to be capital improvement projects. Typically we see cities um asking for larger projects I'll just say all of these things run through a storm water management grants through engineering that kind of thing citizen advisory committ >> okay and that's great thank you and And so these the grants, the storm water management grants, those are is the maximum amount of one of those grants $100,000. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> Okay. And so I had seen articles about a couple of um pollutant reduction programs in lakes and White Bear Lake. And those pollutant reduction programs tended to be $4 to $500,000 to clean up storm water management ponds. Is that a rough estimate of how much such a cleanup would cost? >> I could not confirm that. >> Okay. >> I have no doubt that they're relatively expensive. >> Yeah. Okay. But it's all going to dependicular. >> And how >> how like in White Bear Lake where lakes were cleaned up. Were those cleaned up through Rice Creek or were they cleaned up through White Bear Lake? There was Vanney Lake was cleaned up. >> Um >> this is rather complex and I'll I'll try and make it as brief as possible. So uh lakes, not wet ones, but lakes have water quality standards that the state has set. We monitor those lakes, determine their alignment, where they they fall on the spectrum, if you will, and then we look at measures to assess where that is coming from and how to address it. >> Okay? >> And those projects that would be contributing to that basically Okay. And so is it reasonable to say that the the PB Lake Halls Marsh cleanup would be above what would be normally provided under grant funds from Rice Creek. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> The expense of that. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Uh for a point of clarity and maybe uh additional information. So preview lake um has storm sewers that enter into it. >> Yeah. >> When the road reconstruction occurred up there, we looked at placement of rain gardens because it would help treat the water before discharge to the lake, improving the lakes's water quality >> it before it discharged to Prey Lake. >> Correct. Okay. >> And then from Lake >> my point being is that there may be multiple avenues or approaches that are necessary because we couldn't put in rain gardens there because of the type of soil that was kind of heavy noninfiltrating soil. >> Okay. >> So that's where the the draw down and the consolidation from the bottom of the lake pre but that's it's a whole another issue beyond the uh agreement document >> okay and so going kind of circling back I mean I guess I think that discussing the grants because the you know I know one of the things we've heard and one of the things that the grant agreement here makes clear is that um part of The solution here is going forward is through grants. Um, you know, there's a number of kind of call outs in the in the agreement that Rice Creek will consider Birchwood and Halls Marsh for cleanup grants, and I just want to understand what the parameters of those are going forward. >> Sure. Again, being brief and probably not capturing all the detail. Um so the contributing wershed to Paul's marly or equally important white bear lake is where you would look to treat it. So it could be vegetation improvement on yards adjacent to it by those land owners or the work park. Uh it could be the other inlets into this extensive pipe from White Bear Lake in those just to make sure all that water coming in is >> treated or improved from its current condition. >> Okay. The and and so to address explicitly the water coming down the the plot, but it's a very enjoyable name to say. Um what when you talk about the water quality and the water conditions if the water is specifically coming down to PBY Lake or to Hall's Marsh from Prey Lake how do you evaluate the water quality >> through the monitoring that is completed in lake? Okay, >> we have a lake and stream specialist who would do sampling and lakes conditionality of the water and from there we can look at measures to improve the betterment of that water and so the rain gardens was one attempt at that. >> Okay. And I guess what I'm asking about is when you're evaluating the water conditions, what you're asking, you know, as you know, Birwood has an objection in place to the DNR to allowing water to flow from Prebby Lake to Hall's Marsh because the concern that that's not in the public interest. Um, and I guess one of the questions I had when I saw this is I was looking around for some of the water quality analysis from from Halls or from Prebby Lake because that makes sense what you say here. I couldn't find any water quality analysis um since 2013. >> Okay. Um, how do you ex how do you plan to um calculate water quality and evaluate whether that should flow into Mahal's Marsh going forward? >> Well, specifically to the monitoring, I would have to engage Mr. and the frequency and the records that he has monitoring the lake and the quality of the water. preview. >> Okay, >> I'm missing a part of your question. I guess my question is there's been no water testing that I could find records of in in the past 12 years. And obviously in order to acknowledge that Birwood should that this is in the public interest that water drain through the plop. One of the things that it seems like would be worth evaluating is just, you know, a water test to make sure that Prebby Lake isn't somehow, you know, full of something, you know, harmful. And it's interesting. Um, is water testing expensive or is there some reason why why that information isn't available? >> It's a bit of a loaded question. Um, >> no, it's not a loaded question. It's a factual question. >> Sorry. I uh my intent by saying a loaded question was to mean that it's complicated. It depends on what you're testing for just as if you were to test your blood. What specific chemical testing laboratory to assess it for? And again, I'm sorry I'm not trying to deflect your inquiry. It's important. I think would be able to answer that better. But typically we test water for oxygen content and it's nutrient phosphorus nitrogen. Okay. And what criteria do you use would you use to determine whether draining those things down the through into Halls Marsh meets the criteria to be in the public interest. The establishment of the previous lake outlet project is a flood management project which is distinctly different from the water quality. That's to not to diminish Birchwood's concerns about the quality of the water coming down but flooding is more of volume. The testing of preview lake water would be for what's called a shallow lake less than 20 ft deep and those standards are set by the state. >> Okay. So when I read under the recital it says the plop was established and is maintained as a lake outlet flood damage retention project and not a storm water project. And then I come down here and um somewhere in here it says that it's not intended here it is the use of terms such as storm sewer in this agreement are for ease of understanding and not to assign status to the project as a storm water project or to make it subject to municipal separate storm water system regulation. What is the meaning of those things? >> Uh council, that's anchoring the project under its initial intent and what it was petitioned to the district to do which was to leave the flooding storm sewers. Uh the pipes under streets and such are under permitting at the state level. That's called MS4. And so all those entities uh do these cities that have this infrastructure which Rice Creek does not. We do not have an permit. Uh but we do do similar things education to the public on how to improve the water entry systems that they do maintain do not diminish quality of water downream. >> Okay. And how do we and I think what this comes down to is how do we in Birwood understand that we are that the water coming down from PB Lake does not diminish the water soil quality in Hall's Marsh. by recognizing the district's mission of Rice Creek as water quality and flood control. So the actions that the district takes are to improve water quality in lake and other lakes throughout the district and to prevent flooding throughout the district as well. and our programs and our rules and all that are to the success of those schools. >> And could you just give me a summary of what the rules are that ensure that the water quality is not diminished? >> Sure. The rules don't ensure the water quality isn't diminished, but they mitigate as property development developed or on the landscape. So if you go from an egg field to for example, a Home Depot that that water that leaves the property has been treated to a certain level and it rate of discharge from the property remains consistent with what it was before. >> And so when you're saying treated to a certain level, could you talk about what that certain level would be for the water that's entering into Hall's Marsh? >> Sure. Uh typically it's retention for a sufficient amount of time for sediment to drop out of the water column of the storm water. >> I guess what I'm asking is you're saying typically is there any standard you would use explicit to Hall Marsh? >> H Marsh is not the regulated item. it is receiving water. So development land use changes adjacent to it that would trigger our rules would be the things regulated. there is a specific uh criteria in the rule and I'm using generalized terms because I can't speak definitively to what that engineering amount to >> and what so and specifically for the flow through hulls through the pipe what would be the criteria you would use to determine whether that was uh detrimental to Hall's Marsh the the water quality in Py Lake has a shallow body of water. >> So you wouldn't >> the state standard >> and what is the what is the state standard? >> I couldn't talk. >> Okay. But there and Okay. But there is a state standard. >> Correct. >> Okay. There is a standard you may have heard okay this criteria and the state gives us a nutrient loaded amount within the water which they find to be acceptable >> and I'll make note that this is specific to the the previous items I noted of uh oxygen content phosph nitrogen in the water where other things like mercury is atmospheric. >> And so under this agreement, would there be any limitation on with respect to those state standards and the water quality in Pribeby Lake? Um well, let me finish my question. Would there be any um standard with respect to the water quality standards in Prebby Lake with respect to whether or not Rice Creek would accept it being drained into Halls Marsh through the plop? >> No. >> Okay. >> I want to make sure I'm hearing your question correct. My question is, is is this an open-ended license for Rice Creek to drain Prebby Lake into Halls Marsh under any conditions? >> The outlet, >> yes, >> is legally established and would remain in drain to Mar. The quality of water in Pree Lake is part subject to the district's mission and goal and so we would continue to work to improve the water. >> Okay. >> I think you're referring to a potential draw down. >> Yeah. >> Because under normal circumstances like flood conditions, lake bounces up and it goes over the stop logs comes downream regardless, right? >> We don't remove stop logs unless only once and if we get a permit from the DNR. But so but that's what this agreement is is asking for Birwood to remove its objection and allow Rice Creek to open and remove the stop logs or whatever they called and drain water from Prebby Lake into Halls Marsh. That's explicitly what this permit is what this agreement and what the consideration that Birwood is providing under this agreement. I think the standards that Nick was referring to are set control agencies. >> Okay. But what I understood was that no matter what the standards are that Rice Creek upon entering into this agreement with Birwood would be allowed to drain Halls Marsh into would be allowed to drain PBY into Halls Marsh regardless of any water conditions in Prebby Lake. Is that correct? That's what I heard you say. That is correct. >> Subject to the DNR's >> Yes, we would have to >> subject to the DNR's >> permit >> permit. And I suppose it could potentially be true that Birwood could eliminate its objection and the DNR could still not grant the permit. >> Okay. also includes the permit for quality treatment. >> Okay. >> We don't have a permit for that. >> Okay. Um so now under this agreement um it has a number of provisions here. um help me understand a little bit when when I look at the at the Halls Marsh aspect of this and I asked you a number of questions about water quality in Prebby Lake. Um what would the conditions be? What what should Birwood expect the conditions the water quality and soil quality conditions to be in Hall's Marsh upon adoption of this agreement >> mean the current condition >> um I want to understand what so if if you look at the agreement it basically says there's a bunch of cleanup stuff that goes on within two years of the adoption of the agreement um including sediment removal from um Hall's Marsh. Um >> Lake No, from >> all the buildup. I know. Hall's Marsh. Yeah. Yeah. >> And Prey. >> And Privy Lake. What What should um Birch would expect the water conditions and soil conditions in Hall's Marsh to be um after the adoption of this agreement? >> You mean after it's cleaned? >> After it's cleaned. Yes. After after two years after you guys do your cleanup of Halls Marsh, what what what would we expect to see in Halls Marsh for water and soil conditions? >> The intention is to remove any accumulated sediment that's deposited out by itself. >> Okay. >> Remove that sediment. >> The testing that we were proposing is related to our our disposition of that removed. We can't just if it's contaminated with VC's or heavy metals or anything that it is, we don't know. We're going to test it. Before we can dispose of it, we have to test it. It needs to be the land. >> Okay. >> But it would be removed. >> It would be removed. >> It would be removed. >> When you say the portion that is deposited, sorry, I'm jumping on your >> Go ahead. Go ahead. I'll take a break. Let other people ask, but I'll come back to me. Yeah. Um, >> give somebody else a chance. >> This somewhat makes us a dumping ground and I know you're aware of that. Um, so as far as the the deposits of the uh outlet or the outflow into Halls Marsh, it seems that you are no longer considering considering the marsh itself as part of your project. you essentially are suggesting that there is some magical pipe that's getting it from one end to the other that does not affect the rest of the the water or quality of the soil in this marsh at all. So you have looked at just the portion that is being deposited from sediment. So are you going to be cleaning up sediment and testing throughout the entire marsh because fluid dynamics would in imply that water is going to mix. We have 47 years worth of water mixing. So, are you cleaning up the whole marsh or are you cleaning up your surprise pipeline that is somehow getting through this marsh? >> The intent of the to sediment delta that's formed from the >> so only the area that you think has been affected by your your current process, not the entire marsh. >> The fines finement that may have been deposited is unlikely Now, >> I think that's course dropped out near the end of the pipe. >> Well, if if you've been down there when the water is low, which is only occasionally now, there is very much a divot at that spot and then uh the water has to get up over that, which means that water is being pushed or all that sediment is being pushed throughout the marsh. If you're implying that the marsh is going to actually flow from one side to the other, it is moving throughout the entire thing. And the marsh, if you're I live on the marsh. I'm I'm their neighbors. And Justin over there, who is one of the other city council members, is on the other side. We see the marsh daily. So, the amount of water that is in that marsh fluctuates, but there is always water. And then in the winter when it drains down there is channels that you can see. So that water is moving through there. So you would need to clean up more than just the five feet that is in front of that pipe. It has gone for 47 years through the entire marsh without being cleaned up. So, one of the issues that I personally have with this is the cover letter you sent with for your for our meeting on the 30th where you referred to that the marsh was not included in your plop agreement and it was rather upsetting to us because to get you to honor your agreement in the 1970s is the only reason we're looking at this. There is no reason for us as a natural habitat to allow polluted water into our marsh. There's also no reason for us to assume that you have to go through our marsh because apparently in the 1970s it was suggested that you guys just take a different turn and go directly into the lake. But they wanted to go directly through the marsh. And it's because you wanted it to marsh and remove those sediments and the pollution before it gets into our drinking water. And it makes sense to do that, but we also don't want to be a dumping ground. So, Preebie Lake is your priority. We don't want to be the second like the ugly se stepchild here. So, that's my thoughts on this at this point. >> The main source of water storm sewers. So whatever you do, water. Okay, I have some more questions. Go ahead, Ren. >> Okay. Um, let me let me pivot a second. Um, thank you guys for coming in. Um, I know we're grilling you a little bit, but um, you know, we're trying to kind of kind of work through this, so thank you for coming in. Um when when we look at um I want to ask about the general pro provisions clause. Um >> can I give him a letter >> section N? And it says this agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties. Um, it's if you go up to three, Birchwood Village agrees to and count up like three or four, two or three letters. >> Top of the fifth page. >> Yeah. this agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties and and maybe Allan is that exclude things like the memo things, agreements, pieces of information outside of this because that's what this appears to me to say is this agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties. Is the intention of that that this is the totality of the agreement and that the memo is just a separate thing that somebody wrote? We're not being in other words, are we being asked to agree to the memo? >> No. >> Okay. >> That's >> okay. >> The four corners of this >> it's we're basically being asked to agree to to the agreement here and not necessar Okay. So, I don't know if it would like would you like them to resend the memo or something or >> No, I'm more so the intent of the memo is where I think that the problem is because I've been working with you for two and a half years on this. Um, so as far as having read that after going through all the work of our intent has always been cleaning up the marsh and making sure that it was not going to be a dumping ground and was going to be taken care of and be a natural habitat for future generations and be in better shape than it is today. And definitely better shape than it was in the last 10 years. and ideally back to the shape it was 46 years ago when it was uh deeded to our city as a natural habitat. So the intent was always from the city that we were hoping to clean up the marsh. So there are several uh we were also told that this is our final draft of this agreement and that we had to talk about this one which is why we had to bring it in front of our council to actually talk about it. So um that is why it is here. The issues that I have had with it and um Allan and Marcus have been working with me um for the last six months on or I guess six months, eight months, whatever it is now, 10 months now. >> Um on working on this one. um your memo really drew into light that you only care about the outfall and the um outlet into the lake but nothing in between that somehow that has magically is a jumping point that you skip over um which then I don't believe it's an agreement that's in our best interest due to the lack of it's it's back to our handshake that we had 46 years ago So that yeah, it'll get taken care of. We're skipping the marsh. So that is why I'm even though we've I I like quite a few of your amendments, but I also feel that the intent of it is not there to protect our property and our natural habitat and what birchwood will be subjected to. And then whatever water quality will get through the marsh. If it's not marshing correctly and that water actually ends up in White Bear Lake, we've ruined our water that we drink our recreation that is our main source of income because we only have property tax in our city. So if we ruin the value of the property of White Bear Lake, we can't fix it. We have no way to get money to fix it. If we ruin White Bear Lake and if we ruin Hall's Marsh in the effort to do that, we don't benefit. There's nothing we can do about it. So that that is my main contention with this agreement. And Kathy, you've been at this far longer than I have, but as I listen to this conversation and as I've read through and and gotten feedback from residents, it does seem that we can't depend on the quality of water that's coming into Halls Marsh. >> Yeah. >> And then we're being asked to accept responsibility for a lot of costs to measure the quality of the water. I don't know what it costs to do an annual report on the ecological health of a marsh. I don't see that that's happening at the preband. Um so it does seem disjointed and not right. >> Will there be if we were to accept this agreement? What's the cost to virtue? It would be fairly extensive because um if the water is going into the the marsh and after they've cleaned it up um everything else as far as vegetative and everything else that we need to get done, we have to get grants and such, which means we will have a portion that we have to cover as well. Um the marsh should never have gotten to the point it is now. it was 46 years of being neglected. Um, so the reason we considered this is there is a potential to get grants and to help uh build up that and there's there's several grants available for marshes where if you have educational aspects and things like that. We've always wanted to put a boardwalk through. There's been grandiose plans for what could happen with our marsh to actually make it a place that would be valuable and enhance the the community. um having an impaired lake, which Prebby Lake is listed as an impaired lake, drain into it and draw down everything that is settled right now in Prebby Lake. I know it's a slow process if as you mentioned, but fluid dynamics kick up all sorts of things. So, that water is not going to be clean. Um it's going to end up in Halls Marsh. It is my backyard. So, I'm also concerned about smell and everything else because Prebby is not exactly a pleasant place to walk around if you've walked around it. Um, so there is a long-term time frame for how long it will actually take to clean up. And then since the marsh isn't considered part of this agreement is the part that I'm very concerned about. So from my uh perspective, I'd rather say no and start over even if it will take another two years of going through this to try and get something that actually is going to benefit the marsh water quality and the general details of making sure that our natural habitat that we were deeded can finally become But what's the plan? I mean, so we say no. Then what's the plan? We we still have bad water that's coming down from preheat. Whether you like it or not, it's still coming down. I don't I mean, are we going to sue them or are we going to >> No, I I'm of the opinion that we uh seek out grants and actually clean up the marsh as it should be. >> Still our responsibility. >> We have to grants for it and we have to do all the work versus they're going to do some of the work. We can get grants for the rest. But the agreement allows them to continue draining forever, >> which they'll always do. Nothing none of your solutions have have suggested that they won't be able to drain unless you sue them. >> I think there's a lot of good in this agreement. Um, I personally am not willing just to throw it out. >> I I would like >> Um, that's all right. >> I have a bunch more questions I'd like to go through. >> Really, Ryan? >> Um, the way I'm thinking about it is once free gets cleaned up, yes, it's going to require draining into Halls Marsh. the water quality after that coming down from it is going to be good because the water standards are so much higher than they were >> definitely it was 46 years ago. >> So it's just that period of draw down that the water should maybe be monitored for whatever and I'm totally fine with like the draw down portion doesn't bother me at all. The concern I have is the lack of responsibility for what they've actually done to the marsh and the cleaning up of said marsh. It is the only card we have. Um, I understand that. >> So, yeah, that is where I am. >> Why don't we I mean, can I make a suggestion? I mean, I'm I'm going to be pretty insistent that I get to ask all my questions here, but um >> then let's do it. >> But I guess I would just like to hear from Kathy and Bridget what they'd like to see in the agreement that's not in there right now. And let's I mean, I'm, you know, let's let's hear what should go in there. >> Yeah. Um, I'm more than willing to say what I would like. I have >> I mean I guess >> in the last two and a half years I have proposed multiple times that Rice Creek be responsible for cleaning up the marsh, not just the flow portion. So that vegetation that is currently uh invasive, that is vegetation that is most likely affected by the high amounts of phosphor phosphorus. It would be wonderful to get that cleaned up in addition to the water testing and soil testing throughout the marsh to make sure we don't have areas that are over that entire marsh. Um, high in levels of things that shouldn't be around people. Um, so mostly I want what should have been taken care of over the last 46 years actually agreed to and done. In which case then I am totally fine drawing down preeie to allow that to be cleaned to allow that storm water as a runoff as opposed to a we're getting all the garbage you're cleaning only the outfall and this very small spigot going into White Bear and actually making sure that the marsh is restored to a healthy level so it can marsh so it's getting all of those pollutants and everything out of that water and doing what a marsh should so that that water is flowing out the end and our drinking water isn't affected. So that is my concern is the 200 ftish of space that they're ignoring. >> That's shouldn't be removed. >> I guess that's what I added. I thought >> well it was in our portion but it's it was only somewhat addressed in the addition that you made. And I loved your additions. They're great. But as far as the um like I liked the removing uh fund of uh fund vegetation removal cost through grants. I need that for the entire marsh, not just the outlet and the outlet into White Bear. It should be looking at the entire marsh and cleaning up that entire thing. It's too big of a project for us to do on our own. There are grants available for us to do some of it, but I'm not willing to sign it at the current level that it's at. And also, um, your amendments are lovely, but that's not the version that they brought before us. So, that's the one that we were asked to vote on. >> So, if they are willing to accept additional amendments, great. >> Well, they don't have any authority to accept to to compel us to vote on anything. Um, I guess >> so. Ryan, I can answer the question that you What what would make me more comfortable >> please? >> Um uh one knowing that the water and that there are measurements and discipline that the water that is coming into the marsh is clean. I'm still I'm still confused about that what we're measuring etc etc. seems like the onus is more on virtue to report back what the water is doing as opposed to uh you know us saying okay the water's clean yeah let it go so that would be one of the things that I would want secondly given given the birchwood budget and how tight things are I have no idea what the expense might be to Birchwood and I think there's got to be some kind of estimate So, those are my two things. >> Okay. I I'd like to go through some more some more questions with you guys if we can here if you don't mind. Um, >> okay. I know you are. So, all right. So, under it's it's just below. I asked about section N a couple minutes ago. I want to ask about section P. Um it says disputes under this agreement shall be resolved pursuant to Minnesota statute section 103D 539. And it says by submitting the dispute to the dispute resolution committee of the board of water and soil resources any disision of the dispute resolution committee shall be shall binding on the parties. Um and we'll assume there should be a B in there. um is the intention of this section that um that the arbitration is binding because when I go look at 103D539 it basically says it describes an informal dispute process you can appeal and then regardless of the results or you can arbitrate through the board of water soil and water resources and then you can appeal to the district court or file in district court if you disagree with that decision. Um, this kind of contradicts that. I was just wondering what the intention of that paragraph is. Is it binding or is it not binding on Birchwood? >> Okay. Okay. See that to me this clause is I think that would really need to be changed. Um, and I had just kind of shortened it up here. I I think it's really nice to have an arbitration process in case there's a disagreement here and have somebody come in and kind of look that over, but I this it's it's unclear to me whether this would be binding or not binding. So, um, you know, that's a clause that I think is an issue. Um so but I I want to get back to where I kind of was here before. The only place um polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are mentioned is is in this um oh I do want to do want to ask one more question here under three and B Bridget asked about this and I think it's a great question. Um, Birwood is being asked to prepare and make available to the public an annual report on the eco ecological health of Hall's Marsh. Could you I'm sorry, >> it's F >> F whatever it is. Okay. Well, I just read it. So, um, could you discuss what the parameters are of that report and what Birch would be would be expected to provide? I think the report would reflect the goals that the city would have for [Music] action. >> Um would it be fair to ask Rice Creek or White Bear Lake to prepare a similar report on the condition of Prebby Lake? I don't think that's unreasonable. >> Okay. >> Typically the district has that monitoring data demonstrate the trends. >> Okay. And when was the last time water quality testing I think we covered that. We don't necessarily know. Okay. So just going a little further here and and kind of circling back to where I was before. Um what is the um what would we expect upon adoption of this agreement? What would we expect after two years and upon adoption the water and soil conditions in Hall Marsh to be? What what should we be able to you know if we're in corporate speak what should our metrics be? >> I think uh what you would see is the actions of the district would be the analysis of that basing the conditions down there. I couldn't tell you how that might materialize in the vegetation or otherwise. Same goes for monitoring if it were down. If the city were to remove the sedimentation and it falls into that lake and the lake bottom consolidated and the nutrient load I think what you're getting is what's it going to look like when the dredging is completed >> when the judging is completed or >> dredging. Okay. Well, I thought we were talking about the judging, too, but Okay. >> But the vision has an open water type. It's probably not >> Oh, no. It it currently has like a floating island going on. Like it's a pretty cool marsh. Um, we had Washington County, they have a marsh specialist apparently who came out and she was very excited about the marsh and the way that she's like, "Oh, this could be so amazing." which could be is the the operative word in that. Um, no, there is a a floating island basically that has variety of trees and things like that. There is a wide variety of animals that habitat there. Um, so I would not anticipate that it would be a lake by any means. So no, it should have >> Yeah. >> No, it it should be marsh. So it should have natural plants. It should have vegetative aspects that are uh I think it's very heavily purple loose strife right now is in there all over. There's quite a few other invasive species that have spread into that. Um I know we have yellow iris in there which though beautiful doesn't belong. So there's there's quite a few invasive species that have taken over portions of that um that have thrived in the high phosphorus levels that are now in that that marsh um that wouldn't have otherwise been able to do so. So maybe lake being much cleaner should help that. But, um, I would anticipate removing all of the invasive species and getting that back to where the native plants can actually survive and thrive, >> which would be what would be covered by any grant that we could potentially get to restore a natural wet land or marsh. So, >> and I guess what I was was wondering about is, you know, there's this uh footnote here. It reads in part, "Testing shall include testing for apparently testing for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon PH along with other pollutants required by the MC MPCA. Um, Birwood did testing, you may be aware, on Hall's Marsh and found higher concentrations of PA derived compounds um, near the PL near to the plop outlet and further away from the plop outlet, lower concentrations. And our engineering firm determined that it was likely the result of, you know, inflow from Prey Lake and those contaminants coming in. Should we expect that after the cleanup of the marsh and on an ongoing basis thereafter that we see those um pah compounds at lower levels than the maximums um put out by the Minnesota public pollution control agency. >> That would be our belief. We would identif for disposs of the testing that you had previously. >> Okay. Um, so and and so then would you if you found levels higher than that that were attributable to runoff from Prebby Lake, would you expect to remove additional soil? Is it kind of like an additional soil or additional sediment to until those levels were reduced below the Minnesota State Pollution Control Agency levels? Is that kind of how you would anticipate that to work? I would anticipate our work to be consistent with how I'm sorry. >> You would expect the sediment deposition to be removed. >> Okay. And so, um, and how does how do you determine, um, how far the sediment delta goes and how far what was deposited, um, into pre into Hall's Marsh by the outfall, how how far that extends into Hall's Marsh. >> That would either be a random or gritted survey, I would imagine. >> Okay. >> So, some topographic Okay. >> And so it's it's reasonable to expect that as part of the cleanup, a a baometric survey would be conducted, >> survey of some sort to identify whether it was >> okay >> definitively that Okay. Um and then it would be reasonable to characterize where the extent of the sediment deposited from Priby Lake based on a survey of some form. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> That would be the goal of the survey. >> Yep. >> Okay. And then I'm sorry, were you going to say something? Yeah. of the >> P. >> Obviously, >> there's obviously other inputs because it's a marsh. Yeah. Yep. >> The only grant you just received. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Um >> majority of the water is >> Yeah. So, and and I mean I just added a couple things in here that I thought would kind of be, you know, >> what's that? >> There were only three things I think that you put. >> Yeah, there were three things. >> Copy. So, if you could tell. >> I mean, yeah. So, so okay. So, I think you suffered through most of my questions. Um, I'll probably come up with more, but there are a couple things. Um, I added a a stipulation that we acknowledge that Pribby Lake is has been determined to be hyperutrphic by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, which is just a an empirical fact. Um, I added a under Birchwood Village agrees to um I meant to add it under E, but I added it under F, except responsibility for um vegetative and/or habitat management activities. And then I said because hyperutrphic conditions increase vegetation growth um RCWD shall equally share you know cost of removal of vegetation if the most recent testing of preb lake shows hyperutrphic conditions. Such conditions shall be evaluated with respect to the to Minnesota pollution control agency or similar standards. And then what else did I add here? Um testing results for sediment after sediment removal shall meter or exceed all applicable standards. This is under >> um >> C >> you know VI what's that five Rice Creek wershed uh is that >> C yeah testing results after sediment removal shall meet or exceed all applicable residential government standards for contamination and pollution. Um and then after F I added G within two years following the effective date of this agreement conduct a bathometric survey and maybe we talk about what that is of Halls Marsh for the purpose of assessing its hydraulic conveyance and drainage characteristics. The findings of the survey shall be distributed to all parties. RCWD shall subsequently undertake the removal of any sediment accumulations identified as an impediment to flow in order to restore and maintain proper conveyance through the marsh. Following this initial sediment removal, the resulting conditions shall be documented to establish a new baseline for the marsh. RCWD shall conduct future surveys every 10 years to identify and remove sediment as needed to ensure the marsh is maintained at this baseline condition and continues to function properly. >> That was my favorite one. >> That's that's quite the and what's that >> I said that just makes sense. >> That that's quite the mouthful. And then at the end here, I I just said pursuant to basically Birwood's commitment to removing vegetation that RCWD would fund vegetation removal costs through grants. And I mean, you know, I look at the >> change that from may to will. >> Well, we can >> pre-approve grants. >> Well, I think they can. They will share the costs. They may share the costs through grants. Oh, okay. I'm okay. >> That's the way I intent I intended that. Um, you guys, um, I guess I I thought Kathy and Bridget made some good points too about putting some additional things in here. Um, I think, you know, I know there's a lot of, you know, contention around this. I wonder if you might give us a couple weeks to kind of um if if that would be okay to kind of incorporate a couple of the comments we got tonight. Do you think what do you think, John? You're the mayor. >> Decide. >> So, you know, >> like I said before, I think >> Well, let's see if they're even going willing to do that. I think >> obviously we've been working on this MOA for some time. It was written uh with the best of intents uh from the district crafted by our team uh legal engineering and >> staff consistent with the initial uh establishment of the project and then circulated. You know we have two other parties municipalities as well. consideration. So, we certainly believed that at a staff and consultant level that we had gotten to a sweet spot that things were aligning. Manager had shared some concerns from when this came up at your workshop and I certainly appreciate all that you're sharing and that we're perhaps not there uh yet. The district under its uh facilities management program does intend have an obligation to continue with those and that was part of that memo that we have asked our engineer to give us a task that you know okay what does it cost to go and what is the settlement you know what does that project look like so that the board can start to consider I appreciate the thoroughess of the comments and the your objectives for the for the Marsh the grant programs that the district has are obviously written and approved by the board for release to the public. So as staff we have to follow that frame of the board. Uh anything you share will certainly bring back and it is on for our November workshop to review M that manager raised and there was a little bit of discussion amongst our board and said hey bring it back to a workshop so specific to the question of a couple of weeks or what have you that's fine by me and I think certainly understandable and something we can look at >> November 6th >> I'll grab a calendar the Monday. >> That's not confusing at all. The Monday before the second Wednesday. >> I mean, >> no. >> I mean, I think there's some valid concerns. I guess I'm a little closer I think on this than than maybe you are Kathy, but um >> well if if we are able to propose like looking at the agreement that you have added things to, I think that's closer. But as far as the um the last agreement that we had received, we were told that that was the last opportunity we'd have to make edits. So that's why we brought it before our council to look at at that point. >> And that's fine. I'm glad we got a chance to look at it, but as we you know, as members of government, we like to take lots of time and >> debate. So, >> uh to to it being the final and that your action certainly if you're ready to take action that the intent of it being final is that we have uh crafted it as you received it and it went to the ities and they were in alignment. Staff and consultants >> were in alignment. Now let's hear from the council was not this is how you get no feedback. It's just >> sure >> this has been circulating looking for >> moving it forward. >> Good. I think we all want to move it forward. >> I always mentioned to you this agreement has not been before managers yet. >> Okay. So, >> still has to come up. >> As Tom says, it's not >> Would it be >> Thank you. Would it be possible for you guys to write down your thoughts? >> And we can get it to them. It's I think it's November 10th. If it's the >> sixth, >> first Monday, >> it's the Monday before the second Wednesday. It's November 10th. So, >> over at >> Yeah. >> So, if we could run off of this that Mr. Henkins has um added some things to and add your >> get it to you by the 10th. Would that be sufficient for your workshop or prior to the 10th? >> In fact, I'll you know what? I'll just have Allan send it out and >> Yeah. When does your packet go out? Can you send out the word document of a Thursday before the first Monday? >> I'll send it to I'll I'll right send it to Allan. But yeah, >> if you could provide us with your draft. >> Yes. >> Ideally, November 4th. >> Okay, you got it. >> And our meeting would be on November. >> Okay. >> Yeah. With the exception of the one point that Ryan brought up to ask about water quality for White Bear Lake, >> I think everything else applies just to Rice Creek and Birchwood Village. >> Okay. From my understanding >> today grants available from our own. >> Oh yes, there's there's lots of grants available from other that are marsh district partners and we have many cities many times to develop grants from clean water for example. >> Okay. >> We have an excellent staff out >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We had I had talked to um was it Gail? I don't remember her name from um Gail Cedarberg. Oh, maybe. Yeah, >> the Met Council. >> From the Met Council. So, I'd spoken to her regarding some of the grants and then I spoke to Washington County Conservation District. They have grants available. There's also ones through the DNR directly for marsh habitat education. There's lots of options. I don't want to spend grant money on restoring something that we're then dumping into. So, I'd really like this to be taken care of first because it doesn't make sense to do it in the other order. So, um, that would be the order of operations and I don't want to apply for a grant and then not use the funds within the time frame. That's a waste of our time and and theirs as well. So, all of that is >> like to echo that point. very good one person. Uh the portion of the memo talks about these other inlets and pipes that come into the system of water. And so we do not want to go and dredge the lake only to have an upstream >> sure >> contributor go and clean their pond or send something down that undermines the good work that was completed. So uh very important and so this tried to lay out between all contributing entities what they're responsible for and what should happen when and choreograph that again uh it is a district facility we're obligated to maintain that so like I said we have a task that >> thank you >> anything for these fine gentlemen. Oh, sorry. Go ahead. >> This not intended to be a cover. >> Simply trying to be a condensed history >> of the so any emission or inclusion was not intentional. >> Okay. >> I add one last thing to both Nick and extensive experience here managing wetlands. We have as a district a large wetland bank over 80. But once we get it cleaned up, we'll be tapping that source of knowledge as well. >> Any other questions? >> We're all set. >> Thank you so much. We really appreciate your time. >> Thank you very much. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. It was very helpful. >> So, we do have a little bit of time. So, as you guys >> send comments and whatnot, we'll put a cover letter together with those things and make sure that they get those. >> Write your own memo. >> Ryan, do we want it all in one document? >> Yeah. You know, >> what I would >> I think we've got a couple options. Do people want to have a Do we want to have Allan collect it and collate it? >> That's what I just offered to do. >> I wasn't listening. I'm sorry. >> All of those comments in one document. >> Yeah. Why don't you just I'll >> That would probably be great. Why don't we just get all the comments collected? >> I mean, we can do it in a workshop, too, cuz I didn't think there I think there were everybody had a handful of things. I'm happy to do whatever. >> Well, I was thinking that if Ryan have additional comments, I can we can send out the word dog. You can add your stuff. You can add your stuff. >> That's what I'm thinking. >> You can ship it to Allan and he can put the paragraphs in the right order in the right place. It'll probably take you 10 minutes and >> and then we'll we'll we'll move on >> and then review and hopefully we'll have something that we all like >> this that I think it's a good >> is really good. >> I agree. >> So that I think that's a great idea just to ship this around and they can do that. >> How we address my concern about what what are the ongoing costs that we're going to take on. Mhm. >> Well, >> so that may not be a part of this agreement, but I think we'd better understand it. >> Yeah. >> Well, I mean, um, >> if if did they get stuck? >> No. >> I have a suggestion, too. >> Um, so if didn't exist in general, we'd still be in charge of the habitat and everything for the deed of that of the marsh. So, um, what the agreement would cover would be the ongoing maintenance of their portion of it, but I do want them to address the long neglect and correct that. So, we're starting at ground zero of what it would have what it th in theory would have been, >> right? >> Sorry, I have no ability to talk anymore. Um, 46 years ago, >> spending any money on it now? >> Not yet. No. So, it would be >> and we will be spending money on it. We will have to do some maintenance >> to know how much money and I know that there are grants and everything else, >> but worst case scenario, we need to know what we're signing up for. That's just good fiscal responsibility. >> And when I was going to make a suggestion to you that we request to drop the frequency of the annual report to like every three years or every five years or something. That seems like >> an annual report seems pretty frequent. So >> I agree that the rest of the the area should be doing the same thing. >> Yeah, I I agree. The preb should for sure be applying that as well. Um I believe we had requested that there be an annual report from Rice Creek, but they said that they wouldn't do it, so they put it under us. So that is where that came from. So >> somebody ought to do it. Okay, it's you. >> Yep. So that that is how that >> was something that we had requested. >> We had requested back when Justin was working on it. >> Yep. So it was something that they didn't put in for a long time and then we kept on badgering and then they put it under us and we're like well it's in but that >> we just didn't want to let it go basically >> we didn't Yeah. >> And to address your fiscal worries you know no money has been spent 46 years on the march. So, you know, even if I can't imagine that it would be a huge hit to any budget, >> okay, >> just to maintain once it's clean, once we have that baseline and we've cleaned it all out, have the vegetation come out and all that. >> Yeah, >> that's really maintenance. >> That's half our cost though. >> Well, if they are in charge of cleaning up the mess they made, that should be on them. In which case then our portion would be uh having volunteers go through and remove like weeding of sorts to try and get that to stay at a level where it's healthy because a marsh should be its own little ecosystem. We shouldn't have to >> intervene often. >> So that is the intent of a marsh as far as like as a natural habitat. We shouldn't be altering a natural habitat much. So, we we will have to do something to clean it up now because it is I don't want to say so far gone because it's it's still a lovely spot, but it is in need of some some TLC for sure. >> Well, they're going to the dredging project will take care of the bulk of that. >> Yeah, >> because it's just been a sediment problem and no one's been paying attention to it, >> right? >> As long as they're not just doing the outlet. >> Bay is full of sediment because no one's touched that in, >> you know. >> We still have a a lot to get through here. Um, >> I think for your work for your work, take a vote >> of you guys. It would be helpful to take a vote on >> the current agreement, >> current version of this. >> Yeah. >> So that we can send it to them saying this is what's been blessed by Birwood. So then it doesn't come back. >> Okay. >> These are negotiation points because we've added to what they've said is essentially their final deal. you're saying on my amendments to it, but I mean I think that >> can we do a that we don't approve the current version they have but would like to make amendments and then bring it up forward for >> a separate group. >> Well, we're certainly not going to be approving their >> what they offer. Yeah, >> that seems pretty clear. >> So >> So we can just make a motion to not approve their current version. Well, we can take no action on it as far as I'm concerned. >> They know where we're submitting, >> then we can push it back to them with the amendments that you've made, Ryan, and say, "What do you think about this?" And if they say yes, all I'm saying is at some point there's going to have to be a vote. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> And so whether it's tonight on the one with your amendments or we take no action and just send it back over to them. So that's fine, too. I'm good with no action until we get everybody's >> I'd like to word Smith, but I'd like to >> my other deals that I've sent them several times. I'd like to pull. >> But I'm going to reflect on this. It'd be appropriate to take a motion to table then. >> Oh, bring it back. >> Well, then I motion to table on. >> Okay. Can I get a second? >> I'll second. >> Ryan, all in favor of motioning motion tableling. Tabling. >> That's right. All in favor? >> I. Before we get too far down, >> I had to wake up my computer. So, I need to record who said first and second. Hang on. >> I I was first. >> I was second. >> We had all in favor. Any opposed? >> Hearing none. Motion passes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks, Alan. >> And if you guys can get that somewhere around Halloween, that'd be helpful just so I can put it together as a cover and get it to them. Um, after we all assemble our portions like Power Rangers, can you send it back to us >> so that we can all confirm that? >> I wouldn't send anything out until you guys see what be going out >> and then if we do need to convene to explain, we can figure that out quick. >> Okay. >> Okay, Marcus. >> Yeah. >> Thank you for your patience, Marcus. got to look at my first thing on my agenda is attachment storm water project. We have one bit back came slightly under what Lori was Is it abnormal to only get one when you send out 12? >> Um, I would say it's not normal. >> It really depends on who like who wants >> who has time and it I know it's pretty small compared to a lot of what these people are doing. Okay. >> You know, very tedious like planting stuff like that. >> And these guys They're not normally a general um which is new to them. A lot of plant frustration people or just frustration generals they figure out. >> Okay. >> So that could >> but this is one of the contractors that >> she had recommended. Yeah. >> Yeah. She's worked with them quite a few times. So, we both reviewed it. >> Does anybody have questions for Marcus on this quote? I mean, I guess I just When do we expect work to start? It probably says in there, but I >> spring most likely. Okay, >> obviously the spring option to start this fall, but we need construction and >> to do that prestruct >> this year contract says exactly a year from tomorrow. >> Yeah. Okay. And then um I'm fairly confident we discussed this already, but just so that we have it if assuming we are recording, I'm hoping we are um that the portion that is currently the soccer field that we have the agreement with would not be affected. So it should be the outer rims of that. So if we wanted to continue to allow this the >> soccer teams to use the fields >> if you could get those dates though so we can make them aware and just make sure >> so that we don't have any open pits or anything. Yeah, that'd be good. >> Okay. >> Um assuming that they still want to continue renting. I'm assuming they do, but I'm not going to jump for that. Okay. Any other questions for Marcus on that? >> Do you need a motion for us to approve? >> Okay. Would someone like to make a motion? >> I move that we approve this. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I hearing none. Motion passes. >> Second thing is the street maintenance project. Oh, can I pause for just a minute? So, um, we had reached out to Lori Tela on the payment aspects of this one. Um, and it sounds like we can do a two-party check where the city and Lorie Tella um, both sign to mitigate having to have funds put from Birwood into there and then get reimbursed. Um, so that that will kind of filter through that way. And then for the larger grant, for the $10,000 one, which is the Rice Creek that we just received, I might be jumping your list here. Um, that one can be used for portions of this as well. So, >> okay. Reimbursement. >> Yes, that's a reimbursement. So, that's the 10,000, but that we already approved out of the parks budget, I believe. So that money has already been earmarked there. >> All right. Continue. Sorry. >> M project is the project under what we estimated. Oh, wait. I was looking at the lift station one. I'm sorry. >> Can you just summarize what it was and what it came in? I'm trying to find the numbers on here quickly. >> Uh, so 12,000 roughly is what? >> That's lipstick. >> Okay. Oh, how come I didn't get one of these? Is it >> You did. It's in the packet. >> Oh, it's in the packet. Oh, I did see it in there. Okay. >> 527 is what was pulled out. The final bill is $89,71.50. >> Oh, that's pretty significant. Okay. It's like a sale. All right. >> Summary of what we saved on is we build up the road. There's pretty good structure in the road still. So we save a lot of and instead of just doing spotless curve replacement we save money by just >> was the water mane break that happened in either of the new roads that we just did. >> It wasn't a water main break. It was a lead personal. It was on someone's property. Yeah. >> Oh, >> it was a water >> like a lead line. >> Water line service line broke. >> Okay. >> Yeah, it wasn't wasn't our main. >> Oh, okay. >> It was a water arterial. >> Sure. >> Okay. Sorry. I >> You don't have to laugh at these things. You should just grown at me by now. >> I thought from the email it said mate and sorry I must have misread. >> Never mind. >> Okay. Any questions for Marcus on the street project? >> Okay. Want to go on to the list station? >> Yeah. So station that's what's up front didn't send me their sign copy until Monday. Uh, so this would be 100% paid except for we're holding 5%age because we still have still. Um, so I expect I mean I know they're working on it. They worked on followers yesterday. >> So there's I mean it looks pretty much done. What >> pretty much as far as you guys can see it's pretty much >> okay. There's a couple of >> it's pretty minor stuff. So that's why we're holding 5% now. Once we get all that done, we walk through them. Expect next month we'll see that 5%age. >> Very nice job managing that. >> Marcus, >> with this one, we saved. So with that final number $500,000, we saved 11,000 Um, we had a construction contingency and they didn't use all that. >> Excellent. >> Um, have we started getting any uh refund portion back from the EPA on >> the reimbursement? Yep. >> It's all set >> every month. Y >> Okay. So tomorrow with approval tonight we'll go for another reimbur reimbursement from the beginning and then next month when we approve the release of retainage that'll be our final >> the final. >> Okay. >> And then we've gotten half of the check from Creek District for that $100 this week last week. >> Yesterday. >> Yesterday. And then upon um the final >> or next month we'll get the >> Okay. >> Okay. >> And then that one should be done. >> Oh my gosh. Such a long time. >> And that's one one year. Two years. Two years. So, you need us to probably make a motion to uh uh pay that. >> Um, let's see. Help me on which lines we're talking about here. >> And these aren't just approved in the claims list in the city's claims list. They because it's in there. >> Is it then we're done? Then we've already approved everything. Okay. >> I mean, I'm happy to do it again so I don't have to show up again, but Okay. >> Rice Creek District, we did get that $10,000. So, >> sorry, >> I jumped. >> I think that's in the >> sto agreement and then it really >> should be to have maintenance. >> All right, >> that's awesome. >> You have nothing but good news for us. >> Yeah. >> Thanks, Marcus. >> Um, are you done with the grant? >> Because, um, could you address the netting at Tyke Schmidt since you looked at it from >> this evening? Um, I looked at it and as far as this the fence itself, I think it's a whole concern of you don't usually see holes drilled into >> pipe >> pipe and stuff like that. I mean the netting itself it's going to be of parks and those kind of things is hopefully not people. So um the fencing itself I think is maybe seen better days. So so as you know we watch to make sure you know we don't need to do >> okay >> so the um the netting is not up yet. So, if you saw the the the wire up there, um I believe that the netting is intended to go all the way to the ground. >> You do you remember? >> I know it's from last year that we had talked about it. So, I don't even know if you were in the meetings. >> I don't think it's just >> you remember. >> I can look while you're talking. >> I don't think it is. I'm >> think right >> like at the top of the fence or does it >> supposed to be like high? >> Oh, okay. So, it's just that portion. >> So, it won't be as heavy as it could be if it were going all the way to the ground obviously because of that, but >> concern about being so far. And I guess my initial impression is test it out right away because installed other projects to go higher. So higher at least right behind >> you have the ability to move it up but if it's not needed down it's just >> okay >> but otherwise yeah >> okay so it should be all right as far as structurally >> okay >> I just want to say a couple things the netting is you know I think it's less North Oaks has they have and I just want to say but we're not talking about cutting. What I'm interested in is we have extra post height on these heavy post >> there. There's two different things that project up. One is the heavy post that came from the back stop >> that goes well above the net line right now. What's going to be the extra four feet of netting nylon netting I guess. And so I don't to cut down the excess above the netting line so we don't have things like above the existing. Mhm. >> So I think that's what Marcus was just saying that >> the goal would be >> extended that where the height is is sufficient as long as it's sufficient right we don't need it but if we do need to raise it like the most recent park I did >> I was going to say the majority of the ones I've seen at uh >> what is it the loop or whatever in Roseville that's 20t high there so I wasn't sure if it was high enoughensive But >> we're not ready. Like anyway, you know, when you talked about I guess >> he's got a wire now that goes along the the perimeter around the AR, right? And that's a certain level. >> Yeah. Oh, no. I think that's where they intend to put it. >> Height of the >> So that's why I think we're going to test it. >> We'll throw some pucks at it. >> But that that's okay. I I asked them, we don't want any more leverage because what we're doing, you know, I would prefer to have these heavy posts dug into the ground. So, we're not levering on the existing post system that we have. That's that's what I would like, right? I mean, even though he's bolted and it's rigid rigid, I just want to say that, you know, to have a small hole holding all this force or even even inside the beam itself, even the post, because they're not they're not necessarily, you know, what we're hanging on them in the rake is not nearly the force that's going to be generated, you know, that we're pulling on the beam or the post with these bolts, right? So, I mean, It's going to be fine, but I think we we should uh ban >> put extra bands around as much as we can to support the post against the pole so we're not just pulling on these small stressed areas. And I just want to say we do have some ruptured supports. They're they're not the heavy duty ones, but on the other end where I was working, you know, there's at least three consecutive ones that have burst, right? And that could be because the wooden supports were decayed, you know, and maybe there was more stress on them than there there should have been. >> But nonetheless, it can happen, right? You could have and that's why I'm trying to make sure that >> and having washers, let's say, >> you know, not we want to distribute the stress as much as possible, right? >> Oh, we could have to hardware store. >> Hold on, hold on, wait, wait, wait. Right, >> Marcus. Um, what do you think about putting bands around the p posts? >> It's just extra support. Is it needed? I don't know. I mean, I don't know how much is going to get used at this point. >> Okay. >> So, as progresses, >> we'll just monitor it and then Okay. >> All right. I think >> Okay, let's just go with that. If you think it's fine as is, we're going to monitor it to make sure there's no degradation. And if there is, we'll have them do extra work to to shore it up. >> Hold on. >> Okay. Same level all over. >> You asked about the size of the nets and they're 4 feet. Um they're all 4 feet by >> attaches to the the fence that's up there and then up to the right, I believe. >> And there's three that are ordered. A 24 foot one, 32, and a 12. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, those are already ordered. should be coming soon. >> Excellent. >> Um, so thank you for checking that out. Thank you for your concern and bringing these issues to us. >> Um, go by the way. >> Yes. >> Um, their their plan was well, it's been over a year, but they had offered to pay for the whole thing, which I don't believe we had agreed to, but at least half they had wanted to pay. So, >> so we shouldn't be, if they still have, we should be concerned about a little extra work on this issue? >> No, I don't think that's the issue. >> No, that's not the issue at all. So, as far as um Marcus had mentioned that a lot of them are put in higher so if we need to move that net up due to something, we don't want to cut it off prematurely. >> Yeah, but you wouldn't be able to do you mean and just have it high right behind the opening? Um, >> okay. I I don't know. >> Let's just see how it goes this year. And if we need to adjust, we will. >> I don't think we're going to hit the the garage, which was the reason for it in the first place. Okay, I know what goes. I see that a lot. And mostly what goes into the street is deflected, right? It doesn't like go on a straight arc, you know, in over. That's a very somebody purposefully trying to do that, but most >> Yeah. >> All right. Thank you. Okay, Martin. Thanks. >> Thanks. >> I we appreciate your um your love of the rink. Is there anything else you need to let us know about Marcus? >> I think that's it. >> Anybody else have questions for Marcus? >> All right. Thank you so much for your work. >> Oh, there's more. >> Ty Schmidt water quality project. >> No, that's that is the >> plan. park >> then I don't think we have any more that I see. >> Thanks. Thanks, Marcus. >> Lift station looks really nice. They wouldn't let me drive the excavator. >> What? >> You gave him a picture. >> That's a memo. >> That one a couple times. >> So, um, >> crosswalk looked nice, too. I mean, are you ready to move on? No. Um, is just for your information only. I did not receive this email, but um Kathy, I think you forward it to me. >> Did um I'm actually surprised you didn't get it because it seemed like it was a to all government, >> right, >> members. So, uh let me find this thing here. >> Everyone at home, we're moving on to city business. >> City business. >> Oh, sorry. Yes. Um, we're at city business. >> What is listed as one? >> Well, my husband is. We're on number two. Um, discussion of Mayor Melvin Carter's email regarding protecting citizens from gun violence. >> Yes. Um, >> I can summarize it if you want. >> I'm just trying to find it at this point here. >> Um, >> it's on page 18 of the >> 18. 17 and 18. >> Oh, okay. and showing 16. Am I looking at the wrong packet? >> It's You're probably right because I left a spot for Marcus's >> Oh, okay. All right. >> All right. So, um I can I can summarize this, I guess. So, we had gotten a um email from the mayor of St. Paul uh Melvin Carter asking uh municipalities to discuss and stand with the St. Paul um city council in proposing um ordinances um which I believe well their meeting is tonight as well. So >> as we speak St. Paul should be discussing these four various um firearm preemptive laws um and discussing gun safety in general. Um the four that they are looking at for St. Paul were banning the public possession of assault weapons ban binary triggers and high-capacity magazines. ban guns in sensitive city-owned places such as libraries, indoor and outdoor parks, recreation spaces, zoos, museums, beaches, and require every firearm to have a serial number. So that was what was being brought before the St. Paul City Council. And in the email or the email to municipalities, they were asking that other cities discuss standing with them. So that is why it is here. Mhm. >> So, it's pretty much it's just for um our information. >> Um the way I understand it, when I looked into it a little bit, Minnesota already has a law, a statute regarding firearms. And so, this their um ordinance couldn't even go into effect until that's rescended. Mhm. >> So I think it's at this point they really can't do much as far as taking action. >> Pretty performative. >> Yeah, >> that's what I would say. >> It doesn't sound like the governor is going to call a special session to deal with it. So, >> right. However, it's just good information in case we ever feel like we need to revisit that. Um, next up is update of the TIG Schmidtz water quality project. So, it would be on either page 19 or 20. >> Um, pretty much that's just our contract. >> You'll see that $65,000. Um, >> that's their portion that they're holding for us to do the project the way I understand it. >> Correct. >> Okay. And the um the estimate we got came just below the two grant totals, >> right? So we should be in in good shape overall for >> um doing our portion and then um when we had initially discussed this the city can use volunteer hours or um Marcus' time etc could be part of our match portion. So there is a potential that this will not cost us additional >> which would be great. Mhm. >> Um and our our community generally, much like this last weekend when we had our cleanup day, uh shows up to help. So anticipate we should be in good shape. >> Okay. Thank you. Um moving on, you'll find in your packet the report from the Birwood Water main Task Force. Um they really did a great job in going through all the information that they were provided. They had good questions for the engineer and um considerations I thought were very well thought out. A lot of them we had already discussed. So um well definitely I think we should definitely take their recommendations. Do the do their recommendations jive with our I mean our preliminary budget? >> Yes. >> Okay. Good. >> Well, if you um like um their first recommendation here was to continue the current level of operations and maintenance budget for 2026 um to sustain the water services. So basically it was saying don't they would recommend not working on the water man which I think we've explained multiple times that we're not going to do until we get a grant. >> So since we did not get a grant of course that is off the table. So, um number two though, um they asked to consider the street segments um that were designated to reclaim reshape to be looked at to just do Milan overlay. And I actually had a meeting with Marcus this afternoon. And the majority of the roads project was Milan overlay. Um there was only two roads slated for reclaim and reshape >> total from here out. So yeah, um I don't know more I could say about that. Um consider increasing the annual budget for the street rehabilitation, which we did >> in our budget. Um I'm thrilled to see that they thought that that was a good idea because I was concerned it was be would be a >> um >> we don't want to budget for it but fix it anyway which >> I have I have actually spoken with so many residents in the last couple weeks about um whether they're all right with tax increases to pay for doing the roads. I haven't had one person yet say no. I would hope that people know who I know just for the fun of it. >> I'm just saying that I think overall even though we're hesitant Yeah. about asking for money to do that, that's what people want. >> Well, I think >> so, >> you know, I'll give Margaret some credit and I think you've gone further yet in terms of making the city getting the city to the point where it's a little more professionally run. So, to where we have plans and you know, the seat of our pants isn't the thing we're flying by all the time. So, I think I would say, you know, I think the the committee did that and I think you've done a good job on that. So, >> I think our >> Thank you for that. But I think this entire council >> likes to plan for the future. >> You know, I that's in all of our workshops. >> All of us are more invested in what what's the city going to look like in 10 years. >> I'm just saving for a four-wheel drive. >> I know we did talk about that. Um so and then oh number four was consider improving recordkeeping on utility assets including summary of any future water main breaks and other service. >> Yeah that's a great idea. Um in my meeting with Marcus today as well. Um, so if you recall back, oh my goodness, >> June, July, >> we talked about that >> documents, >> not that well, >> the additional pay for the water, M. Yeah, I know. >> The um the grant from the Minnesota Department of Health to look at the service lines and Okay, so that work was done and Marcus showed me, remember, he was going to update the GIS. >> It's so awesome already. Excellent. >> Like the information in there, he has documents that have been scanned in from 1965. >> Oh, wow. >> So, >> I know. Like I was so excited. It's such a geeky thing to say, but when he showed me all the information in one place. So, if you had any questions about your house, for example, >> congratulations. You're number one in the city. >> Wow. >> One and only. >> I know. But anyway, you could click on any address and it would say, you know, tell you what their service line is made of. Um, like if you had just any work done in front of your house or it's just so cool. >> So, we're on the way. >> How do we let residents know about that? >> We could send it out. There's just a link to it, right? Anybody can access it. We can just >> I don't know if they can get into it. I'm not sure. >> I've looked at it before. So, so have I, but I don't know if >> I don't remember if somebody in >> We should find out cuz like the county has it all available. >> Yes, the county does. >> If I remember, there was like a password that was emailed out. >> Yes, we had one >> which seems like we should let people have readonly access to >> Okay. >> everything. >> Um, they're still in process. They're still the staff at Bolton Bank is still uploading all the information from this past summer. So, maybe when that's done, >> we can have the big reveal. >> Right. That would be a nice residents. >> Sure. And so it's going to be something we can update starting this winter with the water main breaks where they are >> and we'll have a good idea if there's any pattern or whatever. >> Find out if your neighbors pipes freeze. >> Okay. Why do you do this to me, Ryan? >> Do what >> thing. So anyway, I really appreciate their work. They did a great job. And as we move forward, you know, we should use them again. >> It was a good group. >> So, um, moving on. Do you Well, first of all, do you have any other questions about the task force? >> I loved number five as well. Big fan. >> Were you number five? >> The capital reserve fund. Yes. >> Brilliant. >> I know. >> I think that's a great idea. >> I know. When I read that I'm like, yes, good idea. >> Good job. Thank you. >> Um I was not able to read the copy of the current road plan. I assume that's just our one that we already had, right? >> Yes. Um >> so I didn't want to really talk about this tonight, but um I asked to meet with Marcus this afternoon to discuss uh the 2026 road plan. >> Okay. And because we have u money from the levy going in directly into the roads, you know, road improvement >> and because there were budget underruns on both major projects, this road project and the um lift station, we do have extra money. um we can still set aside a good portion for the capital improvement fund but still use a chunk of that unused money from previous projects and throw it in >> 2026 a little bit more. >> Yes. And so the plan tenative plan we came up with I think a lot of residents will be excited about. >> It's going to cover a lot of the city. Um but we we're going to just kind of hold off until January. >> Save it. It'll be fun. Well, because Marcus wants to do again another just an open house so people can come in and see the plan. Yeah. >> Oh, that was really that was really good when we did that. So, that's a good plan. >> Anyway, so that's coming. So, I was really excited about that as well today. Um, he's doing a great job by the way. Um, Ryan discussion of ordinance to amend the fee schedule. >> Just Oh, I'm sorry. Um, do we need to get finally get back to this group and respond to what they have laid out >> to the water task force? >> Are they disbanded now that they've put in their report? >> They don't have any meetings. >> Okay. >> Oh, it was a task force. >> Yes. >> We should just >> They completed their task. >> So, they're done. >> Put a thank you for them in the newsletter. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. I don't know if what else did you have in mind, Bridget? Do you >> Well, I mean, so they say consider developing a strategy to build capital reserve. We should tell them we've done that. It's in the budget. We should we should say exactly what we're doing with each of their points. >> Okay. >> I think >> that's a good idea. >> Yeah. Do you want me to put together a report back to them? >> Yeah, I think that would be good. >> Sure, I can do that. Um >> Okay. point that that you made about there only two rows that are that won't be known. >> Yeah. You know, just so let's get the facts out there. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I didn't even realize that until today when he was pointing it out to me. So, >> yeah, that would be great. Um, did you want to talk about the fee schedule? >> You know, I can say a couple things. I know you mentioned to me that maybe we were losing money on village hall rentals and I think there's a handful of things in the fee schedule that >> could probably be revised. But maybe what would be best would be for you and I if you have an interest to just sit down and we'll print out a copy of the fee schedule and mark it up a little bit and then I can take responsibility to turn it into an ordinance as I've done way too many times. and and but if anybody else has comments that this fee seems too high, this fee seems too low, you know, let us know. I know Bridget said it was way out of date and I said, "Yeah, I think we got a little behind on our ordinance processing." So, let's we let's get some of that fixed. So, but >> I don't need to talk about it beyond that. >> Okay. I did print out a copy today. How about I scan it in and email it to all of you and you can put your comments on it >> and then um send it back to uh Theres >> and she can compile our comments and you and I can work on it from that. >> Can we do that, Ellen? >> Why not? >> Is that an open meeting issue? >> Independently and send it to her to aggregate the material, I think. >> Okay. Okay, then let's do that. And I don't know if anybody else has any comments. You can always tweak it in a meeting too if we have >> That's right. We won't make decisions. We can make the decision during the meeting, but >> we'll bring them together and bring it to the whole group. >> Just gather the data. >> Our next newsletter um as far as responding to that, it looks like our um November, end of November is going to be our next newsletter already. >> I'm just I'm just letting you know for timing as far >> like we just did that. Okay. >> I just was making sure it wasn't this month, >> man. >> I didn't need a full report. >> All right. Um, that's the end of city business. >> Um, did we approve the consent agenda yet or no? >> No. >> Okay. Is there two tiny comments very fast? >> Yes. >> On the consent agenda, >> um, >> what would you like to pull out? >> No, nothing. I just want to make a comment on two things. Um, so the deer hunt is this Thursday and Friday. >> Yes. >> I would just say next year let's not have it on any >> Yep. >> Got a lot of kids at home. Um, and the balance sheet. I was just surprised we don't have any money that we've spent on trees. It's like zero. But we've been doing trees. That's because mostly Ron and Jim have been doing it. >> Okay. >> So, we haven't had Steve Dean, >> right, >> doing any of it, which I think is what we had budgeted for was >> right external tree service. >> He's done a couple things. I don't know if he's built the city though. >> Probably ought to find another tree service. >> Yes. Well, we've talked about that. >> I have I have one quote that came back and it was um for Poly's Park and it was 30,000 to take out big trees and place >> at this point. Couldn't we take our money this year and our money next year and just do that? >> We could. >> That doesn't seem like the worst thing. I mean, maybe we prioritize a little differently, but just as throwing out an option. >> Can we make sure we stump grind because there's no way new trees will be able to be planted amongst all those stumps. >> Um, that was the part that they didn't include that was in our previous quote, which is why the cost difference was significant. probably a longer conversation, but you know, let's figure out what we want to do with trees. >> Okay, >> that's all I had. >> Okay. Um, but yes, the October 16th and 17th is the deer hunt. We should, assuming this is being recorded that, uh, >> okay, >> people should know that that is happening at that time frame, >> right? Anything else we need to discuss? Okay. From that, we should approve the consent agenda, though. So, I I will move that we approve the things on the consent agenda. Um, we didn't pull anything out, did we? >> Oh, I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I opposed. Hearing none. Motion passes. Um, can I get a motion to adjourn? >> Bridget second. >> I'll second. >> Kathy, >> uh, all in favor? >> I >> I opposed. Hearing none. Motion passes and we are adjourned. Thank you everybody. >> I'm going to vote against adjourning sometime. You're going to fill a