I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. Uh, next item on the agenda is the approval of the agenda. Absent of any motions to amend, I will entertain a motion to approve. >> I move to approve the agenda. >> Second. probably no discussion. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> Motion passes because I did not say no. Presentation C. We have a presentation on sustainability from the green team. So, Miss Jensen, no, no, no. Miss Monuso, >> hello. Uh, good evening, council. So, let me pull up my presentation first. Okay. So, tonight the city is receiving award for participating in the gold leaf program with the MPCA. So, ahead of receiving our award, you're going to hear a short presentation from Kristen Raose about both the gold leaf program and the green step cities programs. Uh this is meant to be a refresher on the program since the city has been participating um for a number of years now from back when we were uh when the program first launched. Uh so after that presentation uh we can do a quick photo and then I'll come back up and give some sustainability updates on the work that we're doing and uh then I'll let you get back to your scheduled meeting. So with that I will introduce Kristen Morose, director of the green steps and gold leaf program at the MCA. Thanks. Hi, good evening council. Um, excited to be here. I'll get to the presentation momentarily, but I gotta um get you through some slides here first just to give you a little bit of background, a reminder about the green stuff program and um how Lake Elmo has been participating in that program uh over the years. So, I will move forward maybe too far. Okay. Uh so uh Minnesota Greenep is a partnership program. I work at the pollution control agency but we have um eight other partners both state and non-state including the League of Minnesota cities uh as key partners in the steering committee of the program. Today we have 156 communities participating across the state, all sizes, um all corners of the state. Um and we've been around since 2010 officially and growing every year. Oh my goodness. Very touchy. Uh, okay. So, here's where we're at with Lake Elmo. Uh, joined in May of 2012. Uh, currently at step five, N5 is our highest. We only have five steps. Um, out of all of the best practices in the program, which focus on sustainability, very broadly, there's over um 180 specific actions in the program. It's really designed to be a menu for cities to um utilize as a tool and a resource for taking action, but also reporting actions. Um so of the 29 best practices, 15 of them have been considered completed. Uh and overall 30 actions have been reported. Um the graph on the left kind of indicates the breakdown of our five categories across sustainability and uh where folks are or where the actions are taking place. It looks like it got cut off a little bit. Um so I apologize, but we certainly have that on the website for you. Um I mentioned that there's five steps uh to the program and really it is the steps kind of indicate a linear process but really it's more of a continuous improvement process. Um it is intended to uh help support growth uh in sustainability over time. So the first step you completed back in 2012 by passing a city council resolution. Steps two and three focus on implementing and reporting best practice actions. And then steps four and five are looking at targets, metrics, and improvement over time. That can then help identify the places where we can celebrate success um but also maybe identify some priority areas that aren't improving over time, which can help help you identify and plan for uh which best practices you might want to set goals for. Um, I mentioned there's over 180 actions uh in the GreenStep program in these five categories. Uh, it's also a really great peer-to-peer peer-to-peer learning um, opportunity because those actions get reported on there. We have over 5,600 actions that are um, on the website, self-reported just like Lake Elmo has. Um, so you can see what other communities are doing, learn from them, um, maybe save some time and effort by seeing what has been successful elsewhere. Um, and again, this these are the five steps. They look linear, but think of it more as a continuous improvement circle. Um you uh at step five are continuing to uh accomplish steps four and five both happen simultaneously in the same year. Um and my boxes got cut off a little bit. Um we actually just changed uh opport options for reporting those steps four and five uh metrics or target based information. uh Lake Omo has and Ashley have uh reported metrics for the last few years. Um and that has been um a valuable tool in really understanding the trends over time. Um and again where those improvements are being made. So more to come on that. Um we're actually in our uh annual reporting cycle right now. Um and so I know Ashley is working on that. But what I'm here for tonight uh is around our gold leaf challenge. Um we kind of consider this our sister program to the Greenep Cities program. Uh it's open to any type of community. So not just city and uh tribal governments like GreenStep is uh but it could also be neighborhood level. Um it could be county, it could be um a church group, whatever community means. Um, and really with the difference, um, this program is also very connected to the GreenStep city's best practice actions, um, and set up and designed as a menu for actions to help guide communities. Um, so there's a total of 44 actions. Um, we're really looking at awarding things that are happening in real time. Um so as actions are happening um as achievements are being made uh sharing that with us so that we can um help continue rewarding and awarding you um those achievements and all right so kind of two different programs there is definitely some overlap uh here they are both voluntary programs so the city has agreed to participate in these programs um where green focuses on sustainability broadly. Gold leaf is focusing on climate actions um specifically high impact high priority. So we tried to do the hard work for you by identifying which actions to prioritize. Um another difference is that uh green is rewarding communities by um step achievement kind of that progression. uh gold leaf is looking more at volumes of actions taken. Uh and one other difference with the gold leaf challenge is we have one required action for everyone who's participating and that is to have a green team. Uh we are really flexible in what that looks like. We know that every city is different, but having some staff, maybe council members, commissioners, um maybe community members who are uh really uh dedicated to uh supporting the work and advancement in the programs and taking action over time. We find that communities with a green team that's designated um really just has that lasting approach to working on these issues. And then I already mentioned too that um we're really emphasizing new actions being taken. So where is Lake Elmo at with this? Um two actions have been reported uh in 2025 which I'm here presenting tonight. Um and uh out of those 44 actions that I mentioned um we have things in four categories. We're looking at things like climate mitigation, reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We're looking at climate planning. um what are the things that are really going to help prepare um the community moving forward? Climate adaptation, so really um addressing the impacts that are already being seen uh as well as community connectedness, so more of that kind of education outreach uh opportunity. The two that Lake Elmo has reported in 2025 are um action CC1, which is having that combined green team. I mentioned that's a one um required action to participate. Uh and so in that report we know that like Elmo has a green team that meets quarterly to discuss ongoing projects um related to sustainability and gathering and organizing information uh to coordinate and align projects across departments. So that internal um interdep departmental staff and CCA which is our tree steward community um action the city of Lakemo worked with the county to um on the tree steward program and coordinated volunteers to attend national night out events to engage with residents. And so um those are the two actions that I am uh excited to present with you tonight. And I will show you our award here is a tree, which is very fitting because one of your actions was tree related. Um, and as you take actions, you get a little leaf that you can plop in the top like Plinko. Uh, and shake it up if you want and your tree grows over time. So, really emphasizing that. Um, taking um, you know, add additional actions. um maybe as quickly as possible uh is really the goal of of the program here. So, uh with that, I think we're going to maybe take a little break and hand it off. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Um so, yeah, we can pause if you guys want to take a photo or we can take it later and then I can continue to go with the sustainability updates that I have for you. >> And I should also ask if there were any questions before we pause to do that. >> Make the call. >> Let's do it. >> Okay. Do it. I know. The one thing that's hard is like they get stuck in the bottom or they're upside down. >> I don't need Okay. Okay, you ready? >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Yeah, that's mine tonight. I just want to sit. >> Okay. Um, so as uh Kristen laid out, we we did start a green team last year. And with that, we want to use this opportunity to to to share a little bit of what we've been we've been doing the last year. Um so the green step or the green team is guided by the green step cities and gold leaf program. We meet quarterly. We coordinate across departments to identify and document ongoing and new efforts. Um we have folks from planning, finance, uh public works, admin and soon to be fire on the team. So by organizing and tracking this work now um we can build a better picture of what the existing processes look like and then we can achieve more focused goals in the future. So in your packet you can find this green team work plan and I won't get into the nitty-gritty of it but it's broken out into gold leaf goals, green step goals. Um but big picture, we're aiming to maintain our status as a step five city by continuing to track metrics around um building, lighting, transportation, uh land use, community development, more more. And then we are hoping to also achieve additional gold loops to to put in our new uh trophy. Um so now that you have a better idea of what the team looks like, here's a little bit about what we're working on. Um the city implemented a new software called fuel cloud in 2024 um that tracks fuel inventory for the city fleet that's helped establish baseline metrics for greenhouse gas emissions for the city fleet. Um we can also use that data um to help make financial decisions in the future if we'd like. Um but we're hoping to use that again or we will be using that again as we report in 20 2025 metrics for 2026. Um, in 2025, the U of M began researching low-input grass species in Lake Omo, uh, with the goal that if that grass is successful, it could be used to improve water conservation, uh, and to use less fertilizer in the city. And we will learn more about that in the fall. Um, next, the in 2025, the city strengthened uh our partnership with MREP uh by coordinating on the tree stewards volunteer program. Um, so as Kristen mentioned, we did a volunteer program with them at National Night Out, but we also uh work with them to prune Boulevard trees, and we plan to continue that work in 2026. MREP also has a watered stewards program that we we hope to coordinate with them on in the fall of 2026. Um, a couple of additional water related items. Uh the city does a uh partnership with lake or with uh the Met Council to offer a rebate program for purchases for eligible water efficient products. Um the city put out a water report to Lake Elmo residents in 2025 and in that brochure there's water information on water and restrictions uh water conservation tips and the city plans to continue uh to update and send all these educational materials in 26. Next highlighted is the Washington County recycling grant. Uh and the city has received funds in 2025 for improved communication efforts um around recycle recycling um at the county and city level on the website, newsletters and social media. Um we also helped promote the North Environmental Center in Forest Lake. Uh one of our projects last year was to purchase reusable totes that were made out of recycling materials. Um, in those we put recycling information in each bag, a going green guide, uh, information on composting, and plan to keep using those bags and, uh, promotional materials at, uh, city events in the future. We also participated in pumpkin composting in 2025, and the city composted the most pumpkins in Washington County, which we thought was a pretty good achievement since we're we're a smaller city. Um, so that that was a fun one. We also applied for uh funding for the recycling grant grant in 2026. Uh we plan to continue to collaborate with uh them on recycling efforts. Uh new project in 26 would be if if we're approved for the funding would be new recycling bins at city parks and then potentially um some sort of recycling event, maybe a a fix it clinic or some sort of swap uh to be determined in 2026. Moving on to some tree items. Um 2025 the city is expected to receive the Tree City USA status once again. I think that would be I I think it's about the 20th year that that we've got the Tree City USA. Um this is a program that recognizes the city for ongoing efforts related to expanding and maintaining the tree canopy. Um the city distribute distributed 500 trees at Arbor Day giveaway last year. Um the Arbor Day giveaway this year is on 425. Uh the city is also looking to receive a tree growth award in 26 for some of the work that we're doing on the tree fund and the boulevard tree program. Um the tree fund was established in 2025. Um that's a dedicated fund to replace trees throughout the city. Um the primary funding sources will be from fee and new tree replacement um and individual and business donations. And we are currently um piloting the boulevard tree program. Uh this is implemented uh using the tree fund. The goal of this program is to provide more trees um to residents who lack trees in the rightway. So finally just wanted to note that this this came up I think recently at a a city council meeting. Uh just wanted to note that the city is updating the comprehensive plan. Uh in the next couple of years with that uh local governments are required to plan for climate change as part of their comprehensive plan. the city will begin its work to meet those met council requirements in 26 and 27. And if you want any more information, uh feel free to head to the lake elmo.gov sustainability page. Uh Kathy, our communications uh coordinator and I are working to update that uh to be a a good comprehensive uh sustainability resource. And if you have any questions on any of these any of these programs, feel free to to reach out to me. So thanks. >> Thank you, Miss Meruso. Any questions for staff or for Miss Muros? Thank you for your efforts on this. Thank you for putting the team together and thank you for coming all the way out to Lake Elmo. >> Hopefully we can have you back for more leaves. >> One one leaf a trip every time. >> That's not a lot. >> That's not sustainable or good for climate change. a certain amount or you don't get any. >> Do we have any public comments or inquiries for tonight? >> No. >> Uh E is approval of minutes. Has everyone had a chance to go through the minutes for February 17. Absent of hearing any changes, I entertain a motion. >> So moved. >> Support. >> Motion to what? >> Motion to approve the minutes from the 20 uh 217 2026 city council meeting. >> Thank you. and >> support. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve the minutes from February 17. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> None are opposed. Motion passes. Item F, consent agenda. One, approve payments and dispersements. Two, approve a farm lease for a city-owned 180 acres. Three, approve Lake Elmo strategic communications plan. Four, approve massage therapy license renewal. Five, approve Lake Elmo Firehouse Edition. Six, approve Lake Elmo Fire Department, Valley Branch Water >> Shed District. >> There's no S in there, but okay. Shed district training agreement. That's embarrassing. I should have known that. >> Water shed is one word. >> Oh, it is. Okay. All those in favor of >> approving the agenda, the consent agenda as written, please signify by Oh, we need a motion. >> U move to approve the consent agenda as presented. >> Second. >> There's a motion and a second on the floor to approve the consent agenda as written. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> There are none opposed. The motion passes and the consent agenda is approved as provided in the packet. Item G, regular agenda, class and compensation update. >> Yes. Good evening. Um, in front of you tonight is a request to move forward with a compensation study to continue to meet the key objectives of our compensation plan to attract and retain qualified employees while providing equitable and competitive comp comp uh compensation. Our compensation plan states we will review all aspects of the plan annually which includes reviewing, verifying and updating as nec as necessary the administrative guidelines, plan components, job descriptions, job evaluations and salary ranges. Um, at this time it's and to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars, we would like to just do a refresh or an abbreviated version of a compensation study in line with our current safe classification structure rather than looking at a complete restructure of our plan. However, in the future, we will need to move forward with a complete study uh like the one that was done in 2022. Um as Baker Tilly no longer provides these services and the safe structure developed by them is unsupported. We feel it's important to move forward with this project now to continue to provide competitive compensation both in wages and benefits. As you know, our public works department was not competitive with what we were seeking seeing in the market. And with your approval, we were able to realign the positions based on correcting a category in which they were slotted in Baker Tilly's safe classification structure, which allowed us to post the new operator position more competitively. We want to make sure all of our positions are reviewed in the same manner to retain that equitable and competitive um compensation in order to attract and retain employees. We received three proposals for the project and after meeting with each vendor, we are recommending moving forward with Flity and Hood who have agreed to work with our current safe structure for this project. Brandon Fitz Simmons from Flity and Hood is here to present the scope of the proposed project and answer any questions you may have. >> Thank you, Mr. Doy. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council members. Well, unfortunately, I don't won't have a shiny reward to provide to you after this presentation. nor paying us will you get one that might be illegal in our case. But I will say this, I I took the sustainable route. There are three of us who could have presented from the firm and I was it because I live in the friendly confines of Still Water. So uh it's good to be to our neighbors to the west. So I'll start as Jennifer said just a introduction on uh the firm briefly what the update would entail, what phases would be part of the compensation update and then field any questions. So your primary team are myself, but the two people beneath the analysts are doing the real work. You know, I'm here for overall strategy, especially in a unionized setting. Uh here to deal with legal compliance issues, but our analysts uh will be doing the work. What's our quick skinny background on us? Uh our headquarters is St. Paul. Uh primarily for me, it's the basement in our Stillwater home. But that's all right. Only a one-person shop for me there. What do we do? We provide legal, analytical, public affair and med media relations services to primarily Minnesota units of government. We perform class comp services for numerous public entities uh serve populations of 1,00 to 300,000. So, um as Jennifer indicated, uh we're under consideration for doing the compensation update. Uh we provided the quote, provided the agreement as part of the agenda packet. So this is an informational overview that uh we felt working with administration to engage the council on why we're doing this. So first you know we hear the terms classification and compensation in the public sector. What do we mean by classification that warrants an update uh that we're not going to do an extensive deep dive on this yet as Jennifer indicated but we're still going to touch on it. What is it? a systematic study of jobs to determine activities and responsibilities, personal qualifications necessary to do the job, conditions under which the workers perform, and each job's relative and importance worth to other jobs internally and externally. And obviously, compensation establishes how an organization like the city manages paying employees for work. And obviously, the big issue, what are those specific compensation amounts we pay to employees? So, what's our approach to studies? One, we want to be customized. Two, comprehensive. Three, comprehendable, so especially councils, unions, and employees at the back end can understand it. And of course, do it in a cost-effective manner. Um, so as Jennifer indicated, why do you do this? Why are we doing the compensation update? We have to make sure that each job in the city interrelate to each other. So, one, as I'll talk about, we can comply with Minnesota's PAC equity law, which is the most rigid PAC equity law in the country, and has been around for over 40 years, and it's very statisticalbased. There's little discretion. Two, optimize your uh the city's mission goals and objectives, operate effective and efficiently, and of course, determine the relative worth and the appropriate pay rate uh to make sure, as indicated already with your comp plan, one, we're internally equitable. um within your jobs. Two were market competitive. Three were uniform and consistent which has been somewhat of an issue in Lake Elmo in our uh initial review of things and of course do it in an affordable cost effective manner. So what do you need? You need a consistent and comprehensive job class and comp system. So we will study certain items that I'll talk about next in each of our phases. So we've got phases A through H. Why do we do A through H? It's not going to be 1 2 3 4 5. Not everything is sequential. A lot a lot of this will overlap. So, first, what's a review, which we've already started even before hiring uh because we've dealt with some microtargeted uh job class issues for the city already. Uh we'll review your current class and comp system. What does that entail? Again, just to give you an idea of scope, these tangibles help. Job descriptions, your job ratings and points, which I'll talk about, which are required under Minnesota's pay equity law. uh fair labor standard act exempt status status can be hourly. Do they have to be sell or can they be sell or do they have to be hourly? Your current class and comp structure, your packet report you submit every 3 years to the state and other governing documents. Um what are we doing now? Um we're providing this inerson presentation to the council at the front end and then we'll uh provide various information to the employees to the union and of course to the city council uh to utilize as part of this review. Then we move to phase B where we start to do job analysis and evaluation updating. What do we do at the front end? We're going to do a higher level review of job descriptions. Again, as Jennifer indicated, we're not doing the deep dive. We're going to change all job descriptions in Lake Elmo. you know, that could be forthcoming. Uh, but for now, we think your job descriptions are pretty solid from what our review is an internal discussion with management, but we are going to have to review all of these to help you update what I'll talk about next, points and pay. So, what are we going to do? Potentially update job descriptions as needed, which won't be an overhaul yet. Two is we'll do job evaluation. What is job evaluation? That is required by law where we have to give assign points to each job based on four factors. Now all of us we have our own system. The safe system will utilize from Baker Tilly uh has it. But in some the four factors the pay equity law in Minnesota says we have to uh comply with for the public sector. We have to point jobs based on skill, effort, responsibility and work conditions and other workrelated criteria. So I've already segueed a little bit. You know what are we going to do when we evaluate jobs? It's not just you know most of you in the private sector. Let's see where the market's at. Uh let's see what we can afford and let's find a number that's market competitive. Minnesota public sector is a lot more rigid. We have to first focus on the internal equity before we can even get to market. So that's why we have to be so systematic with how we do it for the city. Um so as indicated already, you utilize what's called the safe job eval system. Again, we'll rely on job descriptions, rely on management feedback to determine, you know, in Minnesota's pay equity law. We don't start again with payer structure. We start with what are the job points, then the job points will steer where pay goes with the market. So, that's why we always start our studies uh with this. So, we will be doing, you know, ad hoc as needed targeted updates to job evaluation. Now, that word's confusing, but also primarily we just call it job points. Then we get to phase C which is really the meat of this is the market survey and analysis. So what did we want to do? You know one hand we could do ad hoc. You know you had your public works position. Let's just as I call it sniff around the market. Let's check League of Minnesota city salary survey data. Yeah that was done but we felt working with you know administration here. We have to be more methodical on this. So, not only we trying to set you up now to figure out are your wages competitive, especially in a growing city like Lake Elmo, we're trying to give you infrastructure uh with doing the market survey and analysis. So, what do I mean by that? The first big issue we're going to do and we're very statistical and analytical how we do it. But of course, you're wonky. Who is you know, which is establish your market entities and sources. Now, we all know who Lake Elmo compared to 10 years ago, you got a completely different, excuse me, batch of market entities. And primarily when we say market entities because we're in the public sector, most your jobs are primarily just public sector jobs or we get there's some skill sets that could eek into the private sector. We really focus on cities and looking at that's really who you need your main competitor when it comes to recruitment retention. So that's likely going to be at the core of who we assess are going to be your market entities. Now what do we look at um when we uh try to determine your market entities? We're going to look at a course population proximity just focus on the Twin Cities metro area. Uh focus on median household income. Focus on your tax capacity capa uh total tax capacity per capita which is really we call it the measure of wealth of cities. So we you know we've got a comprehensive database the only consultant that really does this. And we just look beyond population. We look at those other factors such as tax capacity or median uh household income. Um, then what do we do after we establish your market entities? We determine benchmark jobs to compare. More likely than not, we're not going to survey all 20 plus of your job classes because part of that is now here's why we're more advantageous in the private sector. Anytime we ask the public sector for data, they have to give it. We all know in the private sector it's just tough because you know for antitrust issues that that law for those who are familiar with that just doesn't apply in the public sector. So we target who your cities are and we can get good data and a way to get good data is not overwhelm the survey respondents. So side note that's why I usually benchmark jobs. Then the third thing we'll do of course is draft and submit market surveys to them. Uh to see if they have jobs that match up with Lake Elmo. Uh and then to see what is the fourth item. What are we going to get from the market? Of course what are their base wages? What are they paying folks? And in the public sector, we're not just looking at what do you pay your administrator today. We're looking at base wages and the structure because again in the public sector, some use it in the private sector, but that is the the core that you need especially to comply with pay equity law. So we'll look at wages and structure. We'll look at health insurance contribution, the second largest part of your uh personnel budget. Three, we'll look at dental insurance. Four is callback pay, a big deal in the maintenance world. How are people structuring it? Um and related to that on call pay uh what are we paying folks paid time off paid leave obviously a big deal in the public sector related to that overlapping uh is vacation then after we compile all that we'll do our analytical work to come up with comparison data just to see today in 2026 where does Lake Elmo stack up with the market so we've done our internal review we've done the market review now we get to phase D we really have to look at both of those the internal equity part on the pay structure and schedule which I'll talk about next. So right now you have a base pay schedule or some folks will call it the grid. You basically have pay grades. The higher the job point for a job the higher their pay grade. Then within each paygrade uh you have steps. So you move up not only with for example loosely called a cola we call it a general wage increase but you move up from steps on top of that based on your length of service and satisfactory performance. So, we're going to really look at making sure your structure, which we've already found holes in it, is internally equitable. And I'll pause on that. What's one driver for this? You have some misalignment in that you have some jobs without your list in front of me that are higher pointed, but they're maybe lower paid than lower point jobs. I think I flipped that. Lowerointed jobs are paid higher than higher pointed jobs. So, you get the you've got some inverse problems with points and paying positions. So that's something we'll look at make sure it's of course legally compliant the pay equity law externally competitive again affordable. Then once we come up with sort of all right what is maybe the utopia structure then we get to the second bullet point that councils are always intrigued by all right we're going to do it citywide but what's the impact not only um for the city on our budget and can we afford it and two is though what's the impact on individual employees to make sure it's fair and reasonable. So that's really the core of course the end product why you do it. So as a side note um I've already talked about the Minnesota pay equity law uh requirements. Uh we sort of flipped our slides here but this shifts from phase D the structure to phase E which is you know we'll make sure your structure is compliance with the pay equity law the recent one you submitted to the state was. But again we can look at a report like that and again understand that internally you have some misalignment uh in comparing positions which is important. >> Is that an annual report that we have to submit? >> No it's uh right now it's every 3 years. Okay. >> So you did it for in 26 based on 25 wages. Your next report is 29 for 28 wages. So thankfully now side note you brought up a good point. Now is the time to do it. You know what do we usually come in or often cities are like we're out of compliance. help us. At least like Elmo, we've got a couple years here, two to three years to make sure we're we're fully >> when we were in compliance. >> You were in compliance, but you had some clear >> flaws with it. >> And side note, that's submitted to the state Minnesota management budget. And side note, if you're out of compliance, they can they're force you to get in compliance and they can sanction cities through uh fines and fees. Um so we've got pay equity compliance. Then we'll come back to the council with a full final report to describe all right what are the results and the big thing for all you are going to have to consider is how do we implement it thanks for all the data we'll obviously give working with administration some recommendations that make sure we're competitive internally externally and it's cost effective but we come back to you uh with all that then once we get direction from the council uh weeks months later then we can start communicating with the employees and your bargaining unit that is your opinion on what we want to do and then we'll work on you know your plan is so so but we think back to infrastructure we think maybe we can tweak your philosophy tweak your plan um you know going forward so that will be an output of the study is fixing some of those uh structural issues then of course we'll work with related to that work with administration on you know a cheat sheet on all right how do we unimplement in the summary form what's our timeline and like I said communicate to the employees and the project team. Then what we'll do is obviously we've seen some flaws just with how it's set up because you basically lost the consultant who set up your system for many cities and they're just not doing it for city the size of Lake Elmo anymore. You know, we'll do the training uh and uh for management how to maintain it and update it, your job descriptions, your points, your pay structure adjustments, pay structure slotting for employees. And then if employees feel, well, my job title's off, my job description is off, my job points are off, you know, try to fine-tune the process uh that you have for dealing with that in the interimm. And then, of course, we're always available uh to consult as needed for maintenance and updating. So again, what's your action plan tonight? I know it's on the agenda. We've given the quote, we give them the services agreement, and we're just trying to give an overview. If you do retain us, uh this will be the scope of the study. So any questions? >> Yeah, I was just hoping uh if you could maybe kind of dig into you mentioned that the report would be customized. I guess I just would like to hear a little bit more about how do you go about customizing it? I know obviously a lot of that benchmark data. >> Yes. >> But maybe like an example like how would how would it be customized compared to like if Stillwater did this, right? A city of comparable size, how does it get customized to cities that are comparable? >> Yeah. So we for example done in Still Water and Oakdale. So you brought a perfect examples bigger animals and what's a driver for them for example they're really law enforcement driven so law enforcement can drive a lot of their wages. So when we say customize you're right we're I'm sorry we have to start with the micro which maybe is not different than a Stillwater or Oakdale is we the first thing we do like I said the market study we want to find Lake Elmo specific entities that we should compare to. So again not only for wages but we also look at that you know structurally one what jobs do they have and two we look at related to pay what's their hierarchy. So when we look at the market, you know, if we have positions XYZ and it's Yxz on pay for Lake Elmo, we can look at the market and try to customize and say, all right, Lake Elmo has a problem with the hierarchy compared to the market. Then what do we mean by customize further? Then what do we do internally? We go, why do we have that misalignment in Lake Elmo to the market? Then we'll start to look at your job evaluation points to see within the safe system, for example, how we should maybe reclassify the job title. reclassify the job description or reclassify the point. So again, whether you're a large or small city, you're right that that's the same comment they'd all get, but I'm telling you how we can get one that fits a city of 15,000 with your tax capacity per capita without a police department, how we're really micro in how we customize it. >> Okay. Thank you. What would be some of the limitations that you've seen for cities similarly positioned to ours where it's a difficulty that's arose during your study? It's something where you had to have some back and forth with council or with staff where you think that that's something we should be aware of to put on our radar of potential hurdles. >> Yep. So I think two things with that one it be can be become personal meaning all right we have a position for example let's say an output as we're going through this is you know this position relative to the market is 10% overpaid so we might freeze their wages and statistically administration's there our stats support it but then they're like all right they want to go to council because you know these people and try to do an endound administration or the consultant say come on they're sort of picking on me for you know reasons xyz So that is prevalent but that's up to us and especially you as council to go all right well let's go back to administration let's go back to the consultant and what's our buffer to that that's why I as I put in our presentation we always have job class reviews so that instead of running to the council saying why are they freezing my wages or I think I'm underpaid should be paid higher you know you're going to have a good systematic way to say well that's why not only do we bring a consultant but even if they're off we have a whole review process we can go through So that is one hurdle. Another hurdle, you know, your uh less prevalent in unionized employees obviously number-wise, but sometimes you will see that, you know, similar situations to that where the unions want to go to the city council and try to maybe get more interjected in the study and the data, but that's up to us. That's up to administration to communicate. But we have seen that as well to try to to do the end rounds directly to council. What's a a reasonable goal you have for how many comparables to have? >> Yeah. Now, what's ideal, but I think we'll be more expansive. The utopia is usually 7 to 11 because that gives you what we feel is a good core. You're like, yeah, these are growing cities in the 15,000ish range, similar tax capacity per capita because but your growth is so wild that we might push it to 15, but that's top. See, that's enough where we go that's sufficient data, but it's not. Some consultants will come and say, "Here's 30 comparables." And there's just no way in the Twin Cities metro like Elmah's anything, you know, close to 30 comparables with how you're growing. So, all I can say, I think, right now, we're probably going to look at the 10 to 15 range based on your growth. So, we have some infrastructure because we're just not going to lock in cities of 15,000. Some of those cities are stagnant in the inner circle, you know, near Minneapolis, St. Paul, you're not. So, that's why I think we'll go a little higher higher end. >> Thank you for that. Any additional questions for Mr. Fitz Simmons? >> Maybe just on the opposite side of the the example that you gave, you know, what what happens when it comes back and we're underpaying and then we have to we have to also compromise that with well, okay, now we got to look at the budget. How does this work with how we're trying to manage our increases in the tax levy? How have you seen cities handle that situation when it comes back? And I know it's kind of getting ahead. Maybe it won't be that way, but I I I have to imagine that happens. Yeah. So, one, we sort of know though you tried to a band-aid fix, you did have a market problem there for you, a recruitment retention problem. Um, so you're right. That's one of the reasons we look at the study and yet it's highly plausible and I I'm pretty confident you are going to have that somebody a position now not an employee is going to be 7 10 15% below the market. So now this is going to be the analytical answer but it's true. We always go even if for example back to your limitations employee will say I'm 15% below market. I mean, this is the example I probably should have started with. Give me a 15% bump. But then we're back to this whole presentation. Well, here's what we have to look at. Back to your point. Well, we have to look first look at internal equity and seems like you're sort of aligned correctly internally. Okay, maybe that mitigates. But I get it. Market, you're 15% below. So, we may have a recruitment retention problem. So, maybe we'll do a fix, but we have to do the fix affordability wise. So, I know that's such an academic answer, but one that's why you hire us. uh you know not only to do that analysis but we just come off more objective. So when we're talking with you but back to the affordability end I mean I will say this thankfully with all the recommendations we have councils yeah on rare occasion will give push back but that's that's why we work with administration and I mean I'm being practical I haven't done this for 22 years is my view is this is administrator or lawyers we're not going to go to council if we think it's just going to be shot down right away. So full circle before we even get to you on the affordability part we're we're spending many hours with Nicole and Jennifer running the numbers to say all right internally market that's good but is this going to be cost effective or to your point sometimes is this going to be unaffordable to implement with one or more positions in year one. So maybe again who knows where the data will go maybe we just have to phase it in. So we will try to find ways to get the pay where we need to be but again do it in a cost-effective way. Okay. And and do do we have future discussions about how those two should play together as this process is going about where you get some feedback from council? Hey, you know, these are kind of our concerns from a budget standpoint. Does that input get provided or is that just more come from staff's perspective on what they've heard us discuss at meetings? >> Yeah, I mean this is a good point here. Let's talk raw. What's our baseline study? We're primarily over administration because it's clunky when we meet with you. generally has to be an open session which is okay but we want you to give direction to the administrator we're working with them within those confines and then what's normal we're working within your general levy and budget confines that the administrators trying to rely on that you know starting in July with recommendations coming from us so with some idea where it'll go so you're right full circle generally I'll be practical when do council give input during the budget levy process and we come to you with the report so proactively in the middle of a study. Do we come to the council? No, because I'll be again trying to be real practical working with councils. I don't like going to councils with sort of a oh halfway here's what we're kind of sort of thinking. We all know if you say that in the public, oh, you said that back in April, so you're stuck with it. So, but when sometimes when council wants to get a little more engaged, we may do, for example, which benefits us, me being a lawyer, I can give a privilege memo to council if we feel updates warranted, but normally it's budget levy and then the final implementation process where council gives formal feedback. >> All right, thanks for that clarity. >> Absent of any further questions, if anyone wants to ask a question of staff. >> Yeah. Uh, one with that. So with the 2022 study that we did with Baker Tilly, how often do we feel that that type of study does need to be done? The more comprehensive, >> right? Four, five, six years is probably when you really want to. >> So since we're kind of coming on that, >> right? >> Is there I guess why wait now then? Even though I I don't know if I want to do the whole thing. I guess why wait at this point if we're doing the study? >> This would tide us over for another couple years. >> Okay, >> we just again trying to be budget conscious and and um work with what we have. >> Okay. >> Kind of keep the >> but we should have it on the radar that it's going to be soon. >> Correct. >> Okay. Absent any further questions, I'll entertain a motion for discussion. >> Motion to approve the Flity and Hood agreement providing compensation update services. >> Support. >> There's a motion and a second on the approval of the Flity and Hood agreement. Any discussion? >> Perhaps you could um talk a little bit about the benchmark positions. I'm not sure everyone's on board with you know what you what what you're exactly describing. >> Y so when it comes to benchmarking what do we do? One we try to look at jobs that other cities will have. Now again you're still small enough or just most of all your jobs um are going to be out there um in the public sector. Two is then we try to find ones among different levels of the organization. Again, you're still pretty small. So, it's not like you have that many levels. So, when I say levels, what do I mean by that? One is it's the high up and down hierarchy. We want to get the top position administrator to, you know, lower level labor maintenance position and some in between. So, that's the second factor. And then third factor, of course, again, not many departments, but we want to make sure that every department's represented in the study. So those are the three three main drive three or four main drivers with the one being well we're only going to survey positions that we think other cities have which most of yours you do. >> So you compare these job descriptions with Lake Elmo with the other cities make sure they're comparable with benchmarks match up pretty well. >> Yeah. So we're real methodical in that. I'll be practical when we do the market survey. We will not here again. If you're going to survey 20 positions, we're not going to give them all 20 job descriptions saying who's a match. Instead, you have good summaries in your job descriptions that we'll put in for each job classes. And then two, we'll list all right, is this a 50, 60, 70, 80%, 90, 100% match. And then there's some any of this is going to be subjectivity, but that's how we try to match it in other communities so they can check the box. >> Thank you. >> Discussion on the motion. Well, I I I'll start. I I I know I had a lot of questions on it, but you know, I do support this and um you know, I had some concerns whenever we do studies. I I always kind of question what maybe we could be doing a little bit more internally versus externally. I think in a situation where we're talking about compensation, obviously, um it's probably best to outsource that so there's no questions about fairness or just the concerns that could arise from that. So, I'm completely on board with that. Um, I know the motion is just for uh the base option, which I'm in favor of. I don't really want to do any of those other options currently. I think, you know, down the road when we do the full study, we can look at that. But I think for now, um, this does make sense. I'm assuming it's being brought to us because there's concerns that, you know, maybe we aren't paying at the right amount. Um, and so we do have to be proactive on that versus reactive. um to make sure we don't have a an exodus. >> Yeah, I would say um I'm on board with this too. I mean the uh thank you for the presentation. I mean you were extremely eloquent with explaining this process. Um the depth of the presentation, all the deliverables that we'll receive too. So I just want to say thank you for putting together a great presentation. >> Thank you. >> I'm in favor of it. I mean in full disclosure, you know, I ran management consulting for spring. So the safe system was I was a Christian. We bought the safe system from um Munipal Advisors Incorporated in Virginia Beach. So very familiar with it. I built the computer models for it. So I want to talk about the benchmark because I was sure that all the council people understood how you did the benchmarking which to me is a real critical factor in getting those matchups right. And sometimes people that turn around and and you know they're not exactly sure how it goes about. So I I apologize. I didn't know what you were going to do, but I want them to know >> and agree the benchmarking does matter. If it's off, the report is junk. >> Yeah. >> And we've we've we've had that question before with studies. So it's a very valid question to be raised. I appreciate that you raised it. I I support the motion. This is a part of our budget to begin with. I do support the concept to council member Hearn's question and as you answered Miss Doyle, it extends us. It It helps to push off that next study. To me, this is a a rational use of our our limited tax funds and there's also a need for it. So, I think it is appropriately sized and scaled to what our needs are at this time. Uh and I do support it and I appreciate the presentation. I I personally don't have concerns with the presentation and we've we've had some bad outcomes previously with other instances dating back I mean I'm the oldest one here for the six years we've been here but I won't digress on that but I I I expect a quality report and um I look forward to seeing it. >> I would also comment that I'm familiar with Flare and Hood for many years. because on executive board for the coalition of greater Minnesota stays way way >> and um and so but I'm I'm fair with the firm the good work that you do I have no no qualms about your qualifications and the good work that you've done in the past >> and if he did he would say so seeing no further discussion I'll call a question all those in favor of the underlying motion please signify by saying I >> I >> there are none opposed the motion passes Thank you for this item two, storm water management utility code review, Miss Miller. >> Thank you, acting mayor and council. So, I wanted to bring this back. It's been a while since we talked about it. It was um September of last year when we um had our city engineer Nate um was here discussing what um the scope of a review would be. So since then we have added it in to our 26 budget based on that discussion and then um I just wanted to bring it back to make sure that um council was on board with the scope still and then if there's any questions Nate is here to answer them and then we can move forward with it. >> The item is in the packet. Uh we have the underlying documents. Do we have questions for staff? >> I have I have comments but not questions. Really no questions. Okay. Do we have any further questions before a motion? As this is something we we have discussed. So the public this is not we're not just skipping. We this is not a new concept for us. Otherwise I'll entertain a motion so we can have discussion. >> Motion to approve the scope for review of storm water fee as provided by Bolton and Mink. >> There's a motion. Is there a second? I will second. So, we have discussion. All right, we have a motion and a second. Discussion. Yeah, the storm water utility has a large number of issues that we've talked about and this proposed analysis doesn't solve those. It it it patched around the edges of them. I think what we need to do is is have an RFP and bring on a a study that addresses all of the issues in the storm water utility. um you know what's not in here. Okay, we talked a little bit about the equity of the system and the charging of the parcels. Okay, but you know we haven't gone into the details about what about the HOAs that have storm water ponds that they pay themselves for the maintenance of but they pay the same amount as everybody else. They have an extra financial burden for storm water that runs off of the streets and sidewalks and public rights away that other people don't but we don't give them any credit for that. Um we have 25 people who receive a discounted storm water fee that nobody knows what why we are given a discounted fee and in fact in my analysis it may be a problem actually with the law in regard to that that may not they may not be appropriate under the statute. Um you know we need to to take a look at those other things and get once and all you know one time and get the study right. We've talked we had all these discussions about should we fund storm water utility improvements on the stormwater utility. The ordinance clearly says the fees supposed to use for capital improvements, but we haven't traditionally done that. And that pushes the burdens to taxpayers instead of rateayers. And so as we look at all of these issues and put it together into one financial a concept management plan, how are the parcels going to be charged for utility fee that that's fair and equitable? How to review the HOAs that have management responsibilities of storm water ponds fair and equitably. How do we make sure that the the discounts we've granted are appropriate? They're granted a long time. They're appropriate and meet statutory requirements. And how do we, you know, set the fees based on all this new information so they're generate the revenue we need. The surai utility had you know had operating losses every year about 500,000 in 24. And so we're not our fees aren't covering our operating costs to begin with. And so if we change the way we charge parcel size or whatever, then we still have to do a study what is the fee going to be. And rather than attack it on the fringes, let's put together an RFP that addresses all of those issues and do one study and get it right. >> Would it be fair to say your analysis is is putting the cart before the horse? because it what what I'm hearing is running the numbers is part two if you're not if you're not reviewing the underlying policies and the underlying variables that still are not fixed by just updating the >> right we need to we need to fix all the variables in this fund and it's been around a long time. It's not a criticism of of anybody or anything. It's just it's time to make this bring it up to current conditions in the city. We have very diverse city land use wise and we need to have our storm water charges need to be fair to everybody based on parcel size. Granting that absolute equity is not possible but as equitably as you can be. The example I gave was um we look there's a house in the old village it's on 210 of an acre and it's 900 square feet. We got a house in another development that's 10,000 square feet has a sport court and a huge driveway. lot more runoff, but they both pay the same fee. And that's not fair to our residents. We need to make this as fair as we can so we can look them in the eye and say, "You might not like to pay a storm water fee, but we we've gone through a lot of effort to make sure everyone pays their fair share." >> Yeah. So, I I I generally agree here with council member Dragoich, and you know, I think maybe as we I agree on the the concept of we need to have more of a conversation around the policy in a whole. I'm sure there'll be disagreements that maybe come up there. I think the big one for me, and I know you've brought this up, is the storm water fund and using that for the the storm water pro the capital improvements. Um I think that's a discussion that needs to be had. So I I I do share the same um opinion here that I I do think maybe we do need to look at this as a little bit more holistic um all at once versus kind of just this piece first on the fringes. I think we list up what are what are the issues that we see in the storm water utility and then develop an RFP that will address each of those. >> Yeah, I agree. I think there there are too many variables with that and people should be paying their fair share and it's make sure it's equitable for every citizen here. I >> agree. So, what I'm hearing is yes, we fully support getting data on the topic, which is what we're here for tonight, but not necessarily this method and probably something more robust, which is not a critique of staff at all. >> This is more so an opportunity where all of us, minus Charles, can discuss it in open forum. As we still have a motion, we can continue to discuss ideas. So, okay, we can amend the motion or we can vote it down and propose a different emotion which either could go to a workshop. I don't know if staff would you feel comfortable developing RFP ideas tonight or should that be something more thoroughly vetted in a specific manner? >> I think we would need some more information. Um but our finance director probably can add some more context to the discussion about the storm water fees. >> Yes, Miss Hadler. >> Um just as as additional information, staff is already working on at least a couple of the items that Council Member Draguch mentioned. So it's not that we haven't addressed some of these. Um we are definitely doing it incrementally around all of our other work. Um, but of the I I think maybe you mentioned four items. We are already addressing two of those. So it would be it would be good to get everybody on the same page so that we're not creating an RFP for something that staff has already done a bunch of work on. So >> is to for two of the four some internal work being done. Awesome. for the other two. Is that something where external assistance is needed or helpful or required or stay away from your perspective? >> I mean that that's up to you guys. Um you know I I think that you know the originally pardon my trying to jog my memory here a little bit. You know we had kind of um taken some of these discussion points and looked at like what can we do as part of our utility study that we update each year. Um and so that's kind of where we're going into the um can we can we fund the um street projects and and to what level right so there's additional discussions that need to be had around that obviously we're going to start those next week and then there was more of the um structure of the fees we're certainly not qualified to do that and that's why we had brought in Bolton and make to do that portion and so it's this like I'm I'm not saying don't do an RFP I'm just saying we have information to share that that might lend itself to determining if that's something that you really want to do at this time. >> What type of timeline do you anticipate for the parts that are being worked on? >> So, we're going to discuss that um street uh issue next week as part of the kind of a preliminary to the rate discussion. Um so I can just give a a kind of a a inter or an overview on that um during the workshop. Um we had talked about at the last engineering meeting how to address the um the uh people that are getting the discount and so I think we all agree we need to do something with that. It's just a matter of you know like who's going to do it and when and um moving forward. Um, so I I think everything's sort of a implement over time. Um, and maybe it would be helpful even if we um if we did a little bit more of a a a better job summarizing our plans and and our steps moving forward in a more comprehensive way for your discussion point. And maybe we can touch on that next week. And then that would leave what were the two then that were not because you you did mention four right? >> HOA >> the HOA maintenance agreements >> and the just the equity of the part of the customer charges >> presumably based upon impervious amounts. >> Yeah. Um, Nate, was that is that part of what you have in there is the fee calculation methodology? >> Yeah. So, the the way the fees calculated, there's a hand there's eight um categories right now. And the intent of this review was to take a look at those um and then look at Lake Elmo now and say, okay, are we missing something? you are we missing, you know, the the um one one item that came up was, you know, the small lot, large lot, you know what I mean? So, right now it just says residential. That's that's one that I'm that I know we would have, you know, looked into and and had some some recommendations on, you know, things like that. Um because at the end, you know, you've got these equations, but then there's the actual the the number that is multiplied by, excuse me, by those equations is what's called in the ordinance utility charge. And I think that's more what the finance department would look at based on our recommendations for um any sort of modifications or additions to um the way that those are calculated per land use. Do do you feel that those efforts are then indeed focused and would help to tackle the equity based upon impervious issue? >> Well, I I do, but I but I have no problem taking another step back here and circling the wagons based on this discussion tonight. you know, um it's a it's right now it's, you know, that exercise I've got kind of, you know, budgeted in like I' I've spoken with my um water resources staff um about this. Um the scope is very clear. It does not include some things that were asked about tonight, such as the credits. Um, so this was just to re to initially to to get us going on um what are those gaps in in um land uses that we're not covering? Um are there some things here that are that are outdated that need to be updated? you know, um, looking at what other communities are doing, um, with with their calculation methodology and then, you know, looking at Lake Away and how those might we might be able to to pick some of those and and plug them in here appropriately and tailor to the community, you know. So, it's it's it's we can wait. I you know I I was just bringing it you know like administrator Miller said you know we talked about this near six months ago now you know what I mean so we just don't want it to to languish if if council wants to move forward but we can certainly we can certainly >> wait >> we did talk about um as you're gathering the data for this to look at other how other cities um do their appeal process. >> Yep. And then of course we would work with Sarah to make sure it's legally sound, getting rid of the um income based credits, right? And then probably implementing maybe annual review of the um discount if folks have them. So we're reooking at them as well. >> And there's some other creative areas we could look at too. You know, I was at an educational seminar, believe it or not, and um and one of the things that was discussed was, you know, the largest runoff area in the city are the streets. And there are cities now that include the Emperius area streets in their Imperial area calculation and they charge that back to the properties based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers trip generation manual. Why? because you put in a big commercial development, you add turn lanes, you know, on both sides, you increase the street width and it generates a lot more runoff. And so, you know, a resident has, I think it's 10 trips per day is if I remember right, eight or 10. Eight to 10. >> Okay. And so, you get um HIV and they could have 3,000 trips per day and you widen out all the streets, create a lot more impervious area, but you pass those costs on to the homeowners. So, if you include the streets in there and and have a charge basis, it would be on general land use. would be on a parcel specific perhaps, but you would set it up so the fee, you know, and considers the fact that, you know, some developments create a lot more demand for a lot more runoff than others based on their traffic demands. And those are things that, you know, we might have a chance to discuss. I thought that was a particularly interesting presentation and there are cities that are actually doing that now um because it makes sense when you're thinking about total runoff. I thought you were retired >> that I was tired. No, I'm awake >> re >> or >> Retired. So, >> but those are those are some of the things, you know, that in in a in a discussion of looking at your utility, you could you could take a look and and certainly Nate, you know, could do that for us. I you know I mean if we want to I think if we want to move forward we want to move in and it's in a way understanding that we're going to get some information concurrently on you know the the discounts and um what else are the discounts >> the appeal process the incomebased credits the fees being equitable storm water fund for projects HOA maintenance agreements and apparently new and innovative ways to include the true impact of impervious. >> The other point when we talk about you know surface water and capital improvements the ordinance itself says that the revenue from the storm artillery shall not can be but shall be used for capital improvements in developed areas. It's not an option. It is a shall that's in our ordinance. So what are ways that maybe can this be phased in? I mean because staff is working diligently on multiple pieces in including apparently as as you mentioned the appeal process and the income based credits. >> That would be part of um Bolton and Mink providing um when they're doing the research for other cities giving us some ideas on how other people do the appeal process and how we might want to change ours. So, oh sorry. >> Oh, so I was just gonna say this is a good discussion because the discussion from September was um kind of doing a minimal approach, right? Is looking at these. It was the fee calculation methodology and land use categories um maybe spending less money and doing you know and then having staff look at the actual fees. So, if we want to broaden it, then we would definitely need to have further discussion on the whole scope and what it should be to, you know, to make sure we're all on the same page. >> I would suggest that if if if staff has gone down part of the way on some of this rather than throw their work away, perhaps we could set a target date that would, you know, give you sufficient time to complete that. I know you're very busy. That's, you know, one of the reasons I was looking, you know, at a fuller RFP. But if you feel you've gone down the path far enough, maybe we say pick a date, August 1, something maybe come back at our at our workshop next week and and kind of get a sense of what will be the timing for staff to complete those pieces that we you're you could complete in house. the the fee credits or discounts, the appeal process, you know, um >> well, that was going to be done by Bolton and Mink when he does the all the other research >> that was that was added into the scope for no additional cost. >> Okay. >> Just since he was looking at other cities um structures >> then he could provide some information on the appeal process as well. Am I speaking correctly? >> Yeah, that's correct. Okay. >> Yeah, it was it was um it's that part of it for us was would just be gathering data mostly and synthesizing it. It wouldn't it wasn't going to be a um a very large task. >> So potentially from because I I'm seeing this from a phasing in approach like make there's multiple moving parts. Make sure that it's properly phased in so that things that are needed earlier on don't occur later on. Is it an issue for what is currently in the Bolton and Mink thing to happen now while concurrently the work is continuing to be done within finance? Is that an is that an issue in terms of impacting potential policy decisions and recommendations later on? >> I don't think so. >> I I don't think so either. And of all the listed items, it sounds like maybe the HOA maintenance agreements is the only one that's not necessarily a part of any of this this activity is what I'm hearing. And >> so just to clarify um so council member Draguch's um comments about like the you know equating traffic or trip generation to um imperous surfaces and and those impervious surfaces being then you know parsed out to those trip generators that that was not part of what we were you know >> yes I agree with that I I didn't I didn't read that or I was going to comment on that that we would need to add that in >> um as you know as a another way of allocating the cost >> equitably to different land uses. >> Um that was clearly not in his fee. I mean, I certainly would be open to just coming back at our next full council meeting with that slight whatever that additional potential cost is for the HOA maintenance agreements and innovative solution math stuff that Nick offered, but it it seems like I mean this is a collaborative effort of combining internal resources with external resources to try to still phase it and time it to get to that that end goal is what I'm hearing. >> The the other thing I would I would suggest that we ask Nate to do then is to take a look at we have these HOA storm water ponds. What is what do we see as a maintenance cost for those? Um, and then can we establish a credit system back to the HOAs who are who have storm water management agreements with the city and they're maintaining ponds that take runoff from the streets and from other public areas. It's there there's a long-term cost to that. At some point, it gets hugely expensive when they get full of sediment. >> But, I mean, there's a way to figure that out. uh there are cities who have gone in in the in the last 10 years and have had to clean out those ponds and they're 30 years old or whatever. There's a way to come back to on an average annual basis. This is what the cost that burden has has been imposed and we could figure out a credit system for that. Um if you're comfortable adding that in. >> Well, I yeah, we we certainly can. I'm I'm going to have to circle back with my staff though and do some additional research here >> because that could be >> a little more of a heavier lift. I don't I I' I'd be curious to see if other communities have gone on a path like that. I'm not aware of it. You know, >> there was an article five years ago in the Star Tribune that said that the the expected projected cost of cleaning out the storm water ponds in the metro area was like $3 billion. Mhm. >> They're expensive to clean once they once they get their from the annual maintenance. They're going cutting the brush in the trees. And it's not that's not such a huge expense, but it's that long-term expense that they would be burdened with when they become full. >> Maybe if that's something that information is attainable, maybe that could be a separate line item. Yes. >> Cost. >> Yes. just because again it might not be and it might not be something we want but if it can be something looked into I >> sure >> um is this something that would could be done within two weeks for that type of update to this or should we is it need a month because again the work is being done and it's not going to be done in two weeks anyways >> right >> within finance so should we give engineering a a month to come back with a revise >> that would yeah that'd be that'd be better um because again I'm going to have to work with both staff at Lake Ammo and then internally at my firm and and um try to develop a strategy here and and come up with some some paths forward for these various items. >> Does anyone have a motion? A well, okay, we have a motion we have to vote on. >> Vote to amend the motion. Move to amend the motion. That's what we can do. >> Uh Mr. Acting mayor, I think the easiest way to deal with this would be just to vote on the motion that you have on the table and I think it's going to fail and then then you can do a new motion. >> Any further discussion? >> I I mean I guess honestly after that discussion, my main concern was the storm water fund for the storm hunter capital projects and making sure that that piece is brought into it. I I apologize. I didn't know that that was being worked on separately, you know, outside of this. I I guess for me that really is the big piece. I I guess I don't know enough about the HOA storm water ponds and the equity of how HOA houses that are having to pay for their storm water ponds and then also the storm water fee. I I don't I don't know if I have an opinion on that yet. I don't know enough about it. Um, so for me, I guess knowing that the storm water fund and the storm water capital projects, knowing that we're moving in the direction where we're going to be using those funds, it sounds like for paying for those capital improvement projects. I I I am more comfortable with this, but at the same time, you know, Council Member Rodriggoes has a lot of experience in this area. Um, and so I I am kind of looking to him for direction on this. And I, you know, I do trust his if if you feel like it's incomplete, you know, I I do think that's something to consider. >> Well, if we I didn't realize, of course, how far down the road we were as well. I don't want to throw that work out the window and then, you know, redo it. So, I'm comfortable if we if we had some, you know, some date we said we're going to get this all done by this, at least information presented to the council by this >> and kind of all come together. >> Yeah. And then we can sort through it. >> You know the easy answer to HOA agreements man storm water management says just get rid of them. >> Then the cost becomes part of the storm sewer cost that everybody pays. That's the easy solution. You know the developer comes in they put in all the storm water infrastructure pay for it in the price of the lots you and then they have these ponds that they they the developer signs on because he's not going to pay for them. the residents are and so they sign these ma uh storm water management agreements for the ponds that cost the residents every year in their in their HOA fees and the rest of the city gets off with nothing and then they pay the same storm water fee. There's an inequity there. But at any rate, I'm comfortable with giving Nate sufficient time to think about these things. And if you come back and think that the street right, you know, right away stuff is just crazy. Okay. You know, I mean, I saw it. I thought it was very very interesting and very equitable. But there's other opinions out there and I value your opinion. Um, I think the other thing then would be to, you know, for finance come back. you think we can have this work done by August 1st, July 1st, September 1st, whatever the date is. >> So, just to clarify timing, so we were going to um discuss the Stormwater Street Capital project next week just as an intro and and make sure that that is something that we do want to move forward with. and our utility study is going to be presented the following week with our rate changes, our recommended rate changes. So, it's not >> things aren't going to necessarily I I heard somebody say information presented together. We're really sort of doing this somewhat in pieces and and incrementally because for to some degree some information. We do need direction from uh council as far as what we want to implement, what we want to model, what we want to, you know, transfer, etc. You need information from us. And so it's just sort of it's going to be to some degree an iterative process. Um, I think there are a lot of policies within the stormwater fund and practices that that can be addressed um sort of individually. I'm sure it would be fun to just get let's get them all decided all in one night. Um, but just to sort of be cautious with our um funding of these projects um I I guess I'm comfortable implementing them uh a little bit over time. And I would say with regard to the the utility rates until we get everything settled, you know, why would we do a utility rate study for storm water utility? We're going to change the classification systems and and add maybe add more classes. >> We're we're just updating the study that we already have in place. So you saw it last year. It was your idea to to make sure we're funding depreciation. So we made sure to get that accomplished in this study. And so we're this is th this is this like again this iterative process. We go through this every year. We're gonna we're gonna project out our utility funds for 10 years. We're going to take a look at it every year and make sure that our assumptions are still holding. We're going to take a look at cash. We're going to so our our our recommendations for water and sewer might not have changed since we saw it last year. Our recommendation for storm water has definitely changed. So it we're we're going to address it this year. We're also going to address it next year. So >> I think we're going to point >> we're going to adjust the rates when we we reclassify the system. We have new rate structure and so we may have to update the rate study at that point. >> Exactly. Yeah. We will we will be updating the rate study annually. So >> well but I mean if we get this done in September you maybe we just we have now instead of having 10 classes we have opic six. You know now we have said what are the reason six classes generate the revenue that we need. >> Sure. >> Is that something timing wise we can do? Uh, I would have to kind of take a look at our workload. Fall is often busy with budgets, but we can certainly try. >> Mr. Nick, am I hearing you right? So, you still think we should wait, do a more comprehensive study to understand how we should be charging and then once we have more of that information, then we look at how the fee classifications are being said. I guess I was >> we can we can kind of do this based on the where they the information we have this evening. If we take look at the fee classifications, the charge system, how what parcels are in there and what we're charging for and all that. Once we get done, if the council agrees that's the charge system we should use, then we're going to have to back our way through and say what are the fees we have to charge in each classification to generate the revenue we need. My concern was, you know, I didn't want the staff to have to do two rate studies in one year. Um, but I think just mo moving it forward based on where we're at today, I think the process we're talking about will get us where we need we need to be in the next 120 days, 150 days >> with what we have here. >> No, with what we talked about this evening >> with a modified >> modified modified >> and understanding that, you know, Clarissa staff is working on some of those other pieces that we mentioned. >> Okay. And I I think the only probably the only the only thing I'm a little bit confused about is, you know, we talk about the the policy for finance capital improvements. We have an ordinance that says it shall be. If the policy contradicts that, the ordinance wins. You can't have a policy that's contrary to your ordinance. >> Am I correct in presuming the underlying topic is going to be the cost to do so and how we pay for that? >> Correct. since we don't currently >> timing and equity. >> Gotcha. >> So, I would say we can vote this current motion down if we choose and adopt a new motion asking, you know, staff to continue the work that they're doing on the uh reduce fees and um reduce fees and >> storm water fund for projects which is next week. and then asked Nate to come back with a a proposal address these other issues because it was never my intent to throw well you said that in your proposal Nate and we want to be fair with you as well >> and you have a lot of good staff at you know Bolton and Mink that give some thought to that and they may say wow that's a really great idea or they say that's the dumbest idea I ever heard >> but we can have a discussion about it >> okay I will call the question all those in favor of the underlying motion please signify by saying I. All those opposed? >> I >> I >> either word works. >> Motion fails. Is there another motion on the table? >> I will make a motion to undertake a review of our storm water utility. Um first to look at the charge system and to make sure it's fair and equitable and that it um passes the costs on to each classification of property. the best the most fair way and ask Bolton and Maine to provide us with a proposal to do that. I would suggest also then ask that the finance department continue its work on the the um fees and the funding of projects. financing of projects and the appeals process and income based credits >> and that we look at I don't know I guess we have to find a way to look at the HOA agreements and I'm not sure how we do that tonight but that we add that as a task to be done. >> Is there a second? >> Oh boy, I don't know. There's a lot there. >> Luckily there's a video record. So we have the fee system itself, the parcels, classes of parcels, the inclusion perhaps a public right away. That would be a Bolton and Mink task. I'll provide a proposal for the discounts and the appeals process >> which Bolton and Mink will also be able to give us information on. Okay, >> that should be with Bolton. >> Okay. And then we have the capital improvement part, >> which is >> staff. >> Staff. >> And I'm missing one. Which one am I missing? Um, >> the income >> income based credits. >> Oh, income based credits. Yeah. >> We'll have Sarah do a a legal review of it to make sure it's up to par. So, we're just giving direct give direction, parsing it out, >> and then and then that we we we ask staff to come back with a recommendation how we deal with the HOA storm water agreements to treat everybody fairly. >> Second. >> Any further discussion on what we previously discussed under a different motion? There's a motion and a second. I I will say this is this to me is a very good discussion. It may have taken a a bit of a 180, but I think the end product is still aligned with the underlying goal of why we're here today is to talk about storm water and see how to move forward. So, uh different result, but still the same goal in mind. So, I I support the motion. It'll probably likely have a a higher cost, but this is a long-term value gain in my view. And I appreciate staff's willingness on this and the continued work that is happening because it is and it's definitely difficult work that is happening. Seeing no further discussion, all those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> There are no opposed. Council reports, Mr. Dragoich. No further reports. I caused enough trouble. >> That is factually true. Um I'm trying to think. Um I do not have a report at this time. I look forward to the mayor returning from out of town so he can take his leadership role as mayor. Uh but I do not have anything further. >> No report. No report. >> Miss Miller. >> Sure. Uh later this month we'll be um having our annual employee recognition and the mayor has volunteered to come say a few words. So thank you for all of you considering it but we do have one already and then we will be launching our um second uh employee survey. So we look forward to hearing from employees again as well. >> That's it. >> Thank you Miss Jensen. >> Miss Doyle, >> no report. Miss Montuso, >> no report. >> Anything more from the finance side? >> You guys, I just have to tell you the number of improvements in efficiency with our new software is mindblowing. So, thank you again for your support um on that. I would also like to thank anybody who has already signed up for our new payment system for utility billing. My apologies that we couldn't uh we were not able to uh keep the old um system as I was hoping. Um and we are giving people a little bit of leeway here with utility bills in order to give them a little bit more time um to get signed up for that. They can certainly call into the office if they have questions. >> Thank you. >> I would just like to say thank you for putting that in place. I know what a hassle is to switch over your finance software. I imagine you spent a number of sleepless nights trying to figure out probably a couple of nights in the office getting it done, but >> couple >> it um it's a big undertaking along with everything else that you're doing and I just want you to know that I personally appreciate that effort. >> Thank you. >> Director Tholan, if am I pronouncing it? >> That is correct. >> Director Tholan, welcome to the chambers. >> Thank you. >> Would you like to introduce yourself or give a 10-minut speech? What would he like to know, I guess? >> Are you a Gopher fan or a Badger fan? >> Gopher. >> You are good to go. Thank you. Give the man a raise. >> For the public, this is our new public works director, Mr. Pete Tholan. >> Thank you. Third week here. Um, it's a pleasure to be here. Uh, I don't know if you guys know much about my background. Came from another municipality 25 plus years. So looking forward to time here at city of Lake Helmo now. >> Well, thank you for being willing to consider us and coming on over. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Stanley. >> No report. >> Councelor, >> no report. >> Seeing that and there's no further items on the agenda, this meeting is adjourned at 8:33.