I don't I have not heard from Bailis if she's going to I haven't heard that she was not going to be here. >> We'll get her going. >> Okay. It's 9:00 on Tuesday, April 28th, 2026, and we'll begin the public utilities commission meeting. Uh the
roll call, please. Bailis Jay >> here. Was >> here. >> Angland here. >> Please rise for the pledge of allegiance. 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. >> Okay, we'll move on to the approval of the agenda. Is there a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Okay, motion to second. Any further discussion?
Hearing none. All those in favor uh say I. I >> I those opposed same sign. Motion carries. We move on to the consent calendar. Notice to public all matters listed are considered routine by the commission and will all be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate
discussion of these items unless good cause is shown prior to the time the commission votes on motion to be adopted by roll call. Is there a motion to approve? >> So move. >> Second. Okay. Motion in a second. Any
further discussion? Hearing none. Roll call, please. >> Jay, >> here. >> Was >> yes. >> Angler. >> Yes. >> All right, we'll move on to public forum. Time allocated for citizens to bring matters not on the agenda to the
attention of the commission. Time limits may be imposed. Is there anyone here for public forum today? >> Anybody online? No. Okay. All right. We'll move on to commission committee reports and we'll begin with personnel
committee. >> We did not meet but I suspect with the new org chart and the special meeting that happened with the charter and city council that we'll probably meet this month maybe. >> May I? >> Yes, please do. >> Yeah, we uh so the first reading was uh
conducted and uh it was approved by the city council. Um the notice of hearing has gone out. There will be a public hearing on May 18th, I think. Um, or chart has been approved. So, yes, more to follow, but uh, things are in motion.
>> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Would you like to set a date or just see how things go or what do you think? >> No, >> I don't I guess that would be up to Mr. and Britain because there will probably be position
that will need to be Can I coordinate with you offline and I'll we'll set a date offline? >> Yeah, absolutely. Okay. Thank you. Anything else? >> No, no, sir. >> All right. Uh, Finance and Operations Committee, >> Commissioner J. >> Well, we haven't had another meeting since the last one. So, I think nothing
to report there. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. President, if I may. >> Yes. One thing that staff was maybe considering is um similar to uh what the city council does with safety and public works and personnel and finance prior to an agenda coming out is having kind of
standing meetings with um the personnel committee and finance and operations committee. if that is something that maybe we wait a meeting um to decide on you maybe we can come up with some standing meeting dates the week before the packet comes out with both
committees so that way it's on everyone's calendar just to I mean if there's no topics to address then there isn't but at least just to create a standing meeting of those two committees moving forward >> I think that's a great idea what do you think >> I think that's perfect
before the packet goes out So, okay, that'd be great. >> Mhm. >> Okay. >> You're thinking for those it just be like a quick phone call on some of them? >> Yeah, some of them could be a 15-minute phone call just touch base on anything that's on the agenda. >> I'm not looking to add any extra, >> right?
>> Some of them might be a little heavier. You know, obviously if there's some larger items on the agenda, but um certainly setting up a standing meeting would I think would help with staff coordination too in that regard. >> I think that'd be good. Do we want to pick a day of the week before right now or what do you think?
>> We could certainly do that. Um or we can wait for the maybe have Nick coordinate for the personnel committee and see when that kind of lines up and then wait until our next meeting to do so. >> Okay. >> We can put an item on the agenda for the next meeting to pick some dates. >> Okay. Sounds good. Yeah, I think that's
a great idea. >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes, Mr. Chzach. um on these committees, would you please invite me? >> Sure. >> Okay, >> absolutely. >> Okay, we'll move on to unfinished
business. Uh unfinished business, see attached separate memo regarding updates on unfinished business. Does anybody have any questions or comments on that? >> Either commissioners or staff. >> My only note was what was just discussed
was item B. um just to revisit that that portion again, but we'll we'll do that. So, no. >> Okay. Anything for you? >> No, not at this time. >> Okay. Uh we'll move on to item B. Approve FY 2027209
professional engineering and architecture services pool on call roster. Mr. Sandy. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Um so staff received um you know previous action by the commission and the park board and the city council authorized staff to
solicit proposals for um a professional engineering and architecture pool um or an on call roster. Uh staff solicited those proposals. We received 33 proposals back. Um uh scoring committee uh went through all those proposals
between March 4th and basically today um and came up with the recommendations that are attached your um agenda. Um the each proposal was scored um based on the kind of point outline that's in your agenda request. uh relevant experienced
team members references uh approach to quality quality assurance and quality control and any other unique qualifications that um uniquely qualify consultants to be in that service category. Um we scored them based on without looking at any fee schedules to
begin with. Um once the um uh consultant pool was narrowed down in each of the service categories, we then um requested fee schedules from each of those consultants within that pool uh within that roster um and further um scored
those uh fee schedules in accordance with the submitted fee schedules. Um the uh attachment that is the uh Excel document below um is staff's uh final scoring um based on we we chose uh a
certain number of consultants for each pool category based on the expected workload coming out of those pool categories. Um we tried to maintain a minimum of three in each category. um some of the you know smaller categories like traffic engineering and studies or
um geotechnical and materials testing um those were kind of limited to um either two or three based on um the expected amount of work that would be coming out of those uh service categories. Um obviously the biggest ones that um you know we wanted to really set this up for
was categories one and two which is our resurfacing and reconstruction projects um that the city council has purview over construction administration and inspection um lead service lines or galvanized service lines. Category 15 was another large one um and you'll see
representative a larger pool in each of those categories um if approved today by the commission. This is also in front of the park board at their meeting um at 4:00 this afternoon. And then finally, uh the city council would um have the final uh approval on this pool services um agenda
request. Um once this gets uh solidified, if everyone approves of it, uh we would enter into master services contracts with each of these consultants. And then projects uh that are estimated to be under a $500,000
professional services fee cap um would go through more of a task order process where it's just um uh tasks and budget breakdowns rather than um a full RFP process moving forward. So, it would be
uh much less administrative time on staff's end to uh enter into professional services agreements with consultants that are in the approved pool. Um I'll answer any questions that the commission may have in this request. Uh I think Jesse's here too to answer questions. He was a part of the scoring
um on these. Um, we thought this was a really good process and it it opens up um our it expands our territory a little bit as far as who we're inviting in to um request services from. You'll see a lot of different names in there than maybe historically the city has used in
the past and they really a lot of the consultants that are not in the city of Brainard or Baxter um their proposals show really well um when we were going through and scoring them and that's why they're reflected in those pool categories. I'll take any questions.
>> Great. Thank you, Paul. Any questions for the commissioners? Oh, yes. Jesse, make a comment before. >> Yes. Um, on the fee schedule that they give, is there a requirement that they notify if their fees change or any can we can we do that that they let us know
if and when they do change their fees? >> Yeah. So, thank you, Mr. Chzar, for the question. Um, we requested that they estimate their 2027 fees. So this pool um services would be for contracts that we enter into for the 2027 season. Um
every year the consultants, you know, we'll still have the master services agreement, but every year they'll be requested to submit their next year's fee schedule. So well, if we have 2027s, we're going to be requesting um uh 2028s as soon as that uh pool category or as
soon as we uh get to that point where we're requesting services for 2028. >> And may I? >> Yep. Okay. Does this uh roster then that if it gets approved, does this affect the Gordian process at all in any way? >> Thank you, Mr. Chzach. Um, no, it does
not. That uh Gordian and Sourcewell process is uh administered through Sourcewell. And so this is the city's pool. Um, this is for any services that land within those 15 categories um that are city projects. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> You bet, Jesse.
>> I just wanted to add to u what Mr. Sandy alluded to with the master services agreement that we would um we were looking to try and establish kind of a city standard one that would be across the board for everybody. As of right now, our process is when we award a
contract, we ask for a a services agreement from those folks. We do a staff review. We do a city attorney review. So, this is going to expedite that process quite a bit by having kind of a standard agreement across the board. >> Yeah. Thank you. Good point. Okay. Any
other questions? >> The only question I would have is um so you've got a pool of people in each of these categories, which is always great, but um the numbers they're providing gives you a good estimate per for the jobs, right? I mean, so you kind of have
have an idea right away. It they have the option of declining the job though if Right. So, and there I mean if somebody's on there and consistently declines, do we is there an an opportunity for us to say you haven't accepted a single one? Why are we have
why do we have you in this list? Do you see what I'm see? >> Yeah. No, I definitely get it. Um yeah, a lot of times, you know, consultants may say we have too big of a workload this year for our staff to perform this project well for the city. And so they we do have it's not many times I've had
a consultant decline work. um they usually try to fill that with other staff from um other offices and things to perform the work for the city. So, it doesn't happen often, but certainly if we have a frequent uh consultant that is declining work, um when the next time the pool comes up, we would have that
conversation with them and say, you know, you declined work out of the service category even though you proposed on it last time. Um are you thinking of uh proposing on it again? And if so, um do you anticipate accepting work from the city moving forward? >> Thank you. That's all I wanted to make
sure we were covered. Thank you. >> Okay. Would you like to have a mo anybody? >> Jesse? Yeah. Sorry. >> I was just going to add this is kind of why Paul and I were very strategic about which categories and how many consultants we were selecting. So, if
the instance does come up where we have a very busy year and some people aren't able to uh perform in that certain year, we're not going to hamstring ourselves with the amount of consultants we have available to us. So, >> Mr. Chair, I I'd like to make a motion
to recommend the approval of the 27 through 29 professional engineering and architectural service pool and to authorize staff to enter into a master service agreement with the consultants. >> Okay, there's a motion and there's a second. Any further discussion?
Hearing none, all those in favor say I. I. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. when it first came out, I thought you guys were building a pool. I was like, I guess we could bid on that. Anyway, funny story that went around the office
a few emails. I was like, wait, no, that's not what it is. Okay. All right. Moving on to approved draft city code chapter 7, public utilities section 705, water system. Paul, >> thank you, Mr. President. Um pursuant to the last meeting and the action that the
board took to kind of table this item from the last meeting uh staff requested that commission members provide uh any comments to the draft uh city code uh 705 that was in the last packet. Um we received uh comments um from a few
commissioners related to the draft uh um ordinance um that is included in your packet. I also put in the packet a draft uh or a uh a summary of question and answers that we received from the commission members. Um some of them uh
were addressed in the document uh regarding the question and answers and then some of them we've provided uh just an explanation. A lot of them were just clarification statements um on how we're interpreting the language in the ordinance. Um staff is available to
answer any questions. Um with the uh last meeting we had some conversation on a few items but I think the question and answer document um answers all the questions that we received uh on April 15th uh related to this document. >> Yeah, thank you for including that in
the packet for sure. >> Yes, Mr. Chza. >> Thank you. Um, I I looked through the Q&As's and I thought it was fantastic and it's um it's I'm glad the I'm glad the commission asked to hold us off and um agreed to submit questions because I
think it shows that sometimes the the amount of time people have um I think I mentioned at the last meeting that staff's been working on this since 2023 and we essentially had it for three days prior to the last meeting and so to to take a couple weeks to go through it I
think was beneficial because I really appreciated some of the comments and questions cuz after going through it a couple times now, some of those didn't even occur to me. Not, you know, not like it was supposed to, but I I just appreciated the input and the answers and I think it was a great way to move forward with a ordinance such as this to
uh weed everything out if there's anything to, you know, everybody gets clarification. So, thank you for doing that. >> Yeah, completely agree. >> Okay, so looking for approval. >> Yeah. So, just a clarification. So, if
the commission forwards this on today, um we do have an item on the May 4th council agenda to hold the first reading with the city council. Um then we would uh move forward to noticing the paper for a public hearing and uh doing the final reading um uh at the next
available city council meeting. Um adopting a summary publication of the ordinance so we don't have to publish the whole ordinance in the paper and um approving the ordinance through the city council process. So that's kind of the process after this. So I would expect something to be formally approved by
June if approved today. >> I have one more question. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Um do you expect to have these uh Q&As's uh in included in the council packet? Is that something that uh just so everybody can see those that they wish to look at it?
>> Yeah, thank you Mr. Chznak. We do anticipate having that in there to kind of show the due diligence that the commission uh performed in review of this document. >> Thank you. Okay. Is there a motion to approve? Any questions, comments? >> Well, one question on 705.32.
Is can you just Is that true for commercial customers, too? Just out of curiosity. This isn't just residential. This is residential and commercial. Correct. >> I'm going to let Mr. Lock answer that question. It has to do with delinquent
bills. Yes, they're treated both the same. >> Both the same. Okay, thank you. That that's all. And again, I true appreciate the Q&A because it does answer questions that I missed to even ask. So, I I appreciate and I I appreciate the fact
that I now have that knowledge. So, um but I would make the if we're ready, I would make the motion to approve the city code section 705. >> Second. Okay, there's a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I.
>> I. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. >> All right, we'll move on to approve tabled amended BPU policy 20007-12 fee for checking, reading, and test change meters. Danny,
>> thank you, Mr. President. At the last commission meeting, uh there was discussion on the policy related to some of the fees as it relates to when we would apply the fees as staff did some research. Depending on what utility and the reason the utility was shut off,
those fees can vary and the dates and recapture can vary. So what staff did or what we're proposing is that we put in the document stating that it would be to the last bill or what would be required by statute or regulation. And that's how
we have amended the policy before you. >> Okay. Thanks, Danny. Any questions or comments from commissioners? If not, is there a motion to approve? >> Make a motion to approve. >> Second.
>> Motion in a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. >> Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Okay, we'll move on to approve amendment to BPU policy 20 005-08
application for service. Danny, >> thank you, Mr. President. So, as part of the comprehensive review, we have selected policy 258, application for service, for review. Um, the policy statement remained fairly unchanged. We
did remove some language in the policy statement for um the disconnection of service and you can see those red lines in your packet. The rest of the changes were just administrative to get it into the comprehensive policy and that is before
you and staff are here to answer any questions. >> Okay. Thank you, Danny. Any questions or comments? Commissioners, >> I do have a question under it was and it was kind of an overall thing. I have a
feeling it had have been uh referencing the turnoff of of property. Um so what are the results of EPU if tenant is impacted and property owners is non-responsive? Are we at risk? Do we have do our policies cover us? And do we have any agreement with the property
owner um at the at the start of any service? I think there there was discussion and I'm I'm trying to remember where I read that. I think it was um disconnection of service, the termination of utility services due upon non-compliance with policy requirements,
non-payment or unauthorized use in accordance with applicable reg uh regulations and procedures. Um I'm just wondering if we're because the the agreement is with the with the tenant of a property that's leasing a property, but if they aren't paying, at what point
does the property owner get notified? the property owner would get notified at time of disconnection not not immediately but a after a time period of I believe 15 days I'm looking at Jana >> well 15 days that is in one of our other
policies that we >> only at disconnect though huh >> okay >> so in the disconnection of service policy there are verbiage around notification of the landlord >> so then what happens um on a reconnect.
Does the landlord is it the landlord's responsibility to make that payment or do we just eat it if they left and didn't pay? And >> depends on the service. So some services transfer with the tenant. Some services transfer with the landlord. Okay. >> So water, wastewater are with the landlord. Electric are with the tenant.
So depending on the situation and the laws and regulations surrounding that. >> Okay. I just I mean I'm not as concerned so much with residential as I am with commercial sometimes. So, I know that those can be some pretty big bills and it it's always concerning to me what
happens and I don't know if leans go on the properties at some point if properties don't get, you know, brought up to >> again depending on the service, but yes, it can go into a lean process or it'll go on to the property statement. >> Thank you. That's all I have. >> Or collections. That's the other the
other part is it will go to collection. >> Good question. Um I would make the motion uh to approve the amended application for service policy. >> Okay. Motion and a second. Any further
discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. All right. Move on to approve guaranteed maximum price and authorization to execute construction phase contract with Rice Lake
Construction Group for the 2026 water treatment plant reclamation tank project. Mr. Sandy. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh so today staff are seeking commission approval of the guaranteed maximum price or GMP and
authorization to enter into a construction phase contract for our uh water treatment plant reclamation tank project. Uh the project's being delivered under the construction manager at risk uh Semar uh delivery method um
BPU staff and Bolton and Mink. We've been coordinating very closely with Rice Lake Construction um through the last few months going through detailed pricing review meetings, updating plans and specs to reflect changes that are made at those meetings and uh reducing
the scope of the project to get um near the budgeted amount of 5 million or 5.65 million for the project. Um the the utility department did receive a $5 million direct legislative appropriation
for the construction um of this project uh back in November of 2024 um going through a traditional design bid build uh delivery method. We did receive bids back, one of them being Rice Lake Construction, who was the
lowest bid at a total project cost of around $10.4 million. That is when the commission rejected all of the bids and elected to transition the project to that construction manager at risk delivery method which um at that time we
went through a competitive solicitation process for a construction manager um and Rice Lake was awarded that construction manager contract. Um they have been involved through the design uh the redesign process for the project.
That's why you see the um the large uh decline in the price uh for construction of that tank. Um after the Seymour was onboarded, we had I don't know probably six to seven uh price review model meetings where we provide Bolton and
Mink and staff provide uh design documents for them to go to trade partners and uh uh price out the proposed work uh pursuant to the red lines and the plans. Um and so through that process and through the Seymar uh
guidance, you know, you come down to a final meeting with the with Rice Lake uh to agree upon that guaranteed maximum price, which uh that meeting was held this last Friday um where we agreed with Rice Lake construction on the GMP of
$5.3 million for the reclaim tank. that does include $225,000 in contingency in that um in that uh guaranteed maximum price. Um you know, as we move through the construction phase, if this is approved today, um
there's still um things that may change during construction um and which that contingency number. So there's still a competitive bidding process after this. And so once this is approved to go in the construction phase, we um complete the what we call zeroday plans and then
we go through and uh Rice Lake puts together trade uh service packages for um biders, prospective bidders that are pre-qualified through a qualification process. We get into the bidding phase and then these um trade partners submit
their their lowest bid um for the proposed work. And so this is the maximum price that we will pay for the tank if bids come in significantly lower than this. Then that is the price we will pay unless there's owner directed changes during the project. Um and
that's where that contingency number may grow once bid comes in or it may shrink when bids come in um depending on where the trade partners come in. Um but that GMP is set um at 5.3. So if bids come in higher, say 5.5, that's the at risk
portion that the construction manager has to take on. So they have to be comfortable where we set that 5.3 to ensure that their trade partners are hopefully going to come in below that um when they've competitively bid the project. Um, so today, like I stated before, we're looking for the commission
to approve, um, that $5.3 million GMP and authorizing staff to enter into the construction phase agreement with Rice Lake Construction. Um, and from there, uh, the project will move into construction, um, I think in the June or July or July timeline.
>> Come in in June and then they would move into construction in July. >> Yeah. And now more or Mac is here uh Matt Groman from Bolton and Mink um to answer any more technical questions that the commission may have. >> Okay, thank you Paul.
Any questions, comments, commissioners? >> Yes, Mr. Chzog. >> Uh thank you Paul. I I appreciate your explanation. This is a I don't believe I've ever seen anything like this. Is that has this been
something we've as far as anybody knows that we've ever done here and way of going out for bids or a project? >> No, it is not. And this was actually um the legislature changed the statute to allow municipalities to use this method
back in 2023. And so this is um it's getting used a lot more in the water industry. um we see a lot of value bringing in that construction manager on the front end to help um there's a lot of value they bring to the table as we're designing a project with sequencing and how how things get built
in the field rather than going through a traditional design bid build type process. So when you talked about uh the partners uh what's the term you use the trade partners >> trade partners >> um they they submit bids is that a public process still
>> it is they do need to be pre-qualified so we um after this would uh if the commission approves this today Rice Lake submits statements of qualifications similar to like an RFP process with a consultant um and we go through and
score those and um then if they are pre-qualified to bid on the project, then they are authorized to submit a bid. And so, um, they'll submit statements of qualifications to all vendors to submit their qualifications, and those will go through a competitive scoring process, and then the owner and
engineer will elect who they want to, um, be available to bid on this work. >> Okay. So, then at that point, um, if this gets agreed on, is does this have to still go by the city council? this if it gets approved here today is this something the council has to still
approve or not? >> No, this is not this is um uh strictly for the water treatment plant and so that is under the commission's perview >> and then after this if it goes forward today um is there still based on the trade partners submitting their bids.
Can it still be rejected? >> You want to come up to the mic? >> Yeah. So to clarify that um the question was can the bid still be rejected? So once you guys approve, if you approve this cost today of 5.3 million, that's the contractor's at risk part. There
would be no, you guys wouldn't pay more than 5.3. If the bids came in higher, that's on the contractor's risk to pay that. So you guys, per se, if approved today, there would be no reason to reject the bids. You could, but you won't pay more than 5.3 if that answers your question.
>> That does. I appreciate that. It's just odd. It's an odd way of uh going forward on these types of uh projects. It's unusual. So, >> it's a good question, Mr. Chazak. It is pretty common in a lot of projects with construction, though it's certainly
trending that way. So, this will be great for the community for sure. >> Okay. Anything else, Paul, from presentation side of things? >> I don't think so. Apparently, Mr. Well, I you know, I I think the only thing I I
mean, from a 50,000 foot level, uh looking down, I you see a project that was, you know, bid at $10 million and then the scope of it changed to the point where it can get down to $5.3 million. My question is is not knowing what the scope of the changes were, I
would only hope that the outcome of the project meets the needs of why we were bidding a project to begin with, you know, and so not knowing those things, uh, you know, that I'm I'm relying heavily on staff and the engineers that
we are we're being good stewards of what we're moving forward to try try to accomplish here at the water plant. That's all. I see a lot of headshake and so I'm assuming that we have a lot of faith in in what's what's being presented here today. So I'm comfortable with that knowing I got lots of
qualified experienced staff members and engineers looking at this. So that's great. Thank you. >> That's a good comment. Good question. Yes, Mr. Chzach. >> Did Mr. Jay have something he want? >> No. >> I'm sorry. Um I guess I'll be more
direct. I I'm appreciate Dolly bringing up because I I don't know how I lost track of that just when I was going through this. I Okay. Um for you go go from a pre the lowest bid was over $10 million.
What are we not getting that we were asking for the first go round? That's a direct question as far as what is being eliminated to get it down to just over five million total cost to us. Mac, you want to come and explain kind of the entire process that we went through?
>> Yep. So, the initial project included the reclaim tank, which is what your SPAP grant is written for. >> So, that has to be included. A lot of the first bids included things such as upgrading the electrical and controls for your existing filters, so you could
have full remote operations and kind of modernizing your existing plant. So when we revised the scope, it was keeping the reclaim tank and the intended function of that grant and what's needed. What was cut was all of the electrical and controls within the existing plant that
are at very significant cost. That brings it down because we're looking to planning on well sighting and preliminary water plant sighting. Those were not deemed necessary improvements. So those electrical improvements inside the plant were a large portion of that were cut out. So, a very that most of
what was cut out was just electrical improvements in your existing plant that were more of a want than a need is how that came down so much. >> Okay. May May I, Mr. Chair? >> Um, thank you. Um, well, I don't know if you can answer this, but I understand the wants and I
understand needs. Um, if it's something the staff wanted, um, that's I guess um, there had to be a reason for wanting that. So when do we see that electrical improvements coming forward? Has anybody got an idea on that? >> I'll let Paul answer. >> Jeeoff, I can kind of speak to that. So
based on the um asset uh management inventory that we did at the water plant and the recommendations that came out of that final report. Um that is when we transitioned and you um there was an action by the commission here a few months ago to enter into an agreement with Bolton and Mink to start looking at
a new water treatment facility which is you know 5 to 10 years window out. Um so right now we're looking at locations for a new water treatment plant. We're looking at um what treatment technology that we would utilize in a new water treatment plant um to ensuring that m
meets the needs of the city for the next 50 years. And so because of that uh that asset inventory that was done and the move towards looking at a new water treatment plant, those electrical upgrades were deemed as we can live with them for now until we see the results
and the price of a new water treatment facility. At which time we can make the determination on if it pays to invest in the existing water treatment plant, which the asset inventory says it does not uh pay right now to invest in that uh facility. and to look start looking
at a new water treatment plant and that's you know that five to 10 year window um in discussions with Charlie you know it's the the plant is mostly mechanically operated right now there's not a lot of control features that we can control the plant um remotely it's something that we can continue to limp
along here as we look at this new water treatment plant and finalize the study for that new water treatment facility >> thank you appreciate it thank Thank you. >> Mr. Chair, I'm ready to make a motion. >> Okay.
>> I would make the motion to approve the attached Semar contract with Rice Lake Construction. Do I need to say the dollar amount and with GMP of five $5.3 million, please? >> Second. >> Okay. Motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. All right. Move on to item G. Approve large industrial power 5 megawatt application process and guide book.
>> Thank you, Mr. President. >> Um, yes, this is coming back to you guys. We had it in front of you previous month. Um, we had some feedback, so we brought this back to uh >> our legal team and we provide some more staff review on this to address some of the comments that were raised um from the last review. Um, we've made those
updates. I think the biggest ones to note is establishing a 60-day uh review period on the pre-application phases to align just with other um processes that we have. The 365day time for completion of the formal application has also been
um incorporated into this contract. It follows Minnesota P's guidelines and what the other processes will have that they'll have to follow through from Minnesota Power. So, I think what's all said and done, we basically took staff or excuse me, commission recommendations, added it back into it. Um we have it here presented so you can
look through those to see if there's any other changes you'd like us to make. It has been reviewed by legal also. Uh staff is looking for recommendation to move forward with uh the guide book and the application process. I think the guide book kind of puts together a nice flow of the steps that we have in front
of us before we get to that application process. >> Thank you. >> Thank you Trent. Commissioners, any questions or comments? just one the pre-application fee, the $500. Are we going to we're I'm assuming
that we'll review that after after a year or at least one or two of the application. I just want to make sure that we're not undervaluing undervaluing the service uh the fee for service of staff to review the plans to re go through all of that permitting process.
So, you know, I mean, $500 seems like a lot, but not really. When you know, you've spent more than three or four hours of staff time on it. it eats up pretty fast. So when when do we review that to make sure that our fee for services an appropriate dollar amount? >> I think it'd be something that we'd
annually do with our fee reser fee for services report that the commission puts together. I think that's in January typically each year. We could revisit it then. I think these numbers are appropriate at at the pre-application level for staff. We're going to give it the thousand foot view and then we're going to push it off into basically the other, you know, MYSO and Minnesota
Power and that's where a lot of that grinding is going to happen on that end. So, um, we're comfortable with the number as of right now, but it's a recommendation for you guys to absolutely weigh in on and give us direction. Um, but I think the next review then would be, you know, approximately eight months from now in January, and we might have a couple of these under our belt at that point.
>> Well, but you have some experience with some of the I mean, is that what you're basing it off of? >> Yeah, it really goes back to our distribution system and our BPU owned assets are ready to take on some of these loads. So, I don't have to spend a lot of time on them right now. It's more of the transmission side that's going to
have to have more of an intimate uh comb through if you will. I think it's kind of Dolly, if I may, it's it's kind of meant for a a one-hour meeting with an applicant after they submit their application and pay the $500 to kind of give a preliminary
vetting of the project and steer them in the direction they need to go. um based on the guidebook information and steer them towards that formal application which is the much larger dollar amount where they're going through and developing plans and um and we're going through in a process with legal um to
review those applications. >> With that being said, then I mean so you you you get somebody that wants to and I'm going to use an example of our industrial park and the amount of hours spent with that and combing through the plans with that. At what point do you
say we've far exceeded that permitting and now we now we're into an hourly basis. At what point do we discuss that? >> There is sunsets and timelines in this. So once they hit I believe it was 60 days. Once they hit that process then it it starts a new application. So if they
don't have any movement in 60 days and they would have to bring it back to us in 61 days and reapply again for a $500 fee. >> That makes me feel better. >> We put some goalposts into it. >> Thank you. Great, great comments. Yes, Mr. Chz. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, regarding u
current um interested parties and uh uh the lack of progress, we perhaps maybe a polite way of saying what's been going on. Can we apply this to somebody
we currently working with? >> Yes, we think we certainly would. There's a few of these projects that we've done a lot of this vetting or ever. staff's had some internal conversations about would we even apply the $500 fee or what what step are they actually at with all the pieces that are in. So, um we would review that if we
get another formal um request from either one of these companies. We kind of take them at a at a prrated price or rate at this point since we have been working through a lot of these already. >> Okay. And and just one other thing uh Mr. chair of the uh I think this is an excellent procedure policy moving
forward based on the some of the things that Dolly just outlined and the amount of work and it it's got to be covered. And so I mean as somebody calls, communicates in one way or another, as soon as they mention a a certain power load, do you just direct them
specifically to phase one of this? And >> absolutely. Yeah. This is, you know, the intent of this would be obviously to put some goalposts on so these projects don't stretch out for years, >> but to to really give the guidance that's that guide book to really have a formal process for us to walk through. We previously did not have a formal
process. So this should streamline a lot of those efforts going forward. >> Thank you. Great discussion. Is there a motion to approve, >> Mr. Chair? >> Yes. >> So, just to clarify, so what we're looking for a motion is for commission
to approve a $500 application fee and then the $5,000 for anything from 5 megawatts to just under 10 megawws and then 10 megawws to just under 25 megawatts is the 10,000 and then 25 megawatts and above is$10,000 plus $250 for each additional megawatt. So, those will also be the fees that you're
approving with this motion. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I'd like to make a motion to just as uh you said there. I'm not going to repeat the whole thing. So, yeah. Make a motion to approve approve the fee schedule. >> I would have done the same thing.
>> Yeah. Okay. Motion in a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. New business. Approve resolution 20263 for bond issuance
2026A. Danny, >> thank you, Mr. President. So, as part of the packet, uh the resolution is prepared by our um bond council. The resolution before you is related to the 2026A uh bond issuance. This is the bond
issuance for the trunk highway 210 project. This has already been approved by council. Bond council is just looking for commission's approval as well so that we can issue the bonds of this amount. It's the 4,945,000 is related to the water structured uh
and the water improvements for the 210 project at a 20year period and we're looking for resolution approval by commission. >> Okay. Thank you, Danny. >> Any questions or comments? >> U may I?
>> Yeah. >> What's the total interest on this over the 20 years? Does anybody see that or >> It has not been set yet. It'll be set at the time of issuance. It was I can't remember. >> Depends on the rate, right? >> Depends on the rate. Yes. But it hasn't been up to sale yet. So, we have to go through the resolution process and then it'll go to bond sale
>> and that'll be the time it's set. >> Thank you. >> You bet. >> I'll make the motion to adopt the resolution. I'll just read it. providing for the issuance and the sale of the general obligation fund series 20 26A in the proposed amount of 5.7 million and consolidating certain accessessible
improvement projects and funding for current year projects. >> Okay, there's a motion. There's a second. >> Any further discussion? Is this need a roll call? >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. Uh hearing none. Roll call, please. >> Jay, >> yes. >> Yes.
>> Penglin, >> yes. >> Okay. Motion carries. Uh item B, review and approve the 10-year capital improvement plan. All right, Paul. >> Thank you, Mr. President. So, um our bi-weekly coordination meetings, we've
had a lot of discussion around revolving around the uh 10-year capital improvement plan, which is um produced by city staff and reviewed um now with the draft charter changes that went through the first reading um by the city council here at their last council
meeting. and um we'll go through the second reading public hearing process. Uh moving forward here, um this 10-year capital plan will be coming forward to the commission prior to September 1st of every year. Um and the commission making a recommendation to the council for its
approval or any changes there too. Um as uh uh city engineer Jesse Dean has submitted his resignation, we thought it prudent to kind of finalize this right now um while he is still here as he was the keeper and um uh the person that was doing a lot of the modifications to this
plan. Um so this is why this is in front of you today. Uh this 10-year capital improve imp improvement plan reflects a lot of um continued coordination between um city staff and um the utility department and um how we're aligning our
projects moving forward. Um you can see a lot of um consistent with our prior discussions with galvanized water service lines, we have um kind of we've made changes to the capital improvement plan to help align our uh street
reconstruction projects um with um heavy areas of known galvanized water service line replacements. Um those uh reconstruction projects were previously identified as a need, but they may have been falling in different years within the capital plan. Those have been kind
of consolidated and moved around to help align um what the utility department uh kind of does from a galvanized service line replacement to ensure that we're taking advantage of some economies of scale and and ensuring that we're taking care of those galvanized lines um in a
um prudent manner with our street reconstruction projects. Um, this is coming before you, like I said before, to solicit feedback, uh, and to obtain a formal recommendation from the utility commission that will be forwarded, uh, to the city council for their upcoming
budget discussions once the audit and things kind of, um, get finalized at the city side. Um, this is really a conglomeration of all the discussions we've had over the past year um during our coordination meetings um to come up with a recommended uh 10-year capital
outlay uh for the city. So, um Jesse is here uh today to help answer questions that you guys might have. Um there's a lot of dollar amounts and prices and different projects listed in there. So, certainly open to questions, comments, concerns, anything that the utility
commission sees fit. Thank you, Paul. Is there um any project or any projects in particular that you feel like the commission and the council needs to have discussions over any kind of joint meetings or anything? Or is it and I
don't know if we could maybe pull these up on the screen a little bit. It was tough to read in the packet, but um I mean anything in particular just that you'd want to point out for discussion today or >> um you know, one of the projects that's been on the council's radar um for a while and that's been discussed at the council level has to do with the East
River Road sanitary sewer lining um the large interceptor main that comes into main lift station. That's from um College Drive to the main lift station. Um that is programmed for 2027. Um and we're on track in the design of that
project. Um you know, future phases of that project is certainly um something that I think Jesse 2032 has a second phase of that basically going from College Drive up to Highway 210. um as
we work through um if these charter changes kind of move through and um the commission um becomes the the party that's responsible for setting the rates for our sanitary sewer collection system. Those large uh lining projects are an infrastructure investment that
we're going to have to look at in detail um and set rates appropriately to be able to either finance those projects through bond issuance or um try to get to a point where we can pay cash for some of those larger expensive lining projects. So, as it sits with the commission, I think the biggest things
to concentrate on is the lining stuff that could potentially come into the commission's purview if the charter uh changes are approved by the council. and then also um the project alignment with our galvanized service line replacements with reconstruction projects. Those are
the two things um and we've really tried to focus on the high density areas of galvanized service lines um and moving those projects around a little bit to to meet the needs of the service line replacements. And Jesse, I don't know if you have anything to add. I think I kind of
touched on the two things that we talked about a lot. Yeah, I don't think there's anything specific other than the the two large lining projects coming up. Uh I'll just note for the reconstructions like we mentioned, we're trying to align them an awful lot with the lead and galvanized service line replacements. It
would be uh potentially a council purview item if they wanted to uh descope some of the reconstruction and just let the utility focus on the water service lines. uh staff values that there would be a good opportunity to have a comprehensive look at those projects because if you're doing, you
know, 50% of the curb replacement, um you're going to have a lot of patches in a roadway, you're going to have a lot of potential for issues with uh curb drainage and then there's probably some other competing priorities with uh available storm, available sanitary sewer that may need to be addressed at
the same time. Um, so there's there's some opportunity if the council did want to descope some of the reconstruction and let the utility come through and just do patching to do those water service lines that we have to. Uh, but we do see there is value to looking at those projects more comprehensively and
that's why we've been more targeted with groups of those services replacements. Um, looking at identifying a project for them like a reconstruction project. Uh, just coupling that with how many of our different pieces that we have to balance together. Um there are obviously a lot
more uh lead and galvanized service replacements that we have throughout town. We feel pretty comfortable to address those on a kind of one-off basis or on um like the project we're doing this upcoming year with Northeast where we're just kind of hammering out those individually rather than in comp um
compilation with a reconstruction project. So we're trying to balance a few different things, but where they're kind of grouped together, we we do see some value in uh putting together a comprehensive project together. Great. Thank you. >> Yeah, Mr. Chz.
>> Thank you. Um, so the interceptor line, um, I think was it 27 you have from College Drive to the main list station. Is that correct? >> Correct, Mr. >> What is it? The, uh, from College Drive to 210. What's that year on that one again?
>> Uh, 2032, I believe. >> Okay. And then that goes to uh, Highway 210 Washington Street. Where does it go beyond there up to the like the u uh does it follow the river up to the >> No, it uh Thank you, Mr. Chzock. It uh moves kind of uh crossways through North
Brainard and intercepts the force main that comes from the Evergreen lift station which takes a lot of the sanitary sewer flow from North Brainard northeast and southeast. So that Evergreen lift station is our second biggest lift station. Y >> um and that takes a majority of the flow from the city. Um and it kind of goes
crossways through North Briner and we would need to line it all the way up to the force main connection which is right around Gregory Park, the north side of Gregory Park. >> Okay. So from if if we when we move forward um from College Drive to 210 and from that point over to Evergreen or
where you're saying Gregory >> Yeah. >> Um what's the need for doing that? Is there a schedule down? you know, you're getting a little bit out of the the main focus has been to line the pipes that have a direct um maybe interaction with
the river given its location and the INI potential with the with the joints and things. As you get into North Brainer, you're up on the hill away from the river and so there's less potential for INI. It's not discounting the fact that we need to line that pipe at some point in the future. It's just we don't have
as much of the concerns with infiltration and inflow as we do down in the river valley. >> Okay, that's it clears it up for me. Um the um I look on the schedule here on the lining projects, they're all right around $100,000, but there aren't any
specifics as to where those are going to go after the first couple years here. Um is I mean is I I I get it. There's a plan for doing it. Um, and it's lining sanitary sewers. And the question I have is that $100,000
um, and this goes back to I think last year we approved instead of 50,000 the council approved 100,000. Is that where that dollar figure comes from for 100,000 on those? >> Yeah. So, the council set that dollar amount at 100,000 and that was based on kind of where the rates are right now. I
think as we get through our rate studies with uh UFS here this year um and implement our water worth software that the commission approved here um a couple of meetings ago. Um we're going to be taking a detailed look at the condition of our sanitary sewer system which we
know is deteriorating at a rapid pace and has a lot of inflow and infiltration. um and hopefully running a few scenarios for the commission to look at, you know, at a certain dollar amount threshold for lining projects. Right now, that 100,000 has been kind of set
aside to start working on some of the inaccessible lines in North Briner, like under garages and things like that that we would have almost an impossible repair um if that were to fail. Um, we know that there's areas in southeast um
by Walnut and Pine Street that have a significant amount of INI and if we get our rates to a point where we can afford to fund, you know, half million dollars worth of lining projects, that would probably be the first area that we would attack is down in that southeast area
where we know we have significant INI problems with higher groundwater in that area. So, just going back to the spreadsheet here, u when I know that there's projects identified um for each year of 100,000, it doesn't give locations. Is that just to give
ourselves some leeway? >> Yeah, I think it gives us some time to figure out our rates and figure out where they need to be moving forward, uh Mr. Chzach and then further um giving us the ability to run some scenarios that we can bring back to the commission as far as the sewer fund is concerned and
what dollar amount um by planning projects to a dollar amount that would be appropriate moving forward and setting the rates appropriately. >> Okay. Thank you very much. That's all I have, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Um, one of the questions I
had and we don't have need to answer today, but just I I guess from a a commission standpoint, do you see that maybe within finance and operations committee there's there's additional discussion about these types of projects? And uh, again, we don't need to I don't need an answer today, but
maybe just some expectations of the c of the commission as we move forward. Um, just what that looks like. I guess I'm curious to see how we can be a part of that or how you know what the expectations are from. >> Yeah, I think you know um as we kind of um look forward to some of the
reorganization um that happened here at the last council meeting and how the departments are much more integrated >> um than what they were. Um there's certainly going to be an opportunity to bounce um >> especially before the next uh cycle of uh review and updating uh with the
10-year capital plan. um that those can come forward if we set up those, you know, um com those uh operations and finance committee meetings that we can um keep that that committee up to speed on how things are going with the capital improvement plan.
>> Okay, great. Thank you. Any other comments or questions regarding the 10-year capital plan? >> Mr. Chair, I'm ready to make a motion. >> Okay. >> Aside from the fact that I couldn't read the fivepoint font. Just kidding. >> You're worse than Todd. Okay. Anyway,
>> I can read that. >> I looked around the room. I'm like, I realize I'm the oldest person in this room, but my goodness, I couldn't even my contacts out. I couldn't read it. But anyway, uh I would like to make the motion to approve the proposed 10-year capital improvement plan and forward it to the city council for further review
and discussion. >> Second. >> Okay. Motion in a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say I. >> I. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. >> Golly, I didn't know you were in your 60s already.
>> Yeah. Well, maybe I'm not that old. >> I am. Maybe the second oldest. That's >> all right. Staff reports kicking off uh with city administrative report. Mr. Broyals. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh it has been a
busy month. Um I'll just hit a couple highlights. My written report is attached. Um, we've kind of touched on it on a couple of conversations already today, but we did have the first reading for the charter changes that went well. We'll have the second reading in the public hearing on May 18th, and that
will also be an opportunity for the city council to vote to to approve the ordinance to amend the charter. That vote would have to be unanimous. And if that vote goes through unanimously, then the charter would still have to essentially sit for 90 days before it goes active. Just a statutory
requirement. Um the the the new ORC chart has been approved. Um I don't want to steal HR director Cummit. She may touch on this a little bit, but we had some personnel changes that have occurred or are occurring at the moment. So uh I think we're on a very healthy path. I'm very excited about the future.
I'm encouraged by that. So couple other things. Our auditors did arrive this morning. So they will be here for this week and then they'll be back for a full week, I think, in May as well. So, they uh just got to I got to greet them this morning and say hi. So, they have arrived. They're busy doing things. So,
if you don't see Connie Hillmer or if you see her and she looks frazzled, please offer her a word of encouragement. So, um spring load limits are going to be coming off soon. So, there's going to be a market increase in activity after the load limits come off.
Um some utility work has already started preliminarily on Highway 210 on the east side there, but it will increase significantly when the load limits come off presumably around 1 May. So that will uh be a significant driver for activity and the rest uh I won't go into the details, but my written report is
attached. I'd be happy to answer any questions if you have any. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Royals. Any questions for seat administrator? All right, we'll move on to uh council lessison on report. >> Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Um I I'm
going echo a little bit of what Nick Nick has said. U this uh process about the charter change and the reorganization is uh is uh it's pretty big and um I just hope we get a unanimous vote when this comes before us for the charter change. I I don't know
if it's almost putting the cart before the horse by doing the or org chart change, but uh I I I mean there are no guarantees to that. I'm um I'm not suggesting I'm going to do anything other than vote for it, but uh we never know. Um and uh I I just want to I you
know, I guess give uh kudos to uh uh staff. Yeah. whether it's uh utility staff or or city, however you want to look at that, whatever streets or any of them. Um I don't think a lot of people realize that with the especially our
undergrounds when those fail uh it it really rocks people's world. um whether it's water or sewer, electric of course and uh I just want to you know point out that it can be any time of the day or night any day of the week and u there are
people there to fix the problem and uh I don't know if we give enough uh uh consideration to that because the people that do these jobs they they work hard and uh and they get hopefully a decent amount of pay to do those jobs and some
of some of us know that there are salaried people who really never get time off. They're always at a moment's notice have to answer that phone. So, just out of respect for those individuals and the other staff that maybe work an hourly day that still have to come in and fix a problem, I I just
want to say thank you. And uh at this point, I also want to recognize that at the last special meeting, I wasn't able to make it. My apologies for that. But I'm really glad to see Dolly recognize me by referring to Mr. Sandy as Mr. Chzach. Just wanted to include that in the minutes, didn't you? Got it. You make
sure you include that in the minutes this time. Thanks. >> Well, I think it didn't show up in the special meeting minutes. So, >> thank you, Mr. Jazag. Well said. Thank you. Uh, we'll move on to HR director report. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, just
a couple highlights. So, the electric director posting was live. It closed. We had one applicant internally, um, Trent Hawinson, and he was offered the position. So that will go to council for consideration at the May 4th meeting. Um otherwise the majority of the other
information is in my report and I can answer any questions. >> Okay. Thank you. Any questions for the HR director? >> I got a question for our H. >> Yeah. >> What if the council doesn't approve that position? >> The council did approve that position. >> I mean the hiring.
>> Oh, the hiring. Well, then we will deal with that at that point. >> Okay. >> Thank you. I gotta make Trent a little. >> Should have cut your mic. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Britney. All right. Public Utilities Director report.
>> Thank you, Mr. President. Um, so you'll notice in the packet that my title is and the most agenda request is still listed as public utilities director. with the reorganizational changes. My title did get changed to public works director. Um so we're making some changes to uh council packets, commission packets. Um I'll still be
reporting to the commission um in my new role. Um if Trent gets hired on on on May 4th, um he will be taking uh the department head position over the electric department. So that is how my description is changing. Um and I am pulling in uh the basically all the
infrastructure side under uh my current job title as public works director. Um, some of the other highlights that I wanted to point out in um, my report today are I had the opportunity to testify in front of the House Capital Investment Committee on April 14th for a
funding package for galvanized water service lines. Um that is kind of a joint effort with the coalition of greater Minnesota cities, lyuna um the IOE local 49ers um and others that have proposed a $250 million funding package
to continue lead service line funding. Um Brainer uh being one of the heavier uh communities in outstate that has a significant number of galvanized service lines. Um they have been um the coalition has been um uh I think Danny
testified here a couple months ago uh for a similar bill. Um we've been asked many times to testify just given the number of service lines we have and the funding need that is out there um for these projects. Uh I highlighted kind of brainer to local need um which we all
know is approximately 1100 known galvanized service lines and just the cost uh around $30 million over the next 10 years to replace all those. And I think um the testimony went well. There seems to be a um consensus um from from
both parties uh to um potentially fund this program um into 2027 and moving forward. Um but this this year's ask right now is set at 250 million to fund the 2027 construction season. Um our
facility tours concluded here uh a couple weeks ago. Um we performed uh tours at the wastewater treatment facility, water uh treatment facility and hydrodam. I think the tours were very wellreceived. Uh there was council members, commission members, city staff
um uh just allowing um anyone to come in and view kind of the size and scale and condition of our facilities um and how they operate. I think a lot of there was a lot of uh oo and a's and eyes opened um to certain areas of all three
facilities and so I think those went really well. Um we are planning on I think doing another round of these in the fall for those who may have missed out on these ones. Um I've already been reached out to by a couple of council members um that they would like to go to these tours. Um they weren't able to
attend the last ones and so they went over very well um and we're happy to continue to do those moving on in the future. Um otherwise happy to see city code 705 go through today um and get forward to the council. That's been a long arduous process. I recognize that
and um I think we have a very good final product here and staff is excited to kind of see it implemented and in action because we've been operating um under no rules and regulations for since the beginning of time. Um so I think it's an exciting uh exciting uh uh thing to get
that kind of moved through and into the council's purview. But um my written report is in the packet and if there's any questions I can answer those right now. >> Thank you Paul. Any questions for >> Paul? It says more of a um if I could um
on on my agenda that I got. Who actually put that together? Is that was that Becky? I'm asking because I want somebody if they could after the meeting just look at this real quick. It's the formatting. I think I if somebody could help me with that. Whoever Whoever put the agenda
together if that >> it's a combined effort but I can help you Jeff afterwards. Yep. >> It's that person here. >> Yes. Yeah. Danny. Danny will be able to help you >> if you wouldn't mind. Danny, just take a minute and Yep. Okay. Thank you. That's all I got. Sorry. >> You bet. Just a quick question on the tour is have have we um extended an
invitation to city Baxter council members or their public? >> That's a good point. We could certainly do that given the uh the shared um wastewater treatment facility. That is a good point. >> Yeah. Okay. All right. Thank you very much, sir. Move on to finance manager
report. Danny, >> thank you, Mr. President. A couple things to highlight. um as we're going through the audit with the audit starting here at the city. We have one audit entry under review that we're working through for some of the shared costs with the city that we're working through. Uh I'm hoping to have that
finalized today which our audit will then start in the the completion phase. Um and that'll be done and submitted on time here with the city's audit. The additional items is we were pausing the cost of service studies. The auditors had a question on our build consumption report. Um there's no issue now. They
had us pause with one of the audit entries they were considering. There is no issue that I'm aware of going forward. So those will begin and resume here uh in the next month. Uh and the big news from when I wrote my memo is our credit card processing transaction
items are all now complete. We received the readers on Friday and installed them on Monday. So that has all now gone through and has been completed. Uh it seems to be going well. Well, I haven't heard anything from the gals up front that uh credit cards are not going through, but that has all been
implemented. Uh the additional items in my report are attached and I'm available for any questions. >> That is big news. It's been a long time coming. >> That's that's great. Okay, any uh questions or comments for
Danny? Okay, thank you Danny. Move on to operations manager report. Mr. Hawinson. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Um, yeah, I won't I'll be brief here. I think one thing that I'll add that was not in my report. Um, Star Energy will be conducting poll inspections again for us
this year. Um, we had that kind of tenatively scheduled for late summer, early fall. They reached out to us earlier this week, yesterday, and indicated they could start as soon as next week. So, there will be some media blast going out. So, stay tuned to our Facebook page and our uh website. Uh we
were targeting the north side of Brainard. So around Gregory Park kind of from the river maybe over to Gillis is what the stuff that'll be inspected this year. But that will be posted on our website. So if anybody has questions or comments, please reach out to us and let us know. Um I did put a brief little um
summary on our overhead to underground stuff in my report. Uh really just for context for more questions or maybe you know another meeting down the road or maybe one of our standing meetings we can take some of this on. Interesting fun fact that I'll point out that BPU's electric distribution system,
twothirds of it is out in the ground. So, what I'll say to that is yes, we see a lot of overhead power lines, but we don't realize how many we're standing on also on a regular basis. And another highlighted piece I'll add to that is we're not the only uh utility infrastructure that's above ground. So, even if we do remove our stuff, doesn't
necessarily clean up the skies if that if you will. So, um there's some other information in there. uh happy to have another meeting about this or um you know whatever it may be. Hydro facilities looking really good this month. I'm excited to see what the end of our numbers are going to look like here in March. We've had good water
flows and all operating generators. So we're excited to see what that cranked out for us. I think we're going to show a good benefit here. And other than that, I'll entertain any questions. Thank you. Thanks, Trent. Any questions or comments for Trent? >> Um no, go ahead.
>> Um thanks Trent. Uh, and I appreciate you addressing Mr. Forest comments from last month. That that was very beneficial and then you put some cost for us to understand as far as underground. Um, what would be helpful is kind of maybe uh some cost versus
aerial. >> So yeah, that's great point. It is in here. Um, so what I put down, we have two different voltages and so we have overhead and underground at both those voltages. So I did the 345 which is our highest voltage and that's a little more expensive. >> Yep. But it's about seven and 7, excuse
me, 3.7 times more expensive to build underground versus overhead. And we really look at our reliability numbers and where those are shaking out. And that's really how we make those decisions. What I'll also add to it is, you know, a majority of our underground system right now is approaching 60 years old. So those are reinvestments we have
to make into those systems. And so as we look at it operationally, most of that stuff has not seen an interruption in its in its life. So, we'd like to push it until we see a failure and make those repairs and then look at the cap replacements at that point, but we're definitely getting to the longevity of a lot of this conductor. Um, which just
proves that the people before us did a great job installing it and did a good job with their craftsmanship and workship to have it last long. So, that is our narrative to make sure stuff we're putting in the ground today last just as long, if not longer. >> Birds can't nest in underground stuff, right? >> They can't. Snakes can. >> Yeah.
Um, I do have one question about can we take a or just a peak again maybe next month at our our uh pole attachment policy. I just want to know where where we finalize the abandonment when we remove our uh facilities off the polls
and then we've got you know internet and everything that's attached to them. At what point um when they no longer using those those poles whose responsibility is to remove those? Great question and we definitely need to review that. But as of right now, what it is is it's the last utility that's on there for 30 days
has the ownership of the poll. So if we underground our stuff and say there's two communication companies and the first communication company's proactive, they remove their stuff that starts that 30-day clock on that last utility and if they don't do anything in that 30 days and they re they remain that pole asset is theirs. If they do get relocated off
that in the first 30 days, we'll come remove that pole out of there and take that infrastructure out of there and it goes right back to the original agreement. But be happy to take another look at that. Well, the only reason I ask and it's always top of mind is there's a there's a line behind on the back of my, you know, that runs through
it that runs through many backyards and nobody knows who owns that internet that's hanging from there. Nobody will claim it. So, when I see that the trees leaning on it, I'm just waiting for it to take it down because then I but then I'm wondering who's going to remove the
poles. So, but if it's happening, it's got to be happening everywhere. This is very much a challenge that we're dealing with. Yes. >> Thank you. >> Yes, Mr. Chzog. >> Yes. Thank you. I don't know if this is a question for Danny. It kind of involves him, but when we look at our agenda here, it starts out with
administrator, liaison, HR, then it goes to our public utilities director, our i.e. new public works director, and then is the pecking order of this going to change if Danny gets hired on the 4th of May? Will we see electrical director and then finance or how you think that's
going to play out here? >> It'll be adjusted accordingly. >> I would say Danny puts a packet together and he could put himself wherever he wants on there. >> I had to ask. I'll be watching it. Thank you. >> All right, Charlie. Save the best for
last, just like always. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Um, pecking order. Pecking order. We know what gravity works, right? So, so we put it up in the air, we take it from the ground, we put it up in the air, we collect it, we treat it, and
then we uh go out the out the effluent. Um, fantastic uh meetings, fantastic uh work with all staff. Um, I'm looking forward to a bright future um and and look for progress. Um, as we you look at
a report, um, it's kind of high level, not in the details. Um, I want to say thank you to Britney for all the due diligence she's done with the water wastewater operator job description and getting the okay from both sides agreement. Um, looking forward to taking
on another operator and really starting to put feet to the ground. Um, we're a little bit uh backed up uh per se. Um, we thought with road restrictions and we have a a good selection of fields we can get to, we thought, man, it's going to
be a great spring to get out and start moving. As soon as we got everything moving, it started raining. So, just go figure if you want rain, ask us to go out and get some room. Um, so yeah, I don't really have anything. If there's
any questions or any of that >> irony of the industry. >> True that. True that. Right. That's the irony, right? So, bestlaid plans and we have always uh contingencies along with that. A lot of great movement, a lot of
great construction going on. Uh great information from uh staff that are feet on the ground. Um you know, positive outlook. So, um thank you. I I'll answer any questions that you may have. >> Thanks, Charlie. Any questions or comments for Charlie?
>> I I just I actually have one. So, last week uh uh Ottertell Soil and Water District Conservation District um put on a presentation for us and uh we talked a lot about septics, private septic systems in Ottertell. There's over 18,000 private septic systems. And my
question to you know because they they land apply also. So they were talking about, you know, what what do the pumpers do with their stuff? Um, and my question is is as we talk about POS and what's coming down the pipes, you know,
pipeline, um, what what will their what will their requirements be and what will homeowners requirements be to eliminate some of the stuff they're throwing down in their septic systems if the city's wastewater plants are, you know, being regulated as much as they are? And we
because we used to take pumpers stuff, right? I don't know another word for stuff for stuff, but I'm gonna just say stuff. We used to take it, but we don't anymore, right? We don't treat it. What do they do with it? And what will be the outcome for And I know we're talking
about city stuff, but I I would think if they're land applying that they're looking for the same fields, they're having the same problems. Um, and then with issues with some of the, you know, requirements coming to us in the future, you know, what do you see? How do you
see, you know, how do you see homeowners that don't aren't into, you know, city limits? Um, and how does that impact what we're doing and and how will that impact where pumpers bring their stuff? I I I think as we kind of go down and
and walk down that path, EPA just released their document on destruction of the man-made chemicals and uh and bioolids is one of them um that looking at technologies to do that with our phase one going to that cake that we
started so long ago um and kind of walking down that path setting up for the future of whatever regulations that may come down. there might be opportunities to where they no longer can uh apply surface application of them products. It is known that uh uh you
know just household chemicals um you know and products and and and a lot of this um debris and stuff that goes down these septic systems do contain it. Not at the greater levels because we are uh industrial impact also and potentially.
Um, for right now, um, you know, we're going to look at what's equitable and and and appreciative to for our communities that we serve. Um, and then we might be able to look out depending if it's equitable um for the community to take that on
>> as a as a for a fee >> for absolute fee. Yes. Um um it it takes a lot of energy. It takes a lot of technology and to run and do this stuff. As we kind of look at the progressions of a type four land application, it's a
little bit different for a septage hauler. Um, and depending on the agency that requires them, a county for inspections, two years, and and building permits and so on. Uh, if we're under the UBC or unorganized uh, townships and stuff like that, they kind of can do
whatever they wish. Um so as as time evolves um there'll be more restrictions coming down um and looking at the technologies to treat this or do away with these that are not needed which is also under movement. Um so if that
answers you know to protect our >> yeah it's just opening the door to the future. I mean we're looking at the needs of our residents and the needs of the wastewater plant. Um but it it also coincides with all of the people out outside city limits. they're gonna th
those those are going to be impacted and they're going to there's going to be a need to bring that stuff somewhere. So I I'm just looking for the future. >> Yeah, hopefully opportunities will, you know, exist there in the future um to help help the areas, but our focus is on
our rateayers and residents and industries within our uh district. So >> thank you, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes, sir. Can anybody uh tell us about the trucks that we uh uh last meeting agreed to purchase? What the status of
those are? >> Maintenance trucks, water. >> Yeah, they're in production right now. >> Okay. How long does >> 90 days is what we were anticipating for the chassis and the the boxes should follow shortly after that, but that was an estimate from the manufacturer. So,
that's what we're banking on hoping to see them this fall yet. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Paul. Uh just one more thing to add. I would be remiss to say uh Jesse Dean did submit his uh resignation. His last day I believe is May 8th. Um so we are out
uh right now for a city engineer deputy public works director. Um Jesse, I've really appreciated working with you both on the private side in the consultant field and now in this position. Um wish you well wishes and new adventures down in Texas and um you know we'll we'll
miss you around here. So um this will be his last commission meeting. And so I wanted to make sure that's addressed before we leave today. >> You bet. Thank you, Paul. Yeah. Thanks, Jesse. Great working with you. Wish you the best. All right, we'll move on to commission member reports. Dolly,
>> thanks, Jesse. You've really cleaned up the neighborhood. Jesse's my neighbor. Let's hope your new your new owner does the same. I actually I just wanted to say how proud I am. Um, and that I think the city of Brainard is very proud to
have two very wellspoken representatives to go down to the cap and speak on our behalf. I think and I I don't know who said the comment of if you're not at the if you're not at the table, you're on the menu. Um, you too, Danny and and uh
Paul, uh, you didn't you your testimonies are speak volumes and I just sometimes I think greater Minnesota just, you know, we are oftentimes forgotten about out of sight, out of mind. Um, and I think you
I can't I didn't hear you, but I can only imagine uh your testimony. And I just want to extend a big thank you and and just say how proud we are that you guys took the time to go do that. So, thank you. >> Thank you. >> You bet. Thank you,
>> J. >> Uh, I was just looking to see I don't know who it would come from, but I wouldn't mind seeing a report of the reasoning for resignation from Commissioner Higgins. It was just something that was kind of brushed under the table and nobody said a word about
it. So, if somebody could send out a report on it of some sort, I would appreciate it. Yeah, we can certainly speak with administrator Broyals and address that. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. Anything else? Nothing.
Okay. I I'm good. Uh so if there is a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Second. Okay. Further discussion hearing none. Those in favor say I. I. >> I. Those opposed same sign. Motion is or meetings adjourned. Thank you everybody.