Utilities Commission meeting to order. Uh, roll call, please. >> Higgins >> here. >> Mattton >> here. >> Odate >> here. >> Penguin >> here. Let's all stand for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of
America and to the stands nationy andice for all. Okay, we'll move on to the approval of the agenda. Does anyone have any comments regarding the agenda for today? >> Make a motion to approve the agenda. >> Second.
>> Okay. Uh open for discussion. I would like to propose that we move the finance manager report um ahead of item B and unfinished business. Okay. Okay. >> All right.
Uh Okay. All those in favor say I. I. >> I. >> Motion approved. Okay. We'll move on to the consent calendar. Uh 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 of the commission votes on the motion to be adopted by roll call. Approval of the minutes and approval of the bills. >> Is there a motion? >> So move. >> Second. >> Okay. Motion and a second. Any
discussion? Hearing none. Roll call, please. >> Higgins, >> yes. >> Matten, >> yes. >> OD, >> yes. Angland, >> yes. All right, we'll move on to public forum. Time is allocated for citizens to bring matters not on the agenda to the
attention of the commission. Time limits may be imposes. Anyone uh here for public forum? Anybody like to stand up and speak? Okay, looks like there is nobody anybody online that'd like to speak? No. Okay.
All right. We'll move on to uh item number seven, commission committee reports. beginning with personnel committee. >> Uh just that we met as the work group um with with um members of city council and
staff uh to interview for the new public utilities director position and uh that's also in our minutes but that was that was our report for this month. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh all right finance operations committee
>> we have nothing to report. >> Okay. Nothing to report. All right, we'll move on to unfinished business. Uh, beginning with the memo. See anybody have any comments or anybody any staff have comments? Yes, >> I can provide an update. So, last at last meeting um we had proposed to uh
block metrics the um revised agreement or the the July agreement that we gave them till October 22nd to respond. They did respond um noting they were unable to proceed under the suggested terms and conditions and
uh that was the response we received. We have been working with climate vision to update the language for that lease for the weather radar on the state hospital tower. That is back to both staff for us to provide comments um from attorney
Langel and then um provide updates to climate visions attorneys as well. So those are both they're both looking at those responses. Bar provided an update on the hydrogeneration project. We don't have firm estimates. We're finding that that's been difficult for all of our
vendors right now and some engineerings to get those estimates in uh even for our capital planning that we'll discuss later. The most up-to-date estimates from a generator costing around that $750,000 just for the generator is now
projected at the one to $1.2 million. So, just to update you guys there and th those were the highlights for the unfinished business memo and staff will answer any additional questions.
>> I had a request I had a a question just regarding strategic planning. So we we all collectively put forth a good effort related to the strategic plan and I felt like that document was uh a good representation of of where we were at and I guess I just like to keep that on
the forefront of everybody's minds as we u move into a new year and um with the recent uh addition of a of a director. I'd like to, you know, just make sure that we're all keeping that in mind and
that I would like to have that be part of the process of working with a new director for Brainer Public Utilities. And so, um, yeah, I just wanted to, I guess, throw that out there just to make sure that we're cognizant of that document and all that effort that we put forth and that we revisit that and just
make sure that that's not something that's a one and done. We we got it done, put it on the shelf, and haven't really referenced it. So, um I'd like to um yeah, just encourage all of us to keep that in mind and and uh work with city administrator broles on that just to make sure that we're
still moving forward on that. Anybody else have any comments? Okay, we will then move to the finance director's report. Finance manager report. Mr. Lock, could you uh provide us with that information?
>> I can. Um, were we wanting to talk more budget? >> I I' I'd like to go through just if you could provide your report and then also go through budget. I'd like to take the proper amount of time just to go through where we're at, get a good financial look at where we're at uh as an organization as we look to move on to
item B. So, as we look to the future and as we're looking a significant portion of the time or the last couple months has always been budgeting, that's this time of year. Um, one of the main items as part of the budgeting is our federal funding for the
lie he program. So, I wanted to um bring that to the commission to discuss uh we received from the Minnesota Department of Commerce earlier this week or last week, excuse me, a letter stating that they would like um some reprieve for our
customers that are uh struggling with making their payments. Lie HEAP funding has been essentially with the federal shutdown postponed. We've typically received that in the middle of November. We are not anticipating to receive that until sometime in December. Now, um
where we have, I guess, been told and expect that that does not change any of our customers eligibility for that funding. That funding typically comes through the L Lutheran Social Services. Um, what we really want our customers to
know is that if they're struggling, call us, talk to us, make an arrangement. The only way that we're really able to assist our customers is they need to make call, make that arrangement, and keep that arrangement. So, as long as they're calling us ahead of time, they
cannot be disconnected. Um, we don't want anybody to be disconnected, but those are the protections they have in place. They need to call and make that arrangement. So if anybody hears anything on the commission side, customers can make arrangements with us. They can talk to any of the girls on the staff, Jana, Lori, all the girls up
front. They know how to help. So to reach out as we've moved into the budgeting conversation. So, um, as I kind of mentioned when we were giving the unfinished business memo update with bar engineering, what we're finding as we're
trying to put our capital plan and and that capital future together and those planning pieces, we are really struggling to get from vendors and engineers some estimates on paper. They'll we'll get a lot of verbal estimates, but we're not getting the
written estimates at this time. That could be the uncertainty with tariffs. That could be the uncertainty with the federal shutdown. there are those driving factors that we're being told are slowing that process down. Um, I guess as a reminder, our capital and
operating budget needs to be approved for November's meeting and then presented to city council the first week of December per the charter. So, that is still at this point. We're on target for all of that. I don't have any concerns there. Um, we're hoping with the new public utility director coming on, we'll
be able to utilize his skills to also assist in that capital planning piece. We have the operating budget that is a discretionary item here. A big portion of not not really a big portion but a
portion of that budget is the discussion on the pilot payment and how that'll affect the operating costs going forward. Um in the budget as presented I did include that at the 3%
uh of revenue estimate. So that is included in the current budget that was submitted. the handout I handed out earlier today with the combined budget. There was an error in the information in the packet. That error was related to
purchase power which just then affected the bottom line on the electric department and then the combined as a whole. So the projection for 2025 went from a deficit to a positive net position of roughly $2 million. >> May I? >> Yes.
>> Yes. When you say purchase power, that's the that's purchased power. That's the power that people are purchasing that we make revenue. >> Correct. So the the the purchase power, it includes the generated revenue we have at the hydro facility. So that purchase power number does include our
hydrogeneration numbers because we sell that to ourselves. So that is included in that purchase power number. But that does include yes. all of the purchased power from the solar facilities, hydro, and what we purchased from a directly. >> You go.
>> That's what I have. I guess I did include the in my report there are the last month's financial statements from June through September. Um that's because of that error we noted, staff noted in June. That has all been corrected and reflected in here. It
changed about $280,000 was that adjustment and that was in the industrial sales and the capital, excuse me, conservation improvement program dollars, but that has Auburn reflected in the latest information you see for
September there, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes, sir. Um Danny, when we look at the alley over on Joseph and um um Ronald, thank you. whispers. Um
there was a conflict I believe and u one estimate was for much less than the um utility estimate like 160 and had that project been forward this year we would have been in the rears because we did not apply that to the budget for this
year. So are we going to be able to square that up for next year? >> Yes, we can adjust for that in the budget for 26. >> Have you done that? >> I have. Okay. Thank you, >> Danny. As we as we
>> as we take a look at uh projected versus or budgeted versus actual, are there any trends we should know about as a commission just in terms of whether it's it's uh you know usage from electrical revenues and and I mean are there any
big picture trends that we should be made aware of as we enter into 26 as well as moving forward making a decision here on item B? Yes, I would look at generally right now we have to spend about one and a half percent of our
revenues on conservation. That is required by state statute. Um as we look at the consumption numbers, water and wastewater specifically, they stay pretty consistent. They're decreasing a little bit, Charlie. Um on the electric
side, we see significant decreases in our residential commercial commercial load as we look at um the improvements in new construction and Trent can correct me if I'm wrong here, but as we look at the improvements in new new construction and new buildings and those efficiencies that we're gaining, our
consumptions are decreasing annually. The trend that we're seeing right now in our industrial load, I believe that's going to stabilize. we're not going to have those loads coming on or we didn't at least budget for any of those loads coming on. So therefore, when we're looking at any load considerations
there, those are not included in our budget, the budgeted numbers that are presented later. >> As far as our can you also just give us a reminder on our rate studies and how we've implemented rate increases and what that looks like as we've already
set in place or set in motion for 26. So, as we sit right now, the rate studies are in progress. Right now, they're waiting on information from myself to get the most up-to-date information. We've had significant changes in our capital planning. We've had significant changes in the budget.
Uh, and then timing, but that is will be the priority once um this budget is put together. And then with the new public utilities director coming on, that'll be full force. any other concerns from your perspective that we should be made aware of that
>> we just need to yeah you know be made aware of or just discuss >> I can't think anything off the top of my head I mean infrastructure costs are going up drastically every year >> yeah and and as you say I mean with with capital and operating that'll be approved at next meeting you're meeting
with the finance group to review where you're at and so that'll be part of this next month >> yes that'll be the plan to schedule a meeting with that group. Yes. Okay. Any other commissioners have questions? No. Okay. Thanks, Danny.
All right. We'll move on to the direction request on payment in lie of tax city contribution. Uh this was tabled from the last September meeting. And I don't know, Danny, if you'd be the one to just speak to this, but could you just remind everybody what we're tasked with and and the decision that needs to
be made today? So, all of the information is included in the packet that has been included both in council and commission the last couple meetings. This was tabled as um President Angland mentioned from last meeting. The response from Attorney Langel was
included in the packet. Um the statements from the attorney is that it resides with council for final they can amend or make any amendments um to the policy. Council is looking for
commission's recommendation on the policy. What commission council asked commission to consider is a 3% of electric revenues for 26, 4% in 27 and
5% in 2028. That's what they asked commission to consider. for discussion. I'll make a motion um that we approve the 3% for 2026, but hold off on the future years until
our rate study is done and that we would know a lot more information after that so that both sides can look at that. >> I'll second that for discussion. >> Okay, we have a motion in a second. Any further discussion?
>> So, I got a question, Danny. is right now. The way I understand it, the charter is actually this what this pilot is wrote in the charter. Am I understanding that correct? >> The the contribution to the city, yes,
is written in the charter and it references the BPU policy for that contribution. >> Right. So, um, Nick Nick's not here, but I saw on the city council agenda that they did open up the discussions for a
charter change again. Is that true, >> Jeff? >> There's a charter meeting coming up on the 5th, I believe. >> Okay. So, I when when Mark brought that up, I I agree with that. um doing the 3% for this year, but I I think this is
something that needs to be wrote into the new charter or a charter change more significantly with a little bit more meat is how I think that this should operate. I think right now it for them for us to be going through all this work
and thinking about it and talking about it and I I personally have put a lot of thought into it. Um, obviously I've I've looked at the fact that that the city of Brainard is our third largest power user and if we add a pilot and then increase the rates, we're just
increasing the the cost to the city. It's it's it's like the money's just circling. Um, it it I don't know what the city council's agenda is or end goal is with increasing the pilot, but to me it doesn't it doesn't really make any
sense because it's just going to add it's going to add revenue and then in a year later it's going to add expense. So, I I I question it and I don't understand really, you know, why they're nobody's ever said why they want to do it. U maybe maybe they've said it at
meetings and I've missed it. I've been trying to to to watch what's going on with the city more, but um at the end of the day, I I think this is something that needs dealt with along with the charter change in my opinion. So, those are my only comments, but I do agree to
to give them the 3% or give them a recommendation for the 3% for one year, and that gives everybody time to to maybe do something a little bit more with the charter. Thanks. >> I have a few things. >> Yes.
>> So, just for clarification, the 3% is included in the 2026 budget. >> I did include that. Yes, >> did include it. Okay. So, I just had to write these out so that I could remember all of them out, you know, to to just mention it. Um, so a higher higher pilot could increase pressure on electric
rates for businesses and residentials, which is a concern to me. Um, I always feel like that's just kind of more of a hidden tax um to the rateayers, you know. >> Is your mic on, Dolly? >> Yeah, it is. Should I talk into it? Maybe that would help. Um, and then 1%
of uh or a percentage of revenue may provide more predictability year after year for the city. However, um the fluctuations on electric revenue, you know, because we base it off weather, demand, energy costs, and all of that, you know, could cause chaos for us on for the budgeting piece of it. So I
understand on one side it it allows for predictability on our side it's chaos. Um and then for BPU how to maintain an adequate reserves and assets for replacements and upgrades when we are straining um with that specific in infrastructure funding and then benchmarking with all of the information
that was provided in our packet. It seems like they were all over the board um as far as uh you know increasing pilot uh percentages. Would you include it in the in the charter? Would you not include it in the charter? Is it just a written agreement? I mean, it just
seemed like everybody who had experience with this had opinions that I would caution. Why would we why would we um just continue to increase based off um based off revenues? Um my my question on
solutions because I never like to create a a you know complain about something if I'm I'm not also looking at some solutions is you know one do we just maintain our current structure seems to be um you know I don't know it that would be one that's ultimately we do
nothing that that's an option a hybrid only because it's actually included in here is um you know is it is it a performancebased you know is it a a base what we've doing 3% if we're also doing things that would benefit the community
for the for the community benefits such as a solar project you know and and again in some of the benchmarking responses uh Hutchinson was a primary example where they they've done community improvements that benefit all of the rateayers and the community um in
lie of that additional revenue or that additional payment to the city. So that was an option. Um our current structure plus maybe a small percentage uh based on revenue growth. Um and then andor nothing if we take a loss. Not nothing
but not as much. Um do we apply a lower percentage to the first you know in incremental? If it's 10 the first 10 million it's 2% the next 10 million of 20 you know it's 3% and so on. So it's incentive for us to do better. But in
the same token, we're all stra striving to conserve energy and and even our appliances, you know, we're looking at how do we conserve energy and use less but yet still be productive. And so there's just so many questions that
surround this just to wave the wand and say, let's just do it based off revenue because it may be good for one entity, but it might be terrible for another. So, I just wanted to throw my my sense of my my opinions or comments before I
forgot them all. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Yes, Mark. >> Some of your questions, Dolly. I I I guess that's I mean, I would hope that your rate study provides us with some of those answers and maybe those questions
need to go to them um so that an informed decision can be made down the road. Fortunately for me, I won't be here. But I that's the reason I asked that it be, you know, the question for down the road be put off until that rate
study is done so that an informed decision can be made. >> Agreed. So, so what I'm hearing is the leave the 3% in the motion. leave the 3% for this year and we assess it for this upcoming year with our rate study information so we can make an educated
decision moving forward and potentially offer some solutions. So that would be our formal response to city council, right? Is that what I'm hearing? All right. >> I mean, it is a change because we're now going up based off revenues. So, we're accepting that that's probably the road it's going to go down.
>> But, um, yeah. >> Okay. Danny, what's the timing of the rate studies? And then what's the timing of us in 26, analyzing this, really putting some careful thought to it, and getting back to city council on what we would propose
a year from now? >> I don't know how long it takes for an electric rate study. We have not engaged on the electric rate study yet. Water and wastewater was uh 12 weeks from the time of them receiving the information to return at last I checked.
I think that'd be nice for us to just provide a timeline of what we're proposing. So 3% but we're going to hold on any decisions moving forward just to give us the appropriate amount of time to uh you know propose any increase if there would be any. I do like what you
say though Dolly as far as if there are any additional um revenues that come in. It'd be nice for us as a utility to be able to invest that back into our infrastructure and and the innovative ways that we can uh position ourselves
to protect our rateayers. So, I think that's a really good point and I would hope that the city council would appreciate and understand that that's our intentions. Um, and so I do have a question for uh Councilman Chzach. Just from your perspective after what you're
hearing here, what's your take on this? And you know if there are any other discussions that have happened at city council meetings. The other question I have is with the charter commission meeting on November 5th. It what information do they have
available to them when they meet and they're they're reviewing the language about a pilot payment or even just anything else. What information do they have? Do we follow up with them? Do are we present at that meeting to represent the utilities just to make sure that they're they're well informed. So, I
guess I have two questions for you. >> I'll answer the second one if I can. As far as I know, there's nothing being presented to the charter commission regarding the pilot. >> Okay. >> Um I I have a comment on that if that's okay. >> Go ahead. >> Um cuz because that's one of the notes
that I had wrote down. I am like, shouldn't we have some say in this charter change? Shouldn't they want our opinions or I mean and and I said is the council or charter going to have any group meetings to strategize the charter change?
>> Okay, >> I don't up a little bit here. Um yeah. >> Okay. So, if it's okay, Mr. Chair. >> Yes. >> Um my understanding is they they'll have an agenda. Now, it's not put out yet. >> If it's put together, it can be added. Somebody can be added. Um there's three
members on a charter commission. Um a phone call to any of them, all of them. um they can add something to their agenda to have a discussion on this. Uh you can email any one of them or all of them. Uh you can do that through city hall. Um and I don't disagree with you. When I read this, it's like what's the
point of having this item in our charter when it goes directly to a policy that the city council has full control over the policy. Therefore, our attorney says they are the final decision maker. So why are they coming to the charter comm why are they coming to the public utilities commission in the first place?
Um it's doesn't as far as I'm concerned uh the motion is doing and it's in line with what the uh city council is requesting for the first year. But I mean this is easily taken care of that our next meeting say well we're just going to accept the public utilities
commission recommendation to go at 3% for 26 and then we'll include 4% for 27 and 5% for 28. Apparently according to the city attorney this there's nothing stopping for council from doing that. I don't agree with it. So to Mike's point, I think there should be a discussion
with the charter commission to codify that it is the public utilities um ultimate authority to set this rate. Um because I think and I brought it up at the last meeting. If to your point uh your question, in my opinion, this is
essentially a um just a shell game. When we start increasing the pilot to the city of Brainard to effectively take uh 58,000 for 2026, that's about twothirds of 1% of our levy. Okay, we're trying to lower our levy. Great. But who's paying
for it? Um to Mr. Higgins's point, we're just increasing the rates the city pays for their electric and also the property the the customers and we've always tried to keep our customers at a good rate. And when we just keep saying, well, the
city is going to take the council is going to take more pilot for the next three years. And what's it being used for? To cover a cover a levy, an increased levy. It just it's it's the old robbing from Peter to pay Paul as
far as I'm concerned. And you you eventually say to people when we have to have a rate study and it shows well your pilot's going to be increasing therefore you're probably going to have to increase your electric rates. We're just saying um okay um we'll keep your levy
as low as possible but as long as we keep getting more money from the pilot we can do that. It just doesn't make sense to me. And this whole thing about the council has the authority to set the policy and amend it. Well, it doesn't say the council has the authority to set
the rate. It just says they set the policy and amend it. And the policy says, if I'm not mistaken, the policy says the utility commission sets the rate. So, I think our city attorney is uh taking liberties with language as
attorneys like to do. Uh perhaps I'm wrong. I' I've been wrong before. I don't like it. But I I think as a commission we should ask our administrator to send forward a discussion on this to the charter commission and explain why we're are
listening for to Mr. Higgins's point again, why we're looking for something more. Doesn't make sense to me. We we have the chart the council's asking the the commission here to recommend increase this rate. Why? They have the
authority. It's a shell game. I don't like it. So to your question, I think I answered it. I can only speak for myself though. If I didn't, let me >> Yeah. No, thank you. >> Let me go on further if you like. I
>> No, I appreciate Yes, Dely. >> Oh, it was just the one of our very first uh benchmarkings from the Dakota County. Um he's now retired, but his very comment was I would not suggest a charter provision, but instead a formal agreement. um you know just because it can become a nightmare. So again,
somebody a a city that's already had the experience when they put it in a charter change um to say please don't do that because that becomes a nightmare. I I think you kind of need to heed some experience from outside our own city. >> But wouldn't we have to just take it out of the charter? >> That's what I mean. >> Okay. Is that what you're saying?
>> I mean yeah not to have this provision and outline the percentages in a charter because >> get it out of the charter and negotiate an agreement. >> Right. >> Can I can I just weigh in on that? I think I think there's two different things there. Um I think Mike, you're talking about the actual percentage or rate increase in the charter and that's
not in there. It says a commission. >> No, I'm talking about the the language in the charter about the pilot, right? >> Just totally get it out of there. >> Not have it in the Is that what you're saying too, Dolly? Yeah. Just just I mean, >> our world's complicated enough as it is
and and our federal government just keeps making it more complicated. We need to figure out ways to simplifi simplify and minimalize this stuff so that so that our staff can go do their jobs and and we don't have to waste time talking about stuff that's it's this is
irrelevant because the city council can do whatever they want anyway. So, I understand them wanting some input and us having a conversation, but I just don't like wasting time talking about stuff that I have no control over anyways. Um, I I would I would recommend that you
all make a motion to um have this brought to the charter commission. I mean, if if you want to pass this motion, whatever you do here, but uh if you want to get this uh looked at this, now is the best time. >> I would like to do >> You have a motion. >> Yeah. I'd like to vote on the motion we
have and then >> Okay. Any further discussion? >> Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. >> Okay. Thanks everyone for your
discussion on this. So, as far as next steps go, the meeting is on November 5th. The agenda goes out when uh Councilman Chz, >> it may have already been put together. I don't know. I I'm I'm just saying the meeting's on the 5th and it's the uh 28th of October. So, you have time to
bring something to uh city administration to bring to the charter commission. But I would do that formally through a motion. >> Should we should we adjourn to that meeting so that we Yeah. >> Yes. >> Okay. We'll adjourn to that meeting then which would allow us to participate in that meeting.
>> You you'd be I would highly advise you have something through administration brought to the charter commission to be added to their agenda. >> I don't hear any action. So, I think I think what I'm hearing is we should be making a motion to be able to send to
the charter commission um just a request to be on the agenda and then to adjourn to that meeting. >> Well, have this pilot discussion. >> I'll make the motion. >> Charter language. I would move that we ask the chartered commission to uh look
at removing the uh language pertaining to to the pilot program so that we can maybe just have an administrative agreement down the road. >> Okay, there's a motion. Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Motion to second. Any discussion? I I guess I think this is a lot bigger than just that language. This this charter this charter change and what what I want to see done with the charter
and what I think some of the the other people at the city want to see done with it or have discussed being done with it are are way bigger. you know, we in and to Jeff's point, Langel's attorney Langel's language, I
mean, he's basically if you read between the lines, he's almost mocking our charter cuz it it I can't find another charter in Minnesota that's like this using my research capabilities. And
so I I don't I don't know if that's enough. I think for me as a commissioner, there's a lot more I want to discuss at that charter meeting than just the pilot program. I mean, I don't I've been I've said it out loud. I'll say it out loud right now. I don't I
don't think our utility should be split between the city and the commission. Get them all under one or the other. And I don't care which one, but our sewer, water, waste treatment, water treatment, and streets all need to be under the
same entity. And the p and the power can be wherever, but it all needs to be under one. And I think that's that's what I want to see at the charter meeting or or discussed at the charter change is something to that extent. So for me, it's a lot more than just this.
I don't oppose what your your motion is, but I just think there's a lot more to be discussed than just a pilot. >> Mr. Chair, if I may. >> Yes, Mark. >> I would agree. I would I would agree with you that that discussion, but I don't think anyone has enough
information to make a logical decision on that. I think Mr. Chzach, you've asked for proform of financials on how this change would look. Is that correct? >> I have not specifically asked for that. Nope.
>> Okay. But I would like to see that as a citizen of Brainard. I probably won't be here when it gets to that point, but I don't understand. At one point, I heard when they were looking at a public works department that it was going to add 1.5 million to wages just to do that. So,
show me where the savings are one way or another. Who's where are we saving money? Is it on the city side? Is it on the utility side? I don't see it. Haven't even come close to seeing it. And so I'm just wondering
why something that's worked for decades is being changed just for the sake of change. Show me. Show me where we're saving money before you do this. >> Who ever said it was going to save money? I never said that. I don't know if it's going to save money. It might cost more, but it's going to run a lot
more efficiently. And and the conflicts are going to go away. this this commission versus city council. The conflicts over my 11 years here are pretty crazy. >> Yeah. I I I I just don't It still seems
like you need to have and I'm hoping that with our new director some of that can be changed and fixed because I don't know why over the last three years the working together between the city
and the utility has become such a problem. We've had four different city administrators in the last six years and every one of them's had a problem. We haven't had enough consistency around here to get anything straightened out. >> Well, like I'll go back to the question
that I wrote. Is the council or commission or the charter commission going to have any group meetings or strategize what everybody wants to do? I mean, to me, we should all be sitting in a room and kind of hashing this out at some point before before a public meeting,
but that's just how I do things in business. >> Mr. Sure. >> Yes. >> So, um I guess to Mr. uh Higgins's uh question or concern. The my my understanding is that there was going to be a charter commission meeting back in
the middle of September which got cancelled and um what I anticipate happening because of a motion we rescended um at our last council meeting of cease and desist all
utility uh services going to public works. That was the motion on April 7th and we rescended that motion this last council meeting. I believe it was on the 20th. So that being said, that now allows staff to go forward to the
charter commission to ask, as it was going to happen, that the services of water and sanitary sewer treatment be brought into public works. That is my understanding of what's going to be taking place. Now, that would bring everything in under one roof other than
electric. So again, um, is that the best thing? I think that's to Mr. ODay's point. Is there a savings? I don't know. I just I just my understanding is it's better all under one roof. You have streets, you have gravity, you have storm, you have sanitary sew service and
um water all together. Never understood why if we have professionals working together. Um, all of them are adults and I heard from the time we uh hired Mr. Habacor that staff is working great
together. Our utility staff, our street staff, our public works staff, they're all working great together. I don't know where the breakdown is. I don't know where the breakdown is if it's not working. Nobody's explained to me why it isn't. Um, so >> I'll give you a prime example of how
it's not working. Uh, and correct me if I'm wrong, Danny, but for the 210 highway expansion, the city staff um, decided that there's a bunch of
water mane work that needs done and presents Danny with a budget item of $5 million. Am I saying this correctly, Dan? >> That was the original budget we had. Yes. >> Yeah. So, that we as a commission don't even know about. So, we can't budget for it. We don't know what's coming up. We
we're we're not ready to bond it. And this job starts next year. That that's kind of a major issue in in my world of being in business of of trying to to operate an entity. >> Go ahead. >> We do have the 5 million was included in 26 and 27's budget. So, it's 2 and a.5
million per year, >> right? >> The the biggest change there is now we have to prepay that full amount. It's going to be less than 5 million. We've been told. We don't know that exact number yet. We're still working on it, but now it's it's a prepayment. We can't split it between the two years like we originally.
>> But if this was all under DPW, they'd have just handled it. We the city council would have handled it. It's their money anyway. They're the ones that have to ultimately approve the budget and spend the money. You see what I'm saying? It's it's like we're we're doing things twice.
It It's already The city council should have just made that decision and did it. if water would have been under city council or under DPW, they they would have and then we wouldn't have to worry about changing budgets or doing any work. And and I I'm maybe don't have all
my ducks in a row on this, but that's why I'm asking the question of shouldn't there be some meetings to talk about all the in inefficiencies and all of the double dipping and all the stuff that happens because of the way the charters wrote. >> Right. Councilman Chzik, it would you
say then it it this topic may be already on the agenda for November 5th. So we've brought forth an item that that Mark had mentioned and then just looking at having everything under one roof may already be on that agenda. So we could already be at a meeting where it's already being
discussed and we would have the opportunity to listen to that and engage in that conversation. >> Whether they allow you to engage is one one question. And I I mean it'll be on their I I'm I'm virtually certain that it's on their agenda because it was proposed back in September to be on the agenda. >> Okay.
>> Um but if if this project is scheduled for 26 and 27 where we have this $5 million water line or water works or I I think it was brought forth at least last year. I'm I'm a little bit I got to push back a little bit, Mike, that >> I could be wrong. Well, well, again,
this is when it was brought up was last year, the 5 million. Um, that's got to be covered. I get it. But where does that not leave enough time to figure out how you pay for it? So, to suggest that that's a disconnect between public works
and utilities, I I'm I'm having a hard time understanding why you call it. >> Well, it could be because I've only been here half a year and I could be mist. >> Yeah. Tell me about it. Could we amend the motion to
reach out add to the agenda that we'd like to speak to language about the pilot and then also be part of the conversation regarding public works water wastewater being under one entity? Is that would that be your suggestion just administratively what we should do to make sure that we can be part of both
conversations? >> Well, that's up to the chair and the commission itself. I I can't see why they would say no, we're not going to let you guys weigh in here. It's it's kind of a we are running a charter commission that you know you want to I think you're only safe getting information from all sides in my opinion
but >> I can't speak for them. So >> yeah understood but just administratively that would be a second request. >> You just ask the request to be part of the conversation I guess. Yeah. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> I think that's partly why I made it a
generalized statement. I mean we need to address the pilot. We need we need to address the pilot discussion that we do know. Um but to be able to adjourn and maybe just to keep it generic enough to be able to address any other general operating concerns or changes in the
this the charter um to be able to have that discussion at the time. We haven't seen their agenda. I have no idea what's on their agenda. So I can't speculate. I I can, you know, I can guess. Um, but if we leave it generic enough to be able to speak to be able to request to speak to
those charter changes, I just can't imagine the charter is going to get fixed in one in one setting. You know, it's a living document that's constantly changing. And granted, it doesn't change often, but it it is a living document. So, I think keeping it open and generic enough to be able to have that ability
to speak to anything that does come up, I think is is a a reasonable request. >> That's appropriate. >> Okay. There's a motion and a second currently on the floor, I believe. Do we want to amend the motion? >> Um, well, you made the motion. I I guess
I may just amend it to be able to also speak to other proposed changes. Is that >> Y? >> Yeah, I think so. >> I would move to change my motion. >> Is that all right with
>> that? Mike seconded that second. >> No, >> Dolly was the secondary. >> Well, then I I swore Mike did. Sorry. But yes, >> I would agree to that. >> Okay. >> I know that's the longing. >> We have a motion in a second. Uh any further discussion?
>> If not, all those in favor say I. I I those opposed same sign. Motion passes. >> So then we will officially adjourn to that meeting. Correct. >> We'll make that request. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you everybody. Good discussion. All right. Direction request on a donation of paint of main lift
buildings. >> Do you want to start Charlie? You want me to? So, if you remember back, you uh uh we had a a donor come up from a Rotarian uh to buy the materials to paint some structures down by the Rotarian Park
over there um which we call and consider the main lift. Um, we all also are upgrading our main lifter or we're trying to get on the PPL list, which we are on the PPL list. Uh, whether it be a low um, uh, funding level right now
potential. Um, but we are looking at replacement of a few of them, buildings down there or destruction thereof. If we look at reality, um we're looking a few years down the road for any type of funding or or um activities 28 and even
possibly 30 as as things are going. So, the generous opportunity to to maybe purchase our um products too and then get them painted. Um, we did receive one quote um right now that we have um from
a contractor. Um, we feel it's pretty reasonable. I'm waiting for another one, but um, it's really up to you guys if if if we want to go forward and and get this done. Um it was relatively I don't want to dis you know disclose any costs
uh in case there's a second bidder um that would come through but uh very uh I would like to move forward um with this uh one quote that we have and and reach out to that uh generous Rotarian uh and see what we can come up with if that's
if that's okay. Okay, Danny, >> we would have uh availability in the 2026 budget to cover any remaining cost of the Rotarian if they were not willing to donate the whole amount. So, we could move forward um with the quote that was
received um at this time. >> Okay. Any questions have comments? >> Yes. Um, okay. So, this facility could be completely
uh new in perhaps as little as two to three years. Is that correct? >> Yes. So, all the paint, all the labor uh would be go bye-bye. >> Is that correct? >> Yeah. In the event of that. Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. So the plan is to have this
facility completely new, right? That that's the plan. >> May May I >> um there's one structure there uh in the middle the middle structure will maintain its uh operation. So there is one structure that will maintain um its
>> Okay. I wasn't aware of that. But what I'm getting at is if you're going to have somebody and and this is going to be not just a flat paint. You're looking at something artistic. Is that correct? is the whole hope here that painting of something a mural type.
Is that the plan? >> The idea was to get it painted uh to have a good uh structure to paint to and potentially a mural in the future that was brought up um okay multiple times, but this this was just a a paint um one flat color.
>> Okay. Yeah. Okay. I I wasn't thought this was more of a mural artistic type of thing, but if that was the case, I would I would recommend you just wait till you get a new structure and work with the person that wants to provide the paint and but that's all I got. >> Okay. Thank you. Any other
commissioners? Yes, Dolly. >> Yeah, just for clarification, um this was on our last meeting and we were just waiting to get bids as to what the labor would going to be. So, we don't know what those are. You do. Um, and I understand your reasoning for not wanting to express that just quite yet,
but um, but that's where I would have a trouble approving moving forward if I have no idea what we're approving. You know, I mean, it could be an exuberant amount of money to me and not me seem that much to you, but I also look at the wheels of government move awfully slow.
And when we suspect that it might be two or three years down the road, it could very well be five years. And just for clarification, these are the buildings down by Rotary Park. Correct. And so I understand for the next two to three years we would want really truly want to beautify that continue to beautify that area and keep and continue to maintain
the buildings as they are. Um so I feel if in the event if the labor bid is reasonable but I don't know what that is because I don't know I would welcome the donation and I would welcome you know making sure that we preserve that area
for the next two to three years because we don't know what 2 to three years is going to hold from us. It could be another five years. And if we didn't do anything now and in five years we look at those buildings and they're, you know, dilapitated because we didn't do anything five years previous. I mean,
shame on us then. That's how I would look. That's how I feel about it. But I just don't know what the labor cost is. So, I have a hard time approving it. That's all. >> Is is this even a painting even going to happen this year? Getting kind of late in the year, isn't it? >> I wouldn't think so. I can I can clarify
that, but uh I would think maybe it might be hitting that 50°, but I I I don't know. I would probably say it's going to be held off to next spring. >> So, I would move that we uh hold off on this until spring.
You'll know more. >> I guess the question is, is the donor able to hold off on it? I mean, some people look at donations by the year in which they've >> contributed. financial donation, we would take it. But I mean, if we're going to go and paint it and then charge him,
>> why would we do it now when it's not even going to happen till spring? >> I'm hearing direction from the commission of us following up with that Rotarian, finding out more information. >> I heard a motion without a second. >> I'm used to that.
>> Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? >> What was the motion? >> Do we have Yeah, >> I don't recall there being a motion. hold off until spring to make a decision. >> Second motion in a second. Further discussion, >> Mr. Chair.
>> Yes. >> Um, this is kind of unorthodox. You're talking about labor costs without having the information about the total. And, uh, you guys did go out for bids, right? >> We have asked for quotes. We've only received one quote. We're still awaiting a second quote.
>> Oh, you're still Okay. So, that's why you haven't disclosed it, but correct. >> Yeah. You guys would be remiss in uh ex going forward without obvious seeing all the and it's a public process anyway. So holding off is probably your best direction. >> Okay. Any further discussion >> and just that we're going to reach out
to the donor. Correct. Just for clarification. Okay. Thanks. Oh, that's all I have. >> Okay. All those in favor say I. I. >> I. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Item B, move approve Rotary Park solar contract.
So, as part of the Rotary Solar Project, the attorney Langel has requested commission's final approval of the Rotary Park solar project agreement that was included in the packet. There is um no signature required from the commission. uh Rotary Park or the
Rotarians. The city council's park board will approve this at their meeting tonight and our just formal approval was requested by Attorney Langle to move forward. The final projected costs were less than what was presented back in
July of 2024 for the commission's costs, >> which was what again? Um in 2024 the amount for the solar panels was like 39100. This is 3,3100. >> Okay.
>> Do I move to approve the Rotary Park contract? >> Second. >> Okay. We have a motion to second. Further discussion. I just see this as as a community benefit project which would go back to our pilot.
>> We were discussing it's 33,000 of a payment that would have typically been made to the city anyway, but we're the entire city is going to benefit and and it's a wonderful project. Um I am appreciative of Attorney Langel cleaning up the contract. Um I'm assuming the dates will be corrected because it says
it starts September 2025. Um but it's Yeah. Wonderful. Thank you. >> Well put. Okay, we have a motion to second. So, all those in favor say I. >> I. >> I.
>> Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. All right. New business. Discuss preliminary 2026 budget, which we already did kind of, but >> yeah, >> we did. I can I can elaborate more. Um so in the packet I presented the 2026
just the operating budget. >> The correction I discussed from the packet to what was handed out is related to the 2.6 million reduction in purchase power expenses. That was I had an error in the formula annualizing that with the
reconciliation. Uh that was corrected in the handout that I provided. that went from a deficit of about 600,000 in the electric department to a $ 1.9 million surplus across all departments. The 26 budget incorporates the planned rate
adjustments effective January 1st which were approved as part of the multi-year rate strategy earlier this year. These rate adjustments are designed to maintain the reliable services and offset the inflationary pressures and strengthen that position as we plan for those future infrastructure needs. We discussed those the capital plan
earlier. I can elaborate more if you would like. The total revenues expected for the electric or the utility as a whole is 39.7 million. Total expenses are roughly that 39.6 million. It
results in like a balanced position across the all three department or divisions uh at about $108,000. Uh again to reiterate this budget assumes stable overall consumptions in the near term with the conservation improvement programs that are already in
place. We do anticipate those gradual reductions in usage over time. The planned rate adjustments are intended to stabilize revenue uh as those consumption levels decline essentially keeping revenue steven steady as the customers use energy and water more efficiently.
uh we did incorporate we did not incorporate any of those changes in the industrial load as I mentioned earlier because we expect those to stabilize and used that most conservative approach for budgeting purposes. Um
to note the electric department right now as staff is continually working on the budget it the electric department reflects revenues about 29.5 million and expenses just under 29.8 8 million showing a deficit um of $245,940.
The purchase power still remains the largest cost in that department and always will be at this point. We are still meeting our renewable energy goals with this budget and that has been reflected. water and wastewater departments. With
the rate increases over the past two years and the increases in January of 26, it appears to have a healthy position with revenues in water 4.76 million, expenses of 4.54 million, showing a small surplus of about 218,000. The wastewater department remained
steady with revenues of 5.38 million and expenses of 5.23 million. That's providing a surplus of about 151,000. What we see in water and wastewater is the continued benefit from a stable operating performance and the steady
consumption levels. So as those consumption levels maintain, we're seeing those steady revenues. Water department is showing a positive budget for the first time in the several years. This has been a significant turnaround and improved uh revenue recovery from our recent rate adjustments and then the
continued cost management. This positive trends this is posit a positive trend for both the positions for both departments or divisions as they begin building the reserves for the future of capital work as we've talked about over the last year.
Uh I just to point out in payroll and benefits this does include uh the increase in the Minnesota paid family medical leave and reflects the increases in the health care costs. Additionally, it does incorporate the pass through cost for the administrative staff allocations from the other city
departments and includes about 160,000 and and additional benefits for the vacant positions on the organizational chart as we have done in past practice. Um, I guess with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions or any additional
items. We will continue to work on this over the next month uh and refine it, but looking for any direction from commission on areas where you'd like us to dive into. >> Yes, Mike. >> Um maybe this is a question for Danny
and Trent or either or, but like like I know that I've been investing a lot of money into saving power. Um me and Trent have had battles over the last 11 years about my power bills and and how peak
power um works and and uh so on and so forth. I I'm sure I'm not the only person in the city of Brainer that's, you know, doing light programs and and changing motors and doing things to to help with my usage. trend. Do you see
that? Do you see that contin continuing to go down over the next five years? >> Absolutely. I think that'll continue to trend as conservation is a key part of our portfolio in the electric industry and as a nation as a whole. So, I see this consistent continuously to either
maintain or continue to decrease as far as consumptions go. And as that happens, is that going to create new capacity for potential other things? Because in in my business, if I have capacity, that's
bad, right? Because that's my my costs are fixed in a lot of things. And if I have 20 or 30% capacity, um, to me that's missed revenue or missed opportunity. Do do you kind of see that the same way? Like as these as
this usage comes down because of conservation, we still have to run transformers, we still have infrastructure, we still have have, you know, things that need upgraded. So am I right thinking that we should be looking at as we're saving
capacity in some places trying to sell it or or bring economic development that uses it on the other side of it? >> Absolutely. I think when we look downstream or look long range for capital asset planning, it's a huge piece to size these transformers especially at our large generating
facilities appropriately for what we expect our load to grow to the next 10, 15, 25 years. And so as we see rates decline or not rates but um yeah consumption decline, these are a challenge that we look forward to. The crystal ball is not very uh clear. It's pretty foggy what that looks like. So we
need to make at commission level decision of where we want our capacity to be and that will help with our capital improvement plans going forward to you know if we can say we want to be at this number then we can staff can put together those numbers and make those projects um materialize in the future.
>> Thank you. >> And hitting state mandates for carbon-f free correct yes and we're doing well. We're on track with that. Um and and that as of right now is our narrative and our marching orders from the state of Minnesota. Yes, >> I question on the electric side are is
uh the consulting services that that like that's really went up. Is that because of oncoming upcoming projects >> that that consulting service line item there includes uh additional $50,000 for the rate study, the electric full cost of service study is included in that number.
>> Good to know. And then um just wanted to note appreciate uh actually addressing the um the credit card transaction fees looking at actual of 2025 at $500,000 for credit card fees. That's pretty substantial. >> So I I guess I'll add a point to that.
Commissioner Higgins asked me a question before the meeting on that as he was reviewing the check report. the staff have been struggling administratively in implementing the credit card pass through to the customers as the
commission had because I believe back in April. Um we are working with Tyler Payments. Jana has been working tirelessly to try to get that in. We have been reassured that that will be in effect before the first of the year and that has been reflected in the 26 budget.
>> Did you have something late? >> Okay, Mr. Chair. Yes. >> Um Danny, you mentioned the water. Um the um I believe the commission agreed to increase water 20% back last November
or December and that when did that take effect? >> That took effect in December and then was effect for all of 25. >> Okay. So then when you look at the numbers for 25 I guess it would be to date. Um you said that it showed that we
have us were above expenses by how much >> projected for 25. >> Yeah. >> You read it >> 260,000 for 25. >> Okay. And and the total revenue for water was projected at what?
It'll be 4.6 million for 25. >> So that 20% um made a big difference, wouldn't you say? >> Yes. >> I would just compliment the commission for because without that we wouldn't have that surplus, would we?
>> No. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Danny, anything else on the operating budget? >> I do not. Any questions you guys have, I will be happy to take. Any other questions from commissioners?
>> Okay, thank you very much. Yes, >> I I'll have one more. I will be looking to schedule a meeting with the finance operations committee to discuss further and how we want to refine it for presentation in final presentation in November. >> Look forward to it. >> Is Charlie going to be there?
>> Oh, he can't wait either. >> Can hardly contain himself over there. All right, new business item B, discuss EV charging rate future plan. >> Trent, I think this is you, right? >> Thank you, Mr. England. Yes. Um, so following our last board meeting, staff
received custom requests to review and discuss rate options specifically to EV electrical uh vehicle charging stations. Um the inquiry really focused on whether our current rate structure is adequate um to account for the unique load
profiles that providing um EV charging can um really put forth on our system. So the question we're really looking for from commission is as of right now we don't have anything currently designed in uh any EV charging rates. Um we're starting to see a little more of that
saturation um hit our system but we haven't really materialized any impacts electrically from that loading yet. Um this is a commercial account. Um so it' be basically a a community charging station through the purview of that commercial account. Um when their demand
comes on when that charger comes on they are currently in a rate class at that demand charge is uh very heavy uh when that charger comes on which is going to make it very challenging to return the investment on that equipment that they've installed there. uh doing
research with a few other communities um I have found that on the commercial side there's haven't been a lot of reprieve with current rate structures from the other utilities that I had looked at but they are looking at things on the residential side so uh off- peak charging things along those sides so it truly align with our residential
customers where on the commercial side um that's going to be more of a challenge off peak is going to be more in middle of the night so people probably aren't going to pull in there to get that best rate in the middle of the day on the commercial side of things so as we kind of peel back this onion staff's Just really looking for direction if there's any key points that commission wants us to consider as we
develop this and try to bring back a policy for your guys's consideration. >> Okay, thank you Trent. Any questions from commission members? >> Um Trent maybe Mike could we have somebody in the
audience that's dealing with this. Is there any way he could get up and and share his experience on what he's dealing with so that the commission understands what a a potential commercial EV station would do.
>> Would you be willing to do that for us? >> Sure, >> I'm okay with that. Yeah. >> Awesome. >> Come on up. Want to state your name? >> My name is Tony Bance. I'm the general manager at Tanner Motors. Um thank you, Mike. Um commission. I ultimately we installed a fast charger. I'm not sure
if anyone here has an electric car. Um, but ultimately there's level one, level two, level three charging stations. I'm a feeling you're more familiar with the level twos that people install in their homes um to charge their homes overnight during off peak. It can be pretty slick for them to save money that way. Uh the
manufacturer Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram Stalantis required us to install a level three. I had a whole plan set up for level twos and the last minute they said, "No, now you have to do a level three." Uh needless to say, since the current administration, now that plan's all backed off, but we installed it. Um
I kind of put the cart before the horse. Um didn't know what I didn't know. Got it all handled, got it done. Took a year to even get it set up. That by the way, I've also learned I can't charge I can't charge for power. So that's on me a little bit there. But I kind of waited for a year-long process to be able to
somehow recoup the cost when I have to charge customers. Uh during that time, what I realized is the demand for a fast charger up here, especially during the summer when we have the summer guests come up is is very high. So when um I wasn't able to charge, wasn't able to
get the system set up and I turned it off, I you'd imagine that the reaction was poor even though it's like I haven't even provided it yet. And so then recently we did we're able to we finally got with the system because even Chrysler was behind the Aball. They said do this but we're not sure how you're going to do it yet. Um once we're able
to finally set up where we can set up with the company to actually possibly charge the customer to recoup the cost, we were finally set up and needless to say, we got our first power bill and my my utilities manager went, "What did you do?" And they went, "Turn it off." So um so needless to say, we we kind of like
the benefit of it because we know the demand isn't up here for in terms of I mean, I could pull registration from uh DMV, but we're not selling that many up here, but boy, do you see them a lot up here, right? And I would hope everyone else if if you're if you haven't been able to see that I'm not sure. But my
point is we like the idea of having another reason for people to come in. And so we made it public. When I started to talk to places in California or the cities or in bigger communities that are more used to it, a lot of them don't want the public coming to their charging station. They kept it behind because they don't want the Toyotas in their Chrysler lot. And I'm like, why do I
care? I want them on my lot. I want them here. So the demand though is what caught me off guard. There is a huge demand. And so if I can get it to a point where it makes sense to turn it back on, I I I think I'm I'm fulfilling something that we have here. Now, I know on the other side of town, I know there's a few level threes for um up at
the resort by the dance studio. Tesla's been here forever, and I think the holiday station just put in a couple, they had a tragedy when they're doing it, but they put in a couple fast chargers. I'm not quite sure how they're getting around it at the holiday gas station, but I'm looking for help. How can I do this to make it make sense so I can turn the thing back on? and guidance
was probably something I should have done two years ago, but here we are. So, >> sure. >> Does that help? >> Yeah, I I appreciate the the conversation last week or last month afterwards and and I have have shared that. You know, when I got here and I
got my first power bill, um it was a number at the at the Bick property and then three months later, my guys decided to turn a whole bunch of lights on and that didn't need to be on and I got a peak demand charge of $89,000 and I'm
like I mean I thought I thought me and Trent were going to go rounds over that but he graciously educated me on how it works so I I knew exactly what you were talking about listening to you talk. So, thanks for sharing. >> Um, I definitely we will we'll be
talking about this more and trying to figure out a way to get this to work in a financial model for you. And I I think that there's opportunity there again, too. We want, you know, me at the Northern Civic Center, I want those Teslas and I want those people coming down into into Brainard proper from the
lakes. you know, everything up there is dated and we're we're just every day, every week, every month, we get more and more people coming to the Northern Civic Center, coming to Brainer Proper, coming through Brainer Proper, you know, and and we want more of that. So, I'll I
support you and we'll try to get it figured out. >> Appreciate it, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes, sir. Um I apologize, but some of your um explanation of what happened is a little beyond my scope of understanding. If if you could just maybe is it because of the peak power
cost that is why you got hit so hard just so I can >> trend >> I'm the liberal arts major stab at that. Yeah. So how are deique our demand charges are set monthly. So your highest demand of that month will be your your demand charge for the month and so
that'll continue to grow in that month. So essentially what could happen is day one of that month you turn your charger on you set that demand you could see that increase that's going to follow through the entire month that one demand peak will stay there all month. So no matter when he turns it on whenever it
has usage that's going to set the demand for their entire general service. So that will impact the entire month's ray class of his bill no matter if it just turned on one time or turned on 20 times. So once it hits that demand that will stay at that number that demand number stays there and then the usage calculates below that. So, it's a
compounding equation to where that initial when you turn that, you know, for lack of better terms, you're at the stop light and you smash the gas throttle down to the ground, you're going 100 miles an hour. That's what that EV charger is doing to our system. And then when it backs off and it gets to the next red light and he's not charging, now you're sitting there
idling again. So, we have to have equipment in to be able to handle that peak demand spike that comes on extremely fast on a level three charger. And that's really where that impact of that pricing comes into play. All of our demand customers are structured the same way. um once you set it, you can only keep raising it up for the rest of the
month. And that's what some of the challenges come into play. So, unfortunately, we've had um customers over the years that maybe set their peak demand on the very last day of the month and then the first day of the next month. And that bill is um hard for them to u navigate through when it happens
two months in a row. It could be significant. So then in turn, you look and say, well, how do you charge your customer then? Right. That's the other problem, >> right? And well, correct. I mean, in theory, if In theory, I thought it was as simple as, you know, I did a lot of research on what other places are doing, what
they're charging, not necessarily, you know, outside in my dealer network group. And um it seemed as simple as bear with me, as simple as this is what public utilities charging us and what's a fair number to charge the customer. Maybe I can make 20 cents per kilowatt and just go on from there. And that in
theory that was the original plan. Now, I also got myself thinking that I also installed three level two chargers. one customerf facing um and two I have two different buildings unfortunately across the street so I need one in my service department one in my sales side because requirements from the manufacturer if
I'm I can still work on electric cars even though I didn't I sold one to myself and one to an employee that's why I got rid of them um and so I can it's outside I can sell in three months again um so yeah I but I have to have I also have to if I'm doing warranty work on
someone's electric car from the cities then I have to return that vehicle charge Why I don't have to return a gas, I don't know, but the requirement is you got to return a charge. So, um, so I found myself even thinking in those the level two is going to get me to peak power, which I should. Yeah. So, >> so as a buyer, did you get the tax
credit or did you business on? >> Um, we did not get the tax credit because I did through our in-house leasing company, but Chryser came up with money to cover that. You had to go through Stallantis to do it, and I couldn't find another employee to take the other one, so we bought it. Yeah.
And it's going to be a hell of a deal when I can sell it used. what do I got to do, you know? But uh uh yeah, needless to say, in all seriousness, it's it's I've been driving it for the last 3 weeks. It's it's a wild technology. It's super cool. Did it need to be forced on people's throats? Probably not. But the market's slowly growing to that. You know, you guys have
seen it in your own end what people are doing on their home. So, it's pretty wild. But >> well, I appreciate you bringing this to our attention because I'm >> you know, I there semiis are coming. We we are we are not very far off seeing
semiis in Brainer electric semis. They're they're coming. I'm looking at them. I have personally I have trucks that just haul in Brainer proper and I think an electric cuck would be amazing. So, but this is all something we as a commission and staff need to think about
because we can educate people. You're kind of the guinea pig, right? and we can if the next time somebody comes and wants to put a level three charger in, we can be like, "Hey, that's fine, but here's what we know." So, >> thank you. Thank you for being the guinea pig. >> If you guys want to take a selfie next
to it, it's up to us. >> Mr. Chair, >> yes. >> Could I ask uh Danny a question or Trent perhaps? Um I think Trent um when it comes to our residential uh customers and those who purchase a electric
vehicle and they want to charge at home um regarding the our our grid and and the capacity that we can provide. Um I don't know how many uh charging stations does the utility do we know
right now how many charging stations are in the residential or the city proper of Brandon? Yeah, that's a great question. As of right now, I know of six, but it doesn't necessarily say that they have to notify us that they're installing electric vehicle. So, typically what we'll see on the residential side is a
level one or a level two charger. A level one is very slow. You can plug it right into your 120 outlet and it's a trickle charger essentially. So, it's slowly charged. What Tony has is a level three that is really right away. We want that battery charged instantly and that's where that demand comes into play. And what we're seeing in rate
design for residential customers are we can design our rates around our off of our off peak shoulder. So we can have them charge that from let's say 11:00 at night till 7 in the morning when we don't have the rest of our peak coming onto play. And that price point is pretty good for a residential um charger
at that point. It's really these fast chargers that put this demand on the system that we're uh considering. And it kind of goes back to Mike's question earlier as we look out to our capital projects and asset planning for 2530 years from now. If there's not a gas vehicle in Brainer and it's all electric, that looks a lot different to
us as we plan out into the future. So, initially we thought that the electric vehicles were going to come on pretty fast. That was the narrative. And so, we were kind of impacting breaking bracing ourselves, watching for that load, knowing that we might have to make some capital um decisions relatively quickly
within a year or two of this impact actually came. Uh we have not seen that impact yet, but we do to Tony's point see a lot of them in town. So they're not coming, they're not parking in brainer garages, per se at night, but they're definitely coming up and they're traveling through. So there is somewhat of a need for this charging, but
unfortunately a lot of that charging is happening outside of our service territory um around the lakes and stuff like that where we don't get that impact for that uh >> so sales. If we go back to the um say residential use exclusively in Brainard, if if that were to say for some reason
um increase to 20% of the residents who own vehicles go to electric and they have either the level one or two, >> could we accommodate for that? >> Yes, we could. And so what we would have to do initially right now we would have capacity to be able to accommodate that. But what we would look at is our rate
structure. So we would make it to where we would want them to charge when it it behooves us to charge. And so that rate would change a little bit. So you could charge potentially we could design a rate to say if you want to charge at 3 o'clock in the afternoon, you certainly can. But we could put the programs in that meter and you're going to be paying
a premium at 3:00 in the afternoon versus 3:00 in the morning. So we can design those rates to be where if customers are plugging in at night and letting it charge through the day, they should be fine during the day practice back and forth or wherever they're going. If your dog run by and unplugs your car at 2 in the morning and you
don't realize that, you might hop in your car at 7:00 a.m. and not have a battery to get to work. So they want that ability to charge quickly from time to time. So there's different scenarios, different people have um you know different schedules and that's all going to impact how we look at our rate structure and really it depends on our
shoulder season or our shoulder times of day when we're our peak load is going. >> There's an idea um invention of dog proof chargers. >> Yes. Yes. I only bring that up because it was an actual case study that happened. So, I think this is good we're
talking about because there is another customer within our territory that you've worked with that I've worked with that's planning on these as well. So, I think it's nice to be ahead of it or at least catch up to uh others within our community. So, what what does that look like for us moving forward? What's our
next steps? >> Yeah. So, there's a couple different things. Um like I mentioned time of use rates and what that may look like. So what we're stashally looking for is what does commission want to see for us as we design this um rate going forward. How do we want to impact that? Do we feel
that the need today um is so great that we have to start planning for more capacity in the future for these vehicles? I would say we're not at that level yet. But what do we do for the ones that are currently installed and or going to be installed? We tried to do a public charging station if you guys remember a year or so ago right out here
in the parking lot. and that really failed for um lack of engagement from both boards in that. So we've the utilities taken a step towards that to make that happen and we just haven't seen that the commission level or the council levels had the appetite to move forward. So that's really where we're
from staff's perspective looking for guidance on how you guys want us to develop this into the future. >> That was because of the cost of the infrastructure. >> Exactly. And so that is the same reason why we charge a demand rate on this account because we had to upsize that transformer two times to be able to handle that initial inrush load of that
level three charger. So we have to install a bigger piece of equipment to be able to turn that charger on. So that can all be resolved through a rate class, but we're going to get pound-for-pound back for what we put into that transformer. And so that's where it makes it a challenge to make it lucrative on a level three charging
situation because of the entry extra infrastructure costs. I find it interesting that you you firsthand experienced exactly how government works. Your your developer of your vehicles created a a vehicle that
you now have to in uh implement a charging station that you can't charge it, you know, charge uh for um and it was a really expensive um and I feel sometimes that's even what just government does to us. they impose these stipulations of, you know, for PAS and
all these other things and yet they don't really think about how it's all going to get paid for or who's going to end up paying the cost. My only concern is, I mean, I have questions. I mean, I don't know uh if there is a metering if you can do metering specific to identify
when these charging stations are being utilized. I've always understood uh the demand is is building a highway for um for rush hour traffic. You know, you build a highway for that rush hour traffic. You don't build a highway for,
you know, times when people are, you know, just getting around town. Um and and so the cost of the energy is still the same to us. And so that's why I I mean there's there's a lot of things questions I would have as far as do we even have options to be able to modify
or create a policy or you know identify you know charging stations as opposed to general use for our commercial users. So I think there's a lot more questions I would have before a policy could ever get created. Um but I get it. I mean I understand and I feel but feel for you
because I know that is exactly why we didn't move forward with this that that return on investment was years. It would have been years for us to be able to uh pay for that charging station out front. So we I think we just nixed the idea all together even though there was grant money for it. I think ultimately it was
just going to be too costly for us. So all I have >> she just described carbon free by 20. >> Amen. brother. Oh, >> Trent, do you have any solutions right now or is this just something we're still going to research or what what are you thinking? >> So, staff's looking for direction right
now. Just from our conversations today, I think that there's maybe some appetite to reopening up a public charging station potentially if Tony has the appetite to have people on his property to charge vehicles, maybe we can work something out with this current location that we have moving forward as a public
charging station. Now, that's just high level from our conversations we had today. But to Dolly's point, really, we have to pay it off the transmission meter, no different than they're paying it off the meter at their building. So, the only thing that I can see for reprieve for a level three charger right now is time of use rates. And time of
use is going to be in the middle of the night when you're probably not going to have a lot of people parking at your house. And that's the only way that I can see in our current range structure to have any relief towards cost. But that would really be overall system impact of our demand. Since we've moved over to A, we're not on a demand charge like we were when we currently had when
we previously had Minnesota Power. We had Minnesota Power. Uh the demand rates that we were in that rate schedule would have been a challenge to make any of this work. Now, we can kind of look at our own system demand and potentially flex something in. My fear is that those points that we're going to identify that make the most sense for us are going to
be at the middle of the night. So, the policy could be twofold. It can be a residential policy and a commercial policy. And I think that we could definitely start on that residential policy sooner than later as we are seeing a few customers start to install these. We are recommending that they add a separate meter base when they install
them. So when we do have a rate going forward, we can install that second meter and be able to identify. We've got two customers right now that have allowed me to set a meter on their service just so we could watch the impact of what that charger looks like. So we do have, you know, seeds out in the field and we're watching them grow to understand that. We've got some good
partnership with some residential customers right now that are allowing us just to see that data. Um, but that's really where the challenge comes into is we're going to have to pay for it just like the demand out at the transmission line. So, it's really through a rate structure and time of use is the only way that I can see impact like that. But
maybe there's a partnership with this current project right now that we can work something out to >> I would love to sit down and have some conversation about a private public partnership and how this this could work with with somebody that's already
working on it. I >> mean, unfortunately, I think there's a stranded asset out there that's going to be hard to utilize from his perspective. >> Well, and and we need we we as a as a commission need to be able to direct somebody somewhere anyway. So instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, let's just
partner up and figure out how to make it work. So I' I'd be all all for some conversations like that. >> Staff can continue to uh cultivate this a little more and we can get together maybe with the operations committee or one of our committees and continue to move it forward and bring something back
with a recommendation to commission in the future. Um or at least for I mean this might take a couple meetings to get through. >> Yeah, that sounds good. >> Keep moving forward. >> Thank you. Thank you for being here, too. All right. All good there.
Item C, discuss on leaking services policy. I'll I'll grab this one, too. So, um, what we're doing right now is we went through when we're doing our leak detect testing and we're trying to identify any loss water in our system. It's something that we do annually. Um, the challenges
run into right now is ownerships of lines. So on a commercial line, that's ownership from curb main to the meter. Um that is the responsibility of that commercial account. Residentials go from the meter out to the curb stop on the road. So we do not have a formalized
policy right now. If that line starts to leak, um how long they have to make repairs, how we make those repairs, what are those what does that look like going forward. So um let's say there's an address that has a leaking service we can identify as leaking on their side.
How long does the commission want that customer to be able to make those repairs? What is an adequate amount of time for us to either go in and make the repairs oursel and or shut that service off? We reserve the right right now water has a lot of force behind it. So if leaking water can erode a road, can
erode foundations of buildings extremely quickly. So if in in the event that that would be the case, we would shut that water off immediately to protect private property and infrastructure that we have in the city. But what about the leaking service line to a residential home that is unmetered water usage? So we're not
it's not like we're getting uh paid for that water that's leaking. It's before the meter. So we need to address them quickly, but we don't have a formal policy as of today to address that. So staff's kind of looking for some direction um from the commission to formalize a policy to put that together.
So we can either and you know have appropriate enforcement measures to engage with the customer and a timeline um to to make those repairs and I guess if you got any more questions. >> Do you have an example of of a where
this happened that you could describe to me? >> Yeah, they're they're happening quite frequently right now and frequently I would say we know we've had probably a dozen leaking services this year. Part of that has to do with the age of the service line that is owned by the property owner. We're hoping through the
leadline service change oats that we get after a lot of these older services, but you know, some of these galvanized services have been in service for 50 to 75 years. They're at their useful life and they're going to start leaking. Um, we have several right now that are leaking on the customer's side and this
is really where staff's kind of looking for direction to move forward. >> And when you say customer side, you're you mean between the shut off and the meter, >> correct? Yes. From the curb stop to the meter. So on their side, they're >> How do you know what's leaking? >> So we can do leak detect and we can listen for it. So we'll actually hear
that water running. Um it's pretty amazing. We actually contract our leak detect stuff annually. One time a year we have a professional come in and listen to our entire system. But with the even the equipment that we have, I can listen to that water mane and I can tell you who's doing dishes and houses, who's dishwashers running, things along those lines. you can hear down. I would
I would attribute it to sticking your head under the water in the lake in the summertime and hearing the boat all the way across the lake running. It's the same thing on the water, man. That acoustic will travel down that pipe. >> So, so you and I'm I get that. So, you're saying you can
hear water running and then somebody standing in there and the meter is not running. >> Correct. So, we hear the water running. So, what we'll do is if we identify a loud a loud noise or a lot of water running water, we'll contact that customer. will shut that curb stop off. When we shut that curb stop off, if it's on their side, that leaking sound goes
away and we can identify which side that's on. If we turn them off, we can still hear the leak. Then we know we have to continue down our distribution um line to find where that leak's at. >> So, you have some sort of a a a way to measure that. It's not just I feel
>> no 100% we can identify exactly what service lines are leaking. Maybe not to the extent of where in that service line, but from this valve to that meter, we can identify it. >> That makes sense. >> And we on average over the last couple years, what has been in my purview, we've been averaging anywhere from 10 to 15 leaky services when we do this. And
then we've been able to address all of those. But um so far we've had good uh participation from our customers. So >> I don't want to ask this question, but I just have to. How much water do we use a
year versus what we get paid for? >> So, we do that calculation annually. And I'll lean that one to Charlie because he gets the fun part of producing the water. >> I'll I'll put it in the report. Um, we have a a lot of water loss. Um, whether it be flushing and leaks, undetected
leaks, um, you know, backwash of seepage. You know, you'll see my report, you'll see the backwasher that's going out, but we're producing it. we have to pay for that. Um it's it's quite a bit um when we look at the the you know
trying to get it within that 10% um sometimes is a struggle. I think last year we we didn't quite make it but we pay for that. So it's just the same thing as unmetered uh power loss, right? Um you know all the citizens and
commercial accounts have to pay for that, right? So, it's our due diligence to try to find and limit the amount um that we we have for loss. Um when I say a lot, you know, when you look at 10% of the total annual production,
that that that's a lot of money. >> How many gallons How many g how many gallons do we produce a year? >> I would have to look that number. Yeah, we're looking in the range of what 300 million um gallons we produce. So 10% of
that's 30 million gallons >> that we're losing. That's why the reclamation >> million gallons of water a year due to blowing out fire hydrants, leaks, >> flushing. >> Flushing. >> Yep. Yep. >> And there is an operational appetite that is, you know, distribution systems.
It's frequent that you flush out your system that >> we would anticipate some of that water loss just through operations of a distribution system. But you know this is a challenge that we have and that uh just starting with littlest smallest leaking services if they go on for years and where it's daylighting is not
impacting anybody potentially these could l leak forever. I really >> and I'm bringing up this this up this way because I just want people to understand the enormity of of the situation that you know 30 million gallons of water is a lot of water that
that we're producing and paying for and treating and and it's going through our distribution system. So I'm just trying to put it in a perspect perspective that the public could understand. >> Yes, sir. >> Jeff. Yep. I believe that's 60 water towers over
there by yesterday's gone. 30 million. Anyway, um when you have a service line that's leaking, um do you have by the sound, you can't tell the volume, you just know it's leaking. Correct. >> That is correct. Yeah. >> Okay. So, what happens uh what does it
just go into the soil? Does it erode? Does it create a sinkhole sometimes or >> It's a that's a great question. We see all of them happening. So, I mean, depending on where it's at, we have very sandy soil in our region right here. So, it's very easy for those services to leak and leak right into the ground or
not actually daylight. Um, we've had water mane brakes that will surface four or five blocks away from the water main break. And that's just the water following the least passive resistance till it pops out of the ground. >> Um, also when I raise my hand, what's the O4 anyway? Um,
>> just about like you laughing when I'm talking. Anyway, um so the policy says then you can you shut the water uh the curb stop off. Um are we allowed to say um you're not getting water until you fix it? I doubt that's our policy. Is it >> that this is what we're trying to to to
write right now? So we would absolutely shut the water off if there was immediate danger to life or property for anybody. And I don't think anybody would disagree with that, customers included. But right now that is the teeth that we have. And so if somebody has a leaking service, we identify them. We're looking
for what's what's the commission thinks appropriate. Is it 30 days, 90 days? As we're coming into the winter time, the cost of fixing leaking service is going to, you know, be as frost charges. So, it would behoove the customers right now to move forward on that. As staff analyzes that we don't have a formal
policy to really move forward to get that moving. So, we can come in and make those repairs potentially when we have staff time to do that, but I would love to say we'll fix every leaking service line, but if we have 15 of them, we don't have the staff horsepower to be able to accommodate that. So, um there's
several different ways that can be financed. We can work on that. We can work through the customer to finance that in a couple different options. Really, what I'm looking for today is is 30 days long enough, is 60 days long enough, is 90 days long enough. um along those lines. And then what do we have for enforcement which Jeff really the
only enforcement we would have is either charge um financially more for leaking service and or shut that service off. Um I believe and don't quote me on this but there is some um rules in the city of Brandard about having running water to a dwelling considering to be a living
dwelling. So if you don't have water to your building you can't necessarily be in there. So it's it's it overreaches quite a ways. This policy needs to align with some of that which um I think needs to be considered by the commission as we dissolve as we make this policy moving forward. I think it's 3 days. Um if
there's not running water in a dwelling for 3 days, it's not considered habitable. So So when you have a leaky service, is it usually the um if the property owner decides to fix it, do they usually replace the entire line or they just try to repair the bad portion or >> typically what we're seeing in in in our
region here is these service lines are to the point where they need to be replaced. So, it's usually a full replacement. >> So, >> very rare do we see anybody fixing a actual leaking spot. >> Um, do you find many uh rental properties with this or >> due to the fact that we're over 50% rentals? Most of our residential
customers are rentals properties. And then, you know, that can impact if it's a a quarter, a triplex or something like that, multiple families can be affected by these leaking service lines. And we do see those as residential lines due to the size of the piping going to the houses, not necessarily a commercial
line. So that ownership does fall um from the curb stop to the house on that landlord. >> So even though the service line is a responsibility of the property owner, we have gone in and fixed it. Is it at their expense or >> Yeah. Anytime we would fix it, it' be at their expense. Yes.
>> Thank you. try. If you set it at 30 days and and a customer couldn't get it fixed in 30 days, are you drawing a line in the sand in your policy or are you going to slide some Minnesota nice into that? How what
what are you thinking you're going to do? >> I will follow commission's direction on that. >> Yes, Kelly. >> So, I guess what I'm hearing just so we can move this along is you are looking for direction. You're looking for a time frame of how long when a property owner
is notified of a potential leak, how long they have for the service line to be fixed. Um establishing a time frame for notification procedure. I get all of that. I think we just asked that you and again I think this was part of the operations piece of it. Why we even established an operations committee was
to look at our policies to make sure that they're updated that we have tightened these up. So I would at this point it would be easier for me to say Trent draft a policy that we can look at and and determine time frames uh
notification meas uh timing and the the appropriate force enforcement action and let us look at it. It's easier to do it that way and make modifications and us try to create a policy right now as we sit here. That that would be that would be my request to suggest staff make that
re or staff at least work on a policy to tighten that up a bit. >> I agree. I was just trying to get to lunch before this meeting was over. >> You you had 12 to 15 you said in the last year. How long did it take most of them to get that repaired? >> Um you know depending I know it's
getting busy for contractors right now too but I would say within within 30 days most of them are making their corrections. uh there was some uh situations where there was financial hardships which made it a little more of a challenge. So we worked through them in different avenues that we can help support um the finances for those
service line replacements. Whereas right on the cusp of having an entire lead service line replacement coming into the city too. So some of this will be you know in the next if you fast forward to 10 years and we get all lead service lines replaced we probably don't have this many leaks for another 25 30 years
potentially until the infrastructure starts to age out again. But between here and then the policy now will be very beneficial because we're seeing a lot of failures on the customer side and we just don't have any good ways as staff to even give direction to the customer and or enforce any of the wishes that the commission might have
for this. >> Okay. Well, to me there is some urgency in getting it fixed. I mean we're wasting money. >> So I would go with the 30 days. >> Okay. And then if you can put in that policy if I would like to see how is the emergency if they have financial
hardship you know what options do they have is it through us is it through other programs I don't know. >> Yeah. So we have the ability to put assess their tax roles with that work. So that would be >> assess it. >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> Yeah I agree with Dolly TR. Get get us a draft that needs addressed. I understand direction. We will have something for you for the next meeting. >> Thanks. >> Thank you. Thanks for bringing it up. >> All right. Moving on to staff reports. City administrator is not here today.
Council Lison report Councilman Jezek. Jeff, any any update from the council? >> No, just um thanks for all you guys do. Appreciate it. >> Yeah, likewise. Thank you. Uh Chris, >> nothing in addition to my report.
Wait a minute. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, I would only like to in the report congratulate and welcome back Paul Sandy. So, >> wait a minute. >> That That was a That was a brief over >> Well, she announced her resignation.
>> Um Oh, she did. Oh, that became public. So, let's hear it. >> Retirement is not until January 23rd is my last day. So, you're going to be stuck with me a couple more months. >> Congratulations. >> Congrats. Congratulations. Mhm. >> Any questions for Chris? >> Trying to slip that by.
>> Yeah, I see. My lips were sealed because you said it wasn't public. I didn't realize you made the announcement documents. >> Didn't read her. >> Sorry. Apparently, I missed over that. I did have stuff on there because I I wanted Paul Sandy to be recognized. So, >> congratulations.
>> All right, Danny, we already heard from you. So, we'll move on to operations manager report. We provided we provided another uh snapshot of September's renewables. Uh one thing to note in there as we look at our hydro project um being this, you know, the mid
mediumsiz generator that we have currently right now in our renewable portfolio, it does run 24/7 and it is beating out some of the solar numbers that we're seeing. So, I just wanted to note that. Um quick update on a few of the projects. Water tower number two has
been disinfected and cleaned out. That's just part of an annual maintenance that we do. We did install a mixer in that tower and electrical work to come here in the next few weeks. So, operationally, we should have a mixer going into the winter here, which will help moving that water around. That'll be a beneficial to our water quality.
Um, flows at the hydro dam are just over 1,000 cubic feet per second, which is keeping us still on the DNR's low flow management protocol. So, we're still following that very closely. Um, other than that, construction projects are starting to come to an end. a lot of what we're left to do. Water man works
pretty much been completed for the construction of this year. Um most of our infrastructure for the lighting for the new roundabouts and roads are all installed and in um so we're looking good to be ahead of freeze up this year. So that makes me happy and uh staff did a wonderful job this summer through the construction season and been many
challenges and they've came up with many great solutions to keep us moving forward. So that'll be the end of my report unless you have any questions. >> Thanks Trent. I think we're good Charlie. Yes, thank you. Um big day today. Uh
been been a large couple weeks. Um we procured and were installing the new uh uh lift station pumps at Evergreen. Um we've completed also the checks and gates um earlier this month. So some things that may not have been on our our
report. Um so one of the things about commercial users, how am I doing? Right? Peak demand. um all these equipment that we're replacing are 1980s or even more vintage. So the efficiencies of them electric motors, we we we share a lot in
common. Um whether it be water or wastewater production and loss. Um so uh any any input, anything on my end, um you know, I can do better. Uh let me know, but we are watching it. The meters, just like every other customer,
um we are charged accordingly. Thank you, sir. Any questions for Charlie? >> I just got one. >> Yeah. >> Um on your report here, Charlie, um 2025 Brainer total flow was 35 million
gallons and change there. A decrease down. I'm sorry. Oh, wrong one. where I'm sorry combined total flow
54 million and change I don't know I I was looking at this I one second sorry I I I the numbers aren't there as I just Okay. I I must have listened or heard it wrong. I apologize. It was a huge
decrease from the previous year. Uh and I and I guess that's not in there. I I don't know what I was hearing. >> Yeah. Apologize. >> No, no, don't do not apologize. You'll see that fluctuate from season to season with we had rain, if we didn't have rain, if we had colder temps, if we didn't, >> you will see fluctuation just like
power. It's exactly the same uh concept. >> I don't I don't know how I heard it. I listened twice and it was there and I don't see it. So, I must be dreaming. Anyway, >> right. The better we do on leaks is the less we have to put out in north and south too. And and and again, um you
know, any work that we do in our distribution and anything we catch uh also can save us money. >> I just have a couple. >> Yes. Tell >> just a couple quick questions. the um the evergreen lift station was that was did we budget for that or was that just a whoops hey we got to fix it?
>> Yep. No, we combined uh it was uh March I want to say I presented it to buy the new checks and everything and new pumps and replace that a year ahead was the pumps or the the checks and valves. I just wanted to kind of wrap that one up
and and start to uh operate that one. So we did uh I did approach and and we actually spent next year's uh checks and gates I think was 87,000 that work is performed and that was on the bill statement. >> That was my next question. Are there any
other check valves or anticipated lift stations of get replaced? >> Yes, but not on this year's budget right now. >> All right. And then um I'm just really glad to see there's only 157,000 gallons of bioolids in storage. >> Yep. And we're we're still we're still
going. I mean, I we'll go until the snow flies. >> All right. >> It's where we're at. >> And then uh last, the emergency generator maintenance. Was were there any other things identified that um you know, during that testing that we should that that we need to like plan for in the future? Did anything crazy come up
during your testing or I mean it was just a standard test? No, we're just we're running them monthly and and now when we look at demand charge, so being the ones that do have the larger ones that have the uh generators um implementing the running the generator, so we're not getting that peak uh
instantaneous look at and paying for that the rest of the month. So that is being engaged also. So if we have a generator and we're going to use we're going to pump out or do something um to engage that status uh for that standard operating procedures. And my last question was on the water tower
communication failure. Do we have a backup for the backup for that copper line being cut and it? >> No, not currently, but we are we are in progress of doing that with fiber and networking. >> Okay. Yes. >> Awesome. All right. Thank you. That's all I have. Thanks, Charlie. >> You bet.
>> All right. Moving on to commission member reports. Mike. >> Um, thanks. Yeah, Jeeoff. I just wanted to clarify my um that I made that you questioned was because you can't see my crap eaten grin that I have on my face. >> Uhoh. So that was uh >> oh when I
>> Yeah, that was that was like I just wanted you to know that I was being sarcastic and giving you a hard time. >> I heard an also like >> call it what you want. Um >> that's all I got. Good clarification. Mark, I have
nothing. All right. Um, just congratulations, Chris, and uh, thank you for staff for all of the very defined reports and uh, very in-depth. I really do appreciate it. It's a lot easier to keep track and follow through and go back and remember. Sorry, I
didn't remember about the lift station budgeting, but I I just couldn't remember. All right, thank you. >> You bet. Yeah, and thanks everybody for sitting through. It's a longer meeting, but I felt it was really good discussion. So, thanks for everybody's time. And we will adjourn to the November 5th charter commission meeting.
Do I hear a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. >> Second. Discussion. All in favor say I. I. >> I. Motion passes. Thanks everybody. >> Thanks everybody. >> Yeah, I know. I thought it was funny.