Okay, we're good. We will come to order. Everyone please stand for the pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of the stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice
for all. The federal complied with the 48 hour notice provisions of the Sunshine Law by giving written advanced notice of at least 48 hours to two local newspapers stating the time, date, location, and to the extent known the agenda of the meeting. This notice was posted in the
Burough Hall and filed with the Burough Republic. Okay, public comment on the agenda. So just a reminder, public comment is unlike our commissioners meeting public comment for working meetings only at the beginning. So this is your this is your
moment for unless you know your staff and brought up for a specific item. So, um yeah. Yeah. So, leave name and address. >> Uh Tom Elgen 5:30 head just curious as to the uh time frame of these working
sessions at 11:30 during the week time. Typically, the U public is working at that time and I was just curious as to why this decision was made for this client. So we're trying to mold this as more
like a staff meeting as well. So as you see the agenda topics that we are going to ask our zoning officer to give her expertise and her opinion. There's things for communications that we'll have in Ferguson and this is staff that is not paid to come in after hours. So
we didn't want to add another nighttime meeting so that we can have all our staff available if we need to ask and really do do the work of building that agenda for the commissioner meetings. So your targeted audience isn't really being addressed. Then
>> it's it's available on Zoom and it's recorded so you can watch it later uh and see what's what's happening. >> Yeah. >> East terrace. I have some questions and comments, but they're not and they're
not important like the other things that have to be dealt with today. Is it possible to to comment and ask those questions after you've gone through the list all the way to shade tree? >> Uh I prefer we're going to keep public
comment at the beginning. Um >> I'll hold my comments. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yes. Uh Rose Tresmont. Um, I understand that that is the sort of run of show, but just from a contextual standpoint, I
feel like coming and spending the time having questions like you would if you were at a meeting at work might happen after some statements are made or some context is shared. So, I don't know if it's like a bigger um ad adaptation that would need to happen to be more
collaborative and inclusive, but I think it would be more valuable. and I didn't know coming into it that I would need to come prepared with something ahead of time so that I could engage. And so that's just I feel like something to work on as we go forward, whether it's
um specific things that are published and circulated next to the Zoom link so that I can kind of do the read up before you get here. So I would love to participate in this as much as possible, but uh it's a little awkward to kind of like collect my thoughts within two
seconds of walking for Thank you. First reading of ordinance 1829 amending and amending revising and supplementing chapter 85 and photo affordable housing of the bar
code. Yes. Um Oh, yes. Yes. So, the reason that we're doing this now as opposed to our March 2nd commission meeting is that there are state court deadline for affordable housing. So, in order to be able to adopt a resolution
uh sorry, adopt the ordinance to pass a first reading and a second reading, it needs to be adopted by March 15th. So as opposed to having a special meeting, which is what we would have done before the existence of working meetings, we're introducing it now so that we can have
public comment on it um at our March 2nd commissioner meeting. Um and this is uh this affordable housing is what we've been working on since June um with our with our planner and with the courts and
with fair share housing. against everyone coming to the same page as to what how the bureau is going to meet their affordable housing obligations with that. >> Okay. Um Commissioner M. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Henderson Riley. >> Yes.
>> Mayor Solana Ward. >> Yes. We have a resolution adopting the 2026 working session schedule. >> Yes. Yes. And this hopefully we'll have these are the times going forward and yet they are
all 11:30 but at least you'll have them ahead of time. Um and again it will all be recorded and beyond. >> Yes. Okay. Sorry. >> Okay. Authorizing contract with with FNS LLC for ambulance billing services. Have a question about this because I haven't
seen correspondence. So, um, I spoke to the owner and what we're going to wind up doing. We're going to keep the same contract that last year, re-enter into a new one. Um, the question of the 90day notice termination period, they need 90
days simply to collect billables that have already been built, but they're willing to give us a 30-day cancellation period to stop services going forward. So I think that accomplishes both the burrow seeds and the the the
building. So um we're going to revise that language and be able to sign it. >> Great. So that >> we haven't yet. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Henderson Riley. Yes. Mayor Solano. Yes. And then we have a
resolution authorizing to advertise for a request for qualifications for consultant on fire EMT services. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Discussion items. So, the first item on our discussion list is the dodge brick. Um, I wanted to
get an update on where we were with the um with the application for the grant. I know that been delayed a couple times and you know, we replied on the second round and if we had any updates as to when um sorry,
>> yes, I understand they have not announced phase two. They have not announced phase >> and I can tell you they haven't announced phase one. >> They haven't yet they're still holding cafe grant. This is a cafe grant. It's a state grant where you been five six million. >> I think that's about five.
>> Yeah, it's a big number um for renovations to Scott. Um there were there's a sec we're in the second round. They haven't award I'm working in a town where the first round hasn't been formally announced yet. So they have got
it's a little late. Okay. Uh are we do do we know if with the new administration the funds are still procured or it's kind of all done? >> So far so good. >> So far so good. >> So we put in the money in order to prepare the grant. We're hearing we're
waiting to hear from first round and then finish the second. >> We applied the second round. We didn't have it. Yeah. We didn't have everything in time for the deadline for the first round. Got it. >> Yeah. It's a mass it's a massive application and appraisal done all kinds of stuff
>> right >> right so we have it's still but there's still even with the with the first round of applicants it's there's still a lot of tax credit money available for later rounds the the early ones are used to
pay for okay >> so there's still reasonable hope um and a status update as to how the right is doing on some of their bookkeeping and getting things in order.
What what's the latest on all by um yesterday or this morning? Uh so we have 20 through 24 that'll give us the picture. Um and then we are going to we're soliciting like a shortterm
proposal on board's side. auditor to go in and do financial management and make some recommendations. So we really just have to get the picture yesterday right to get um all the documents together but we haven't so we can now
take them they've all been testify um does the county have something else that they need from us other than I said it I was like here's what we got daddy for Anything else? >> No, no, we we've got the documentation
out. We can have more discussions. >> Okay. >> And sorry, I haven't been part of this. Um what's the audit involved? >> They were they did not have an audit from 20 to current. >> Okay. So they had to bring a lot of leg
work together and then figure out the financial statements so that you know finances you know what should be done >> this is connected to the grant or no >> yeah totally separate >> okay >> totally separate >> okay >> we just break we need
>> it's been rotten so it's just about trying to >> okay >> get things in order >> well we got them this morning Justin, anything else on the on the right? >> Oh, did they um
>> shows the show? Did they finally get their um their everything fixed with their sprinkler system and the leak they have? >> Yeah, within 24 hours they have to place uh repair sprity
is that the heat is back up and running there. There's there's larger issues. There's other issues still going to be addressed with the through the count the counties who were county spent a lot of money last year uh like 34 million bucks right on air conditioning and kind of
our HBAC C system and 24 I guess. Um, and so there's some issues with the heating system that um we just we have pipe break, but that's not that's not part of the issue. There's larger issues that are being addressed with the county
and the the vendor, the installer of it to try to make sure the heats, the furnace, and everything is running properly. And the county runs late on them because >> they Yeah, because we they were the ones that coordinated all the construction.
So, we're going through them to have them go back to the guy that came in with their money. >> Yes. >> So, why why did the county pay? >> They had infrastructure money from like the Biden infrastructure money. They had a lot of money left. So, he made application for it and was it how much
was it? Six, five, six million. We got a grant of 56 million and they spent it on uh air conditioning, upgrading the heating, a bunch of improvements to the building. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, it was free money. >> Yeah.
>> All right. Um let's move on. Budget issue. Budget means budget. Yes. Um I brought up budget. I wanted to talk about part of the budget. >> Okay. >> Um so the last version of the budget um that RCF Joe sent around included two
firefighters and I wanted to discuss this with the chief as well understand where that number came. Well, I believe that what is in this is my understanding what is in the budget that last year pursuant to the agreement
with the union at the end of 24 where we bumped up salaries for the member for the membership, we also had agreement that we would be adding a firefighter ENT every year for the next three years.
um and in order to accommodate the number of calls that there were and so it was budgeted for 25 and my understanding is Betty Joe's budgeted the second for 26 and when you had said like we should
take that out and I think that like we because we're in a a position here where we're looking at what's going to happen within the fire department we we should hold that money. Not saying that that's what it's going to be used for, but you if you remove it and take it out, then
it limits your options with respect to what might come out about any study and how you be structured. Okay, that's all simply hold. >> Um, I have a copy of the fire department's request from 26 for 26. Chief Joyce, can you confirm that you
did not ask for chief fire? Yeah, in my budget request for 2026, I requested the information of the EMS division underneath the department. Um, my understanding that the adding one person per year for three years was removed from contract negotiations
between myself and the that was not my understanding and I've got document emails that say that. But the the addition of the money in here, like I didn't put this in the budget 25, the 26. Betty Joe put the I asked Betty
Joe after you raised the question and Betty Joe said she put it in because that was her understanding of what was done out of the end of contract negotiations and she had that one in and she was adding the second one in and that's what she was doing. Okay. So talk to Betty Joe about why
>> I did talk to Betty Joe. Yeah. Okay. As the director of public safety, I also reached out to the chief to say, "Was this what was in your budget request?" And the answer is no. So, let's >> So, Betty Joe tell you why she put that that would confirm what I just said? >> Yes. Okay. >> But we weren't part of that discussion.
So, I wanted to have it now to discuss the implications so that we can approve the budget as a governing body. >> Okay. Well, I had a lot more questions about the budget. We were going to have a budget workshop last week that got put, you know, cancelled because of concerns about open public meetings, but
like yeah, I got a whole bunch of questions about the budget. >> Sure. Do you want >> We should set up a a we can I can raise some of them, but uh it'd be great great to have our CFO here for that. It's the one that knows what came where. My
concerns on the overall budget are things like uh it's it's really really tight Um it is relying on a million4 sale of the Ocean First building is
being plugged in as a revenue which is is a is a very risky thing to do because we're not selling that building again in 27. When you take a one-time revenue and use
it to support the budget, it leaves you hanging in the next year. Okay? Unless there's some plan about where we're getting another million7 in revenue. Um, >> to be clear, we did use over $3 million from our surplus in the 25 budget.
>> We did 25's budget was tight because the schools were raising taxes by $4.5 million. And so we announced to the public that we were not going to increase the municipal rate. That was
not exactly how we expected it to be when we settled contracts at the end of 24 and put big bumps in for police and fire. Okay. So it made it extra difficult. So, it is with that with that
being the status of where where things were, what what's going on in this budget is we're we're plugging in one-time revenues. Um there's still a $100 tax increase for the average home, but we're plugging in
onetime revenues that give me like you just you just don't do that. Like you just don't do that. Um because you don't cuz in 27 you don't you it leaves a $1.4 million haul that you have to make up sometimes.
>> So in 25 we used 3.2 I believe $3.2 million of our surplus to round out our budget. This year we're only using I believe $700,000 surplus with as well the 1.4. So there there you are at uh
2.1 which is still almost a million dollars left. >> I don't think the surplus numbers are are exactly right. >> They are >> which be really >> great. It'd be great if that we do like a like a budget workshop to go over.
Okay. Because if that the the um uh there's there's no money in the budget for any kind of road work or anything at all. There's no infrastructure work. There's a there's just a lot of things that um we should we should go over.
>> There is infrastructure work and it's not a ton, but there is infrastructure investment and there are capital improvements and >> there's a capital improvements roads like there's a there's a there's a line item in there for moving the burrow offices for 200 for $250,000.
So it's a line item that has been in between either fixing up rural hall we're going to stay or to use in one capacity because what I've been told is that we're going to stay in rural hall. There's some investments that need to be made in the building. That's what the CFO and the administrator have been telling me statewide. So we should we
should do we should do a meeting and focus on have a CFO. The other the other one that pops in my head is you know the the latest draft that Benny Joe sent around on Monday has that we're going to pay the schools $230,000
that's been put into the budget. That number is roughly what the pilot share payment was previously. >> 225. The exact number of the pilot share that's been in the budget for the last nine years. >> It wasn't in it last year. >> It wasn't 25. >> And it wasn't 25 because the school
district was raising taxes $4.5 billion. Okay. And told us they weren't going to need that money. and then publicly came to a schoolboard meeting and told everyone that this is the money that has been set aside from the Parkview High, the 225
and it's been in all the budgets. It wasn't in 25 understandably because of taxes that got raised and so it's getting put back into the 26 budget as it is in 24 and before. >> Mayor, with all due respect, you're mixing up. There were a whole lot of meetings all the beginning of 25. Okay.
And yet there were all kinds of proposals being made about trying to fill in what the schools told us was, you know, a door dot gap financial cap. Okay. Start all kinds of meetings. And those meetings I did make statements
saying we'll we'll do this, we'll fill in this, we'll do this. And then the law changed and they were allowed to increase their tax levy by $4.5 million. And then they sent us emails saying,
"Hey, we're going to go all the way to 4 and a half mil." Okay, we're not going to need that help. All right. And that's why that's why in 25's budget there's not the 222.
That money's not in there because they raised taxes four and a half. So out of the blue, out of the blue now Monday, two days ago, we're putting back into the budget, we're going to pay the schools 222
as though it were as though there had not been a 4 and a half million increase. And I'm just like, I have questions about that, especially when we've got a budget that's it's it's a it's risky. It's risky the
way we're doing. Okay. It's risky and I and I think those those are like you gota and nobody knows nobody knows about it. >> This is why we're talking about it. >> I got it Monday. Well, you know, with all due respect, I got it Monday like you know that it's been put in. That's
it. So, you've had conversations, >> right? Because I'm the head of that that's my commissioner title to speak with the CFO. So my question is and so I spent an insane amount of time during the campaign reading all of the public budgets because I wanted to understand
where our money went and every budget that's available online has had that 2225 and it was my understanding from all the publicly available information that Parkview is a gigantic gigantic um the the amount of money the schools
do not get because on a pilot is sizable. Like this is not making pilots the bad guy. They've done great investment instead of amazing things for those apartments to make them a place that is liveable and safe again. But the understanding and the way that it it was
explained to me and what I've seen is that that 2.25 25 was a nod and be like, "Yes, we understand that because the pilot revenue from Parkview is coming directly to the burrow. That means schools are not getting it cut and this is a nod in some way from the burrow to address that and give the schools a
chunk of that pilot." That was what I understood that 2225 tob that has been in the budget for the last nine years except for 25 for understandable reasons. Right. >> It went back in for 26. >> But what's No, no. So I I I got you. I don't see what's changed between 25 and
26 because they this year this year they're collecting an extra $4.5 billion dollars in taxes just like they did last year. Okay? And and what we've just gone over is last year because of that
increase the burrow did no increase even though we had done some major investments in for the most part salaries for uniforms. Okay. and we made that investment. We cut everything and did bare bones so that residents would
not have an extra tax burden. Okay. So, with that being the case, when when they're getting the extra 4.5 million and taxing folks again for it, why would we voluntarily
pay them another $230,000 and act as though that 4.5 million increase never happened. >> It's not acting like the four half million increase didn't happen. But what doesn't change is the fact that if curfew were not a pilot, the schools would be receiving more revenue. No,
they receive no more revenue. Not one nickel more. Let me go through my little pilot stick. Okay, it is this. The the school district adopts a budget. >> They get no more money. Nothing. If it was fully taxed, >> the taxpayers,
>> they would get the same amount. >> Correct. >> I missed >> individual taxers >> became less into the school levy because park viewed paying a higher >> Yeah. So they wouldn't feel it as much. So they're it.
>> But now it's upside down. Now they've increased it 4.5 million. Okay. They've increased the 4 and a.5 million and >> they want us to tax for the 230. What's that? >> Didn't you agree to give it? >> No. Not once the 4 and a.5 million came
through. No. Absolutely not. Absolutely not. >> So you're Okay. So any correspondence I have on that is not true. >> I'd love to see what it is because there were a million. Listen, I can pull emails where it was they wanted us to write them a check for three months. >> There are hund things. We should have a
budget workshop. >> I would like that. >> And this decision decision to pay this money for the school should not be just getting dropped in two days before. >> I think what I would like to say is this. Everyone is I I'm a mom of three kids.
Everyone's thinking about their budgets. It's important to think about taxes. to go back to the fire item for a moment since that's where I where I want to discuss it today. What your suggestion is is to put in two firefighters even though it wasn't requested and
raise >> Betty Joe put it in >> Betty Joe put it in. I had nothing to put it in. >> Didn't know until you went. Okay. >> Yes. But that was you that it was the VA saying it should be because of public
safety. I mean it should be that's the conversation in August with chief choice and that was your original proposal was to add it was supposed to be one per year >> right well this so this budget is going
back to the original proposal from like August or September I can't remember which version which was before the other route was struck down um it was to add one officer and then you say you we could hurry this up and add two officers and that
So what what said is this this budget was taking the fire and ENF budget and going back to status quo. That's how she that's how she described it. Here I' I'd like you to try to finish a sentence. Thank you. Um it's really important for
us to consider taxpayers and what we are taking whoever puts it in the budgets. I would like us to discuss now and I agree with you. I would love to have a budget workshop that's open to the public so people can see where their their money's going. It's bigger than this discussion now. Happy to add a
special meeting, whatever we need to do on fire. I would like to determine now because this is a important topic that continues to be, you know, discussed in the communities chief choice. Do you want two firefighters in the budget?
So at this point now with the approval of the consultant I would say all on that because again like with the previous proposal one person per year for three years there's no way to make that work with the system with the platoon system and the same two like
that would make two platoon heavy one still and again two people it doesn't resolve the issue at the moment. So, a proposal would be to remove the two firefighters while, and I discussed this with Betty
Joe yesterday because I think I know what you're going to say. Well, it keeps money in there, but we don't know what we're going to do. But I think we want to stick to the public process that we've agreed on. Let it remove the align item. If that's what you're saying, Chief, have a consultant. >> What if the consultant comes back and
says add certain number of certain number of firearms? Well, that'll be >> in a couple weeks. >> Well, no, it won't happen till the first of the year. >> Correct. >> Do you do you want us to take this out and not have any contingency in the event we get a report back that said you want to add some personnel and we're
able to make it work? Do you want you want you hold off until January 1 of 26 27? >> Okay. Well, that's what director said. But at the same time, what does the two people being added in the budget do besides holding a place for the two
salaries? >> It gets it closer to three. Who knows? Listen, if and I know you guys don't want this, but if a consultant comes back and says, "Hey, it should be, you know, there should be five, six EMS
only." Okay. But, and I I don't know how it doesn't come back saying this, but you don't need the same size fire department now. Okay? Because you the the overwhelming majority of calls and
the pressure of the fire department is EMS calls. So if you take that service away and put that into four, five, six, whatever the number it is, you're not going to need that same fire size. So if
the consultant comes back and it is we need to get rid of a couple fired position fire positions and have five or six EMS the numbers having availability of some funding makes it easier to do that sooner I don't see that's a
possibility of the consult there's a bill in trend right now requiring that's it's committing budget required for fire department FBA 17 which is four firefighters on fire. You get it all the time. >> That bill's been there forever and ever
and Jeffrey. >> So that's fine. So you're saying take this money out. Okay. And if that is the solution, it's not going to happen till 27. >> So I don't see the two people being the consultation. >> Can I put my financing? This is my
financing revenue. It sounds like two would not work because of 3.2. Can we and we can put this on our uh you know follow up from Burough staff. Ask Betty Joe what it would be in a pack increase to make it three and have
whatever that is going to be added by whatever that is for a third salary to put three in as the gap just in case so that there's money to act on whatever >> say you can surely ask for but but I think our trouble is we are right up
against the appropriations cap okay like we I don't know that we have another firefighter okay there's two different caps we deal with our levy cap We have lots of space there, right? That was the push from the schools. We could rate taxes $3 million. Okay. As long as
we don't spend it on any burrow stuff, but we're up against the eight appropriations. So, you can ask her about that's fine. Yeah. I'm just trying to leave a contingency in case we come there some other solution that we can market. That's all. >> Have the consultant do care. We approved
today that we're going to have this out. I'm looking forward to seeing who applies to and how we can move forward with that. I also want to say that I appreciate in the monthly report from the fire department that I sit around as a governing body. We're now including concurrent fire incidents that are happening per month as well as days per
month where you have many minimum staffing timeline. So, thank you for including that. My my concern is if we take out three maybe we'll use your tax money we want. It doesn't land well if the taxpayer say
well what happens for something else. >> Well, when you rely on the budget on making sure a sale happens and you got a gap for next year. >> Well, you need to talk about the whole budget. Okay. They're not in isolation. >> Keep this on topic.
>> Yeah, I am on topic. Okay. you're what you're talking about is what it would do is fall to is fall to um surplus, >> right? >> Which and what we're what you're taking out of it that surplus need to be rebuilt big time. Okay, it got hit last
year because of what we did with what the schools were doing and this year still that increase with the schools, but this year for other reasons it's getting hit. Okay. So that and listen, if you're going to take it out, then it comes out and if the report comes out
that there's something else we could do, it's like it waits till 27, >> right? Yeah. >> That I don't think I don't think that's a smart thing to do. I don't think that's what >> we have that was $0, but unfortunately we're in this new position. So I wanted to >> It wasn't zero dollars. You lost
$450,000 which is back in Okay, don't rehash it. Don't rehash. >> I want to hold the bring it up. >> I want to follow the guidance of our fire department and what they >> That's fine. >> So, you want it now? >> I feel like I'm being put in the
position here. My my no my answer is if we're going to appropriate money, three is the only way that would work for this year. >> All right. So, let's look what that see what that looks like to the average homeowner and look at the appropriation gap as mentioned. >> Yeah. I guess
>> right. Well, that's what that All right. Um, okay. Lindsy, >> hi everyone. Um, I was asked to give a status report on
the website currently um, specific to any updates that might be included in our current contract or any redesigns that are funded or scoped at this time. Um, so based on our current contract, there are no specific website updates included in the current contract.
Nothing specific. There's nothing that is fully funded or scoped in in that. The communications that we're getting are largely sales pitch emails. Um, you know, there's nothing that's truly no cost that's included in what we have
right now. So based on that information and with the other things that our department is tackling this year, um, which we'll get to in a second, my recommendation would be to look at what priority issues are internally right now
that we can kind of fix without, you know, having to hire a contractor or do a full redesign, whether that's ADA, navigation issues, outdated pages, and then look a little further further into next year to see if we can scope in
terms of labor and budget to include that because my other concern is labor for >> absolutely that >> um question just because I mean I think the whole governing body copy of again some of those promotional so there's it said that like you know you're do your like there's no
>> it does even if it's like there's nothing included in the contact for >> they have some increased capabilities that revise has introduced like an AI chat chatbot, um, a dashboard type feature, things like that that they will
add to your website. So, we could look at some of those functionalities, but there's nothing like a redesign. There's nothing like an audit or anything like that that we would be looking at a more full process. I do think if we're going to do that, we should look at a more >> full process. Um, but again, labor-wise,
that's a huge >> even >> lift. even the things that like the dashboard and things is that also a labor intensive >> that we could look into this year. So that like I said my recommendation would be to identify some of our priority concerns about the current website. Um I
know ADA accessibility is top of mind for me getting everything you know up to par this year for ADA accessibility. Um, we also experience some navigation issues, some archived pages that kind of come up when people search stuff that
can make things confusing. So, I think focusing on stuff like that to just make it a little more intuitive. um you know get rid of some of the replicated information that's on their streamline could be kind of a stop gap this year that our department could certainly undertake and we would not
incur a cost for that really >> and then look into a more broader redesign if that's something that we're interested in because if we are I think we should also look at potentially different >> yes yeah because I don't know how much we like >> really love at the end of the day there might be something a little easier to
work with out there >> um can you send VA the governing What? I know it's it doesn't sound like it's much, but there are some things that are included in our contract. Can you include what those are? We can be like, "Okay, stop gap. Which of these do
we think you have limited time to actually implement these and get um our our vendor the information like it's not like the vendor just does it like that? Like that's required a lot of leg work on your part and we understand that. So, just let us know what are the included, okay? even if it's even if this is small
just to know what they are and uh and how focused the updates that we can get for what we've already paid for for this year. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Great. >> All right. You're up again. Burough app. >> Okay. Um so we paid for uh an app last
year to be developed for the burrow Collinswood app. Um it did get put on the back burner a little bit just due to shifting responsibilities within the burrow. We had certain employees leave staffing. Um so we are circling back to get that off the ground right now. I was
in contact with WebMax which is the company that we contracted with for the development this week. So we currently have a list of assets that they need which is pretty easy to gather together. I should be able to get all that over to them in the next week or so. It's just stuff like high-res logos, branding
guidelines, um, images, some examples of apps that we like that we kind of want to see it modeled after. And then as soon as we get them those assets, they can give us a more solid tentative timeline. Um, honestly, I think it's going to move as fast as we move for the
most part. So, we are looking at bringing an intern in over the next couple months. We have some good leads right now. a large part of their responsibility is going to be gathering uh content for the app. We do have like an outline already set so it's pretty ready to go. We just need someone to sit
there and really get that together. So that is >> is that fully paid for >> sorry >> is that fully paid or it is >> okay great. So there's no outstanding contracts or RFPs or anything needed. >> All just develop it. >> And that will be um focused largely on
downtown and businesses and dining and stuff like that. But we'll also have a strong array of municipal features. So event calendars, information, parking, stuff that residents would find useful as well. >> Parking. Yes.
>> Okay. >> Oh, I don't know. We could find out. to link it to the marketing app. That would be great. >> I never >> like therapy. >> If I had it all in one place, I had too many too many kids. Too many people.
>> Okay. Any other questions on the app? >> Hi. Um, so there >> we're gonna give Lindsay a free trans. >> No, that's okay. Um, there has been a concept brought up to the communications department. Um, Commissioner Henderson Riley is interested in producing a
burrow podcast this year. What the concept would look like would be 8ish um, short kind of bite-sized episodes that explain burrow operations, highlight local businesses, kind of do a deep dive into certain subjects. Uh we do have a proposed partner which is
someone local that we're already working with for videography and stuff like that. Um if we go forward with this we would be looking at realizing this in the second half of 2026 mostly due to budgeting. Um you know that money will
become available and so there is a line item in the budget for that. Basically going forward we just need to clarify kind of like the logistics on how this will work. um topic planning, guest booking, script writing, hosting,
promotion, editing, approvals, stuff like that. So, we're just kind of in the state now where we need to kind of define roles and responsibilities um to support the concept going forward. >> And we already have a we have a contract
with a a market with >> we don't have a signed contract for the podcast, right? We have a signed contract with Mako and Henil Company. Correct. Right. The is there a way to hold to add this in contract and just you know come
out of our fixed budget but just add you already have an existing contract. >> Yeah, they're working on our um 2026 proposal for our contract now. So we should have the first draft of that by next week that they present to us and then we can kind of make >> and they know to put the
>> I can let them know to include that. The other thing, just as a heads up, I did ask them to consider and get us a quote for whether or not we use it this year or not. I know we're all impressed by my setup here. Um, but not everyone is impressed. We get a lot of complaints
about the audio quality and video quality for these public meetings. So, I do think we should prioritize. You know, we invested in the Al, she's great. She's doing her best. It might not be the best solution to these larger rooms with larger meetings. Um, so I did ask
them to just work up a quote on what that would look like to have those streamed professionally with audio just so we can kind of consider that for the future. >> Um, and I wanted to point out too, we had an email about this and Holly brought up um potentially maybe even
including the high school pause TV. Yeah. Something like that. I think it's really cool idea. >> Emmy awardw winning award. >> No, Emmy award. Yes. Yes. Yes. Um and we as well we can look at that
>> if you know the process takes and it's like we find that we have more topics than we have sessions um because I think once if if it takes and people are looking to them then um having a partnership with local
and there are several um surrounding municipalities that have these. I think it's interesting to try it out. Um >> yeah, everyone really liked Jim's um YouTube updates during during CO. We had a public a public comment last week, two weeks ago that like you know during CO
is one of the only, you know, he was one of the only faces that people really saw talking about what the heck was going on. Um so this forever, >> right? It was a really hard go out. Um, so I
just maybe seeing us and seeing the different uh experts and people who take care of specific things talking about what the municipality does could be could be fun and helpful. All right. Thanks. Uh, alcohol.
Sure. So >> serving at the bar license for that. All right. So um you guys have asked me to explore different options for potentially bringing uh alcohol to town. I'm assuming that by
that mean plenary retail consumption licenses. So there's different categories of licenses that are permitted by the alcohol beverage uh committee ABC. Um and the most typical one is the retail consumption license
and that's what's separate and restaurants and that allows consumption of alcohol on premises and and limited availability to sell closed containers to to leave the premises.
Each municipality um is permitted to authorize a certain number of retail consumption licenses and that number is based upon the amount of residents you have. So that number is
3,000 people. So based on your last census data, you're slightly over 1400 or 14,000. So you're looking at for like they round up or down. >> They unfortunately they do not round up.
Um if you are also looking at possibly adding a distribution license that population that's also on a population cap basis. Um that one's higher. So that's 7500. So, you would only be
looking to authorize one of those based on your last sets of uh data. And I presume it's it's not an eitheror. It is an either or. It's not. So, if you were to get four retail consumption licenses, that means you can't also go get
distribution. >> Right. They are specified to the certain type of licenses. >> Right. Right. So, >> and distribution license, that's like that's like your liquor store. Um so
those are your your main options available. Um there are different types of licenses that are available on a smaller scale that don't necessarily go under your population cap number. So
social affair permits or concessionire licenses. Um, sometimes you'll you'll see club licenses or your, you know, your BFWs, things like that. A lot of those types of licenses are either tied to specific
events or nonprofit organizations. So, social affairs is what we use here in the fifth >> for um individual licenses at the community center >> when folks can. >> Yeah. When they get Okay. >> Yeah. and and those are still typically
tied to an entity that already has a license. So when you get a social affairs permit, it's usually tied to an entity that already has a retail uh consumption license. Uh it doesn't have to be within the bounds of your
municipality to do that. But but >> So how do we how do we operate here in the theater center? Who >> concessionary is different, right? Oh yeah, concessionires. Yeah, >> which they're concession concessionires are a day up to a year. >> Okay. >> Okay. So sky's right. We have a year,
>> but we don't have concessionires for them. >> No, but but you can a nonprofit. But you go ahead. >> No, no. So yeah, concessionire license to either a nonprofit organization or um a governmental entity. So that that's
likely how you've been able to get them in the past. And again, they're typically tied to certain events. They're those are for places of public access. So if you're going to have uh they have, you know, all the PT have
bingo here and they >> get a single day to the police department get a single day. >> Yes. Yeah. Yeah. So that's a social affair or is it a single day? >> What is it? Social >> social affair. >> Social affair. Yeah. And then the
concession air is slightly different, but they're they're all pretty similar. But for those specific events are typically the social affairs concessionires, you'll see if you even think about the the word for it, you know, stadiums, ballparks,
theaters, and concession there that are tied to limited time area for specific events. Um but those are not subject to your population caps. Um, so you know, you you wouldn't typically see restaurants or or your everyday business
with those kind of uh permits. And there are limits on the number of uh session or social affair permits that you can get per year for an individual organization. I don't know those off the top of my head, but they do exist.
um and walk us through what voting because we are by burrow by ordinance by ordinance. Correct. What does it? >> So I took a look at your code. Your code does restrict
um your zoning restricts the the sale of alcohol. So it with the exception I believe from permitted uh the micro brewer in town. Um so that that's an exception from
this. But if if you're looking to go the route of adding liquor licenses in town, you're looking at doing it essentially two ways. So you can either go out to bid for it and there there will be procedural steps to you know authorize
add an ordinance which would allow you to sell alcohol within the the boundaries of the burrow um repealing any kind of prior restrictions that could all be done um relatively >> well there would be a vote for oh so
>> referend yeah so that that's option one and that's what is most widely used. Um, that is probably your your safest step forward and least likely to get challenged. So, you either
have a referendum and then you oh, you have your referendum, assuming the referendum passes, then you go out to bid. And when I say two options, it's either go out to bid or your historical ex. So, you still are going for your referendum
first, assuming it passes. um the go out to either a bid which is what I was saying about the least is the most used method of going forward. So you can put certain restrictions of
location, hours of operation, those kind of things um in your ordinances for the sale of alcohol. you go out to bid, typically those will be your highest available bidder. You can still put some
restrictions when you go out to bid, but um ultimately that award is going to be your your highest, >> but they can I'm sorry, they can bid from anywhere like it's not restricted to just so we can get like restrictions, >> right?
So you can restrict the the you can restrict where it is going wise, where you want to see it, how hours of operation. Um I know I've done one in the past where we have
as far as the restrictions, we incorporated it into the bid documents. So we wanted to see proposals had certain space purely bars. So somebody that you wanted
to see get a license had to be a restaurant. So not just you had to serve food. You had to put a percentage kind of requirement of tables and versus chairs versus bar seats. Those are the kind of things that you can incorporate
into it. Um you you know it shouldn't be like based on ownership or anything like that. So those are the kind of things for the the bid side. There's also another option and and the benefit to with the
bid is what I referenced the the highest bidder the burough can set a floor of we want at least 100,000. It's probably going to be more than that for a liquor license.
Um, and people can bid on that liquor license and it's the highest bidder that meets your qualifications in the bid. Um, so you could have somebody that bids the floor, you could have somebody that bids five times that amount because they live.
Benefit of that is you do get a a surplus to borrow for that amount of money. Another option you can look at which is like a more historical method of awarding these licenses that doesn't necessarily come with that that cash
influx and that is more of an application review done at a public meeting uh of potential uh applicants in the burrow. um because
that is not widely used. uh if you want to go that route, my suggestion is you still establish mechanisms to make sure the process is fair
across the board because that kind of review and award is much higher likelihood to challenge on a arbitrary kind of basis. So adding objective standards that certain people
have to meet, securing your review would probably be the best way to go with that. Um things that you can look at for that is business experience, location, um your operation.
>> Yeah, those are the kind of things into that. Um, but they different have they have different notice procedures and how you do everything, but your best bet would be to do a lot of notice to get potential bids to to apply. And now is
this also has to be one or the other. There is no two of them go out for bid and two of them. >> No, there there's nothing restricting you. So we could bid out for example one and then the other three we have the historical method where we have
application. Okay. All right. And that's just a decision by the governing body that be in the referendum to say how there be >> no the referendum is to allow >> Yeah. But if you review and assign a historical method you're not collecting the same
>> can't charge can't charge and you pick who's going to get it can't charge >> but you can't charge for two of them for example. You could charge for the other two, >> which whichever one you're going to pick and select, you can't charge for that. >> But that one. >> Yeah. So, the application review, you're not getting the the money for the burrow
or the bidding method. You're you're looking at probably a pretty high bid. >> Uh but it's wider. >> Yes, absolutely. in the wider of the market, but uh as it would save time, it would have to be located in the burrow
based upon any zoning requirements that uh we put forward of locationwise where it was. >> Thank you for that. So, >> and then every year after that, Holly would probably have a little more duty because they would have yearly uh
license requirements that would go through the clerk's office. The burrow would collect a nominal license fee renewal. I think that's the the minimum is $250 and maximum is $2500. It it's not going to hit the scales either way, but and the referendum is
just simple. Yes. Now, like you want to repeal the existing 195 >> you specify what it is. >> You have you have to say like this many licenses like heights one, right? It's this many licenses that will be these restrictions. This is what they'll pay.
So that >> will be specific. >> So you specify whether four retail consumption license or two distribution licenses or that right that's >> and any sort of notice for a referendum
valid question. >> Yeah. long. >> All right, that's all. Thank you. Um, status committee. So, we are the the committees that we talked about last month. Um, the master planing committee
and then the the night park steering committee. Um, we will have more information about those coming out in the town prior. Um I'll share more information at the commissioner's meeting as well. Just like a broad outline of um duties to expect for um for the master
plan u duties to expect backgrounds that might fit um time like time, how much your time is expected and this sort of thing. Uh but that will be in the counter with like an actual old school like you cut out and put out an application. There also be a link to a
Google form so you can put in your information and uh let us know what level of involvement you would like to have. Uh I'll let Jen update on that metro what the details are the next part. >> No, we do the same thing. I contacted Lindsay. I know she was down to to get
to see what >> we'll get done with all just to follow up and something. Great. >> Great. So you'll need that in the prior for both committees. Um there.
>> Oh sh we mission by error. Um we need to talk about shade tree real quick. Um the shade tree commission came forward with an update to this removal application. Um and our zoning off author has
diligently worked to kind of marry the current one as well as the um proposed new and she's going to walk us through that a little bit. >> Yeah. So um the top one is the current one. I believe I have them all marked for you uh in your little packet. Uh the
one that has kind of a highlighted shading that's the shade tree. Uh, and then I I I did a a monster mash of the the two. Um, just uh adding uh the uh shade tree commission would
like to increase the replacement fees for the trees. Um and so that would need to be done uh via the ordinance because the ordinance has certain structure uh for the certain uh DBH of of a
certain size. Uh it's a required uh fee if you're not going to replace it yourself on the lot. Um so they would like those increased and those are those are noted in uh both their form and uh
the combined form. >> Uh the this is the state statute that says yes you take a tree out of your backyard. >> Yes. >> You have to either replace it in your backyard. >> Correct. >> Or pay a fee.
>> Or pay a fee. And then the fee we then plant a tree somewhere else in town. >> What's the fee now? >> So the fee now, >> right? So the fee now is uh for a DBH of
6 in to 12.9 is 100. >> The diameter diameter. >> Yeah. Yeah. Diameter diameter of breath height. Uh which is about four and a half feet tall. Uh so >> so it's from 100 to three to three categories.
>> So they all trip they all triple in >> 100 to 300 200 to 600 300 to 900 500 to 1200. >> Yes. And the the application fees are the same as we currently have in in the uh >> somewhere.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. These are the shade tree recommendations. I was just giving you a you know it's up to you all to decide uh what the if if there are increases and what they are. Um, I did take some of the information um from the shade tree
recommendation um and added it to our form. Um, there were some other uh things that I did not because I don't believe it has anything to do with the ordinance and really not part of the
I don't think it should be brought in to whether or not it's approved. I just think it's more opinion-based than actually, you know, being objective. Um there's also some other concerns that the shade tree had that were brought to
um Mayor Solano word um about their involvement in the in the shade tree. So um the the tree removal process. So um those can be discussed but uh yeah their main their main concern um that I see is
that they would like the replacement value to be higher. Did they also have different measurements? I'm looking at it real quick. >> They're just highlighted on it. So, >> I'm not So, yeah, they're highlighted. The um ours is are currently different
per ordinance, so it would need to change as well. >> Okay. That's just a different a measurement of a different part of the tree. Yeah. So they're they give the circumference as well as the the DBH because a lot of people will come to me with the circumference because it's it's
very difficult to come up with your diameter if your tree is still standing. >> Yeah. >> Um so they're they're giving the math for the circumference which then can be calculated. I I could I could take their circumference and calculate it to the diameter for them but the shade tree is
just adding that in there so that the folks can can understand. These categories come from the state, the original state. >> They're from the ordinance that we have. Yes. >> The ordinance was based on >> Yes. >> How long has this been on the books? It's only like a year or so.
>> So, two, we've done 24 was mid 25 was a whole year. >> And how many in 25? How many? >> So, in 25 I can tell you that. Uh oh, I have these two. Um, >> let's make sure we get the >> jam.
>> Sorry, I know. >> That's all I wanted to know. How many? >> 50. >> People really are coming in applying that to take a trees back. >> Yes. >> Well, there's also there's also categories that people dead or like a junk tree,
>> right? And that is noted that is noted here whether or not they had to pay the fee whether it was a hazard tree or not. um because then you're exempt if it's a hazard tree uh or if it is a weed tree of a of a certain variety. Those may
because it's invasive, those can be taken down without having to pay the application fee or replacement fee because they shouldn't be there anyway and they need to go. And you're allowed, I believe it's up to five five trees down in
two years or maybe even five years. Um, we've only been doing it for a year, but I am tracking how many trees come down so that if a same address comes up, I can then track how many trees they've had down in a certain amount of time. Um, ultimately, you know, the state and
and we want to keep as many trees as possible because it helps with our our excess, you know, storm water issues. >> Yes, it does. Um, but we also are aware that, you know, you may have to take down a tree in order to, you know, have
uh, you know, something added to your property, but we just have to go through that and keep an eye on things. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, so you can all look over those and then let me know like what you're going to do and then we can move forward.
>> Nothing else on our agenda. I make a motion. Thank you so much for coming out. You're after