I'll call this City of International Falls budget and finance meeting to order. It's 4 p.m. Please rise. We'll say the pledge. I >> allegiance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Councelor Holden is absent
today. We will move on to new business. First, I would bring up to consider approval of Cassell multiple module add-on proposal and authorize a signing of the master service agreement. Emma, is this
something that you'd like to discuss? Thank you. >> Thank you, Mayor and Council. So, back in I believe it was June, um Sher Lee and myself took on and did a demo with Cassell, which is our financial software
provider for over 25 years. And we had them demo for us a couple different modules that we do not currently have, but we believe would be beneficial. and we wanted to see whether they would potentially suit our needs and alleviate um some redundancies in our processes.
And through that process, we realized that this was a very good um fit for our organization. So got them to quote that out then. And then once we got our preliminary budget tenatively approved, I asked for
them to draft up a formalized um quote package and then um an agreement. Um obviously we would be asking that the city council approve this with the understanding that these would come out
of 2026 budgeted funds. Um but overall it's something that we've wanted to do for a very long time and just assumed that it was completely outside of our feasibility. Um and when we looked at it with them, it was actually within within
reason. Um you know, most of it's the one-time costs. Um the um monthly costs are much more minimal. So, I stand for questions if you have any [Applause]
>> questions from councel. [Applause] >> Mayor, if I may, >> please. In speaking with Emma and um Lisa who handle the payroll and the accounts payable, it sounds like this would streamline or it is my
understanding and I I did looked at part of the presentation as well would streamline the um efficiencies of the payroll especially um less uh burdensome on the department heads when it comes to the payroll having the employees be more
um actively involved in that process and streamlining through to the payroll. role um person who Emma who handles the processing the final processing of it. Same with the accounts payable. The accounts payable would be more streamlined with the department heads
having the document electronically them they coding it according to the budget that they've had and have been approved and then forwarding that electronically to the accounts payable department to process internally instead of a lot of scanning and copying and reprinting and
rescanning and different things like that. um a lot of streamlining and as Emma indicated the less redundancy and less handling of the paperwork. >> Um I have one question I guess now that you bring that um so will that will this
be able to do electric time cards? >> Yes. >> Yes. So um the AP is a considerable time savings. So at this point in time our system is we while we have streamlined to the best of our abilities with what we have um everything is pretty well
manual. So we have people handling any particular invoice upwards of four to five times from the receipt of the invoice through processing and coding to having um signatures to then having to
stamp with check numbers and then having to have staff rescan them in all once they're processed. It's just a very redundant process and it's considerably time consuming for all staff involved. payroll, it would essentially eliminate
all of the the the paper. So, um it's going to be um everything's going to be electronic for from uh submission of requests for leave off. There are integrations with our existing software. So, I've talked to a number of our
supervisors and kind of got their feedback on a little bit of this. Um but there's a ton of integration that we can do with their existing software and and scheduling softwares like a lad and first do for both police and fire. So
that is our ultimate goal to try to kind of um build a system that works in unison with the systems we already have um but eliminating a considerable amount of time where they're having to reduplicate the same data over and over and over um before they get it to me. I
would and I just like because I I experienced that transition and when I was gainfully employed and uh it does save a lot of time makes it on both cuz I did it from an staff employee to management and it
streamlike made it much easier for everybody if we with the electric all I know for sure is the um electronic time cards and that right >> that and I mean we have roughly 10 to 12 paper boxes every year of just
payroll documentation. So that would, you know, minimize it to next to nothing. Um, in terms of having to and it's going to extremely improve our auditing process because we will be able to give auditors an electronic portal for access for both payroll and accounts
payable. Um, so it it's it's going to make things a world world better than where we're currently at. >> One question, the conversion price >> that's not included in the code, do we know what that is?
>> Um, the conversion price is on um what page are you looking at? Um, right behind the signature paid like like third or fourth. >> Are you talking on the master services
agreement? >> Because the onetime cost is the the 7560. Okay. So that's um that's our onetime cost and then 550 would be for the two and it breaks it out on um I think it's the third page in of the the
agreement proposal. um breaks it out by what module. So essentially the AP workflow is 175 and then the balance of that 550 is pertaining to the payroll process because of all the different things that we need from timekeeping to leave time requests and it'll allow
employees to have um the ability to queue up their their leave balances. They'll be able to request leave off in there. It'll be um it'll make things considerably more user friendly for employees as well. um
>> seems very reasonable for that type of >> we were shocked because I think we were all like we would have gone to this that much sooner if we had realized it wasn't you know outside of our our feasibility. >> Is there a motion to add this to the
next city council meeting agenda >> by councelor Buller >> second Wagner. Thank you. Discussion. >> Yeah. So, do the employees all have access to a terminal somewhere that they can >> Yep. So, what
>> everybody's got easy access. So, if >> we'll be making sure as we move through this process, the recommendation is to do um stationary iPads for like specifically public works. Y um they would also have the ability if they so choose to do it on their phone if they
wanted to download the app. There's an app as well. Um, but we'll make sure that there's a a stationary uh check-in point comparable to our current time clocks. It's just it's not going to do the little clicky punch thing. Um, but it's all just an electronic and it talks
to our system. Then, >> thank you. Any more discussion? >> Question. >> I >> I >> I >> I'll vote yes. >> Motion is approved and passed and moved on to city council. Thank you, Emma. Second
new business item is to set schedule to meet and continue 2026 budget discussions. It feels a little bit precarious where we're at maybe today. Um,
we have a lot of balls in the air with the budget. Um, how often would you like to meet? Um, we can meet weekly.
>> Every two weeks right now. every two weeks >> for now. >> I think that Yeah, >> just for the for now till we get a little closer to where we're going. >> Yeah. >> To get more info maybe.
>> And where does that put us, Betty? We have the survey out on the round table on the ambulance. Was it the 21st or 23rd? >> Uh 22nd or 23rd.
So to have the first one after that would probably be the most advantageous because I think we're going to have a pretty clear sense of direction >> um where that component's headed.
>> Um so two weeks from Tuesdays again. >> That's fine with me. Yeah. >> So that would put the first meeting Tuesday the 28th. >> 28th.
>> Is there a time that we want to stick to? Do we normally have them at one o'clock? >> We've been doing them at one o'clock. It just depends on how much time you want to afford. Are we agreeable to one o'clock on Tuesdays?
>> Yep. But for me works. >> Is there a motion to add to the next city council meeting to have our next budget and finance meeting Tuesday at 1 p.m. on the 28th of
October. >> I'll move. >> Thank you, councelor. >> Second. Thank you, Councelor Wagner. Um, councilors Kayla and Wagner discussion >> just for clarification purposes. Um, first meeting the 28th at 1. Are you looking to have it every every other
week thereafter or >> you want to get a few scheduled? That was kind of >> what I was just trying to >> Let's schedule weekly and if we want to cancel then we can. Do you mean when you say schedule weekly, do you mean schedule one at a
time or do you mean schedule them >> one every Tuesday? >> Every Tuesday. >> Okay. Sorry, just wanted clarification on that >> for clarification. Any more discussion? Question I >> I
>> I'll vote yes. That can be added to the city council agenda. Thank you. Is there any other business as it pertains to budget and finance to come before us? Seeing none, I'll adjourn the meeting.
And at this time, I'll call the committee of the whole meeting to order. It's 4:13 on Monday, October 13th. Councelor Holden is absent for the record.
We'll begin first with the report from human resources, Sherry Stenland. Hello. I'm going to flip my report today. I have Chad Bellinger here with me from True Insurance. He was kind enough to come in on his day off. It's a holiday for them today. So, um, and
we're going to talk about the retirey benefit renewal plan first since there are a couple of options available to take a look at. So, if you look in your plan, you'll see you have rate information for three plans. Um, the
first plan is the current existing plan. Um and then there are two alternate plans, a plan and an advantage plan which both offer decreases. There are differences obviously between the plans or there won't be a change in
cost to them and that's the part where Chad's the expert and comes in on on what those differences would mean to those retirees as far as the benefits. Um, you also have a comparison sheet in your
packets which kind of lays out some of those differences for you between the three plans. to be clear and this would be we get to decide what then becomes their pay own benefits. >> No, this is a this the city pays for.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep. And so there are currently 13 on the plan, eight of which are former city employees. Um yes, three are library employees and
two are um from the sewer district >> and I would assume that those are agreements from the past how that >> Yes. Yes. I >> mayor if I may just for a little background >> please. The history of that is the eight
former um city employees at the at the time they were uh offering lifetime benefits upon retirement. But in lie of that they had to have a maximum their sick leave had to be max um at the maximum excuse me and they forfeited
that in lie of lifetime benefits. So um it was a cost to them. I mean the that did not continually I mean pay the entire cost that it is costing the city over the years but they did forfeit the their maximum sick leave in lie of lifetime benefits that was um sunseted
at a time back I believe in 95 if I'm not mistaken but um there are no employees currently that have that type of benefit um and so therefore these last eight people uh are that are on the plan are the only ones that you know and
as they um move on that would end >> and I think the last person came onto the plan October of 2008. >> Okay. >> So it yeah >> good background. >> Yeah. >> Thank you.
Is there a how would you like to proceed? Do you have a recommendation or um well I think from from a retiree standpoint from the employee standpoint or the former employee standpoint the
the existing plan um would be ideal for them. That's the one they're most familiar with. It's not the most cost effective obviously that that comes with a a cost increase to it actually this year. Um it's the one
they're used to, the one they're familiar with and probably the best of the three if you had to rank them, would you say? >> Yeah, I mean there's >> I'm sorry. Um there there's there's pros and cons both ways. Um, you know, the
the biggest thing that you're going to see is price. Obviously, there's quite a savings to go to an advantage plan. Um, and they do I mean, they actually pick up some additional benefits with that plan. Um, and from the standpoint of
just talking with Blue Cross, um, the they're really there's not a huge chance or, um, that they would, um, see any change in benefits. I mean, negatively affecting them. Um the the thing with it
though is when we we talk about advantage plans I I I I honestly I deal with a lot of people in this age group with and change is huge. They don't like to see change. Um so that's one drawback of switching to a different kind of
plan. An advantage plan. It's got a negative connotation to it. It really does. Um mostly you probably hear the term all the time. um and usually not in a good in a good sense, especially up here in our area. Um these
types of plans, but um a lot of places don't accept them. But we're we're typically when you're hearing all that, we're talking about individual plans, not the group plan. The group plan is going to be different. Um but these people, um it may be a matter of just
educating them. I don't know, um you know, about the changes if the if a change was to be made. um you know they do get a lot of their information from having coffee with friends and family or whatever and
they'll probably bring up advantage and somebody will say well you better look into that you know type thing. So that's the biggest thing for me. The biggest drawback would be the change for those people um and the uncertainty that comes with that. Um but but like I said look
at the cost. It is a big It is a big deal costwise if you look at those two. So >> about 150 a month. >> Um is that per person? >> Yeah.
>> Um it's it's a savings of 12550 per per month per participant. >> Yeah. So, >> um, if you go with the group advantage, the third plan. >> Mhm. >> So, about $20,000 a year.
Some of this just for the record is there's some a digestion period of >> right >> um >> for city specific it's it actually comes out to about 15, um 648
for the eight city employees. Mhm. >> So the board of trustees and North Cooch is reimbursing us for the benefits that we're paying out on their be. Okay. So there's eight. >> So the other five is understand. >> Correct.
>> So Chad, when you say the change then the change if they went if we went to the advantage plan would also be that the members are going to see a $3,000 out of pocket maximum. um that is on the um benefit sheet um if you look at that
comparison, but when you look at the um out-ofpocket expenses for the different things um it's it's all zero co-pays and co- insurance that $3,000 um is with the advantage plans. They have to put that out of pocket maximum
in there. It's just part of the part of the plan, part of the law how they have to do that. But there's actually nothing that would go towards it. It's that 3,000 pretty much just isn't doesn't affect anything. So, >> okay. >> It's just part of the plan that has to
be in there by law. >> Is there a When is the renewal date that we have to abide when do we have to have a decision made by >> Well, I think they wanted it like 3 weeks ago, but >> that that's what Chad told me anyway.
>> No, as soon as possible. as soon as >> it's it's January 1 is when the plan renews though. >> Understood. >> So you saying Chad that the word just the word advantage plan is going to be the the kicker of any issue.
>> Uh I I I think so. And change I mean just changing a plan. I mean it's you know they know what they have. They they're used to it. They've used it. They know you know what to expect. Um I just see it all the time. you know, change is tough and that advantage, just
that word advantage does have a lot of negative connotation with it these days. So, but again, um that's more when you're looking on the individual side, not the group plans. So, >> and I'm I'm guessing they'll get all new
literature, all new cards, all new >> everything. Um their prescription drug plan will remain the same. >> Okay. >> But it'll still require new cards. I right. I mean I I don't suspect they have a separate drug card or do they?
>> I think they would. Um I guess I'm not totally positive on that but that would be irregardless of which which plan for the health side of it that that drug plan remains the same. There's only one option there. So >> yeah. And to be clear, are
is the idea that we the council makes a decision today and adds it to a city council meeting or we add the idea to the council meeting and decide at the council meeting. >> That's up to you. >> Well, that that was Yeah.
>> Um >> I was going to ask you which way you prefer to do it. Um, you know, Chad is here today to answer any any questions that you may have to help you get to that decision making. Um, I haven't asked him about his availability next
week. >> I got that. And when you trust me, I understand the whole change is tough thing. Personally, not a favor, but once again, you'll be around to help them with that. They'll be able to contact
you if with questions and stuff like that. >> Absolutely. Right. Myself or Cindy were >> right in the in the >> I do think that some were not locals. I believe >> correct whatever is like they're going to be and I figured out the kids not be hung out
to dry. You're local. Um I'm I'm comfortable but that's just me to move to the advantage plan. That's >> feel the same as if it the benefits are all the same. It's just the wording of
it. I mean it just >> Yeah. I mean they when you look at these types of plans I mean they like just in Minnesota they both accept you know they're both accepted by you know 98% of hospitals and doctors or you know some
high percentage like that. Once you get out of state, um, you know, they can they can go anywhere that Medicare's Medicare is accepted, which you're probably looking at a 90% participation rate possibly. They did say, um, this was Blue Cross, you know, in talking
with them, they said, you might run into something where somebody might be seeing maybe a, you know, a small private practice or something that one might cover and the other does not. um you know when you're talking 90% and we're talking about eight 8 11 people
whatever I mean I I guess the chances are there is a chance that they could have a little disruption in their service could they find somebody another provider I'm probably >> there's also a chance in my blue cross I'll find it too >> right >> same thing so it's not that plan it's just
>> yeah it may be a provider that they're seeing that they would have to possibly switch I mean but >> is there a chance yeah is it very I no >> and please >> Oh, I was going to say the other thing
they checked on us because for us is because we weren't certain if this absolutely did not work out, we could go back to the plan that's currently on they're currently on. Um, but it would have to be at the next renewal, right? It would have to be a
full year. could switch back next, >> but I I don't think I would necessarily I go into it with that in mind. >> Um, but it is an option. I mean, you want to try to make this work if this is what we're going to go with, >> right? And would you be willing to turn
into motion >> to add this to the next city council meeting, the advantage plan councilors uh Kaylor and Buller? And I just want to say thank you because, you know, we're all under a lot of pressure. We've talked about the budget. We don't need
to talk more about it. Um, and these are typical places I think that that get looked at and with cities and these types of things, I mean, they things change over time and we have a commitment to do it, but at a cost that
we can afford. So, um, question. >> I >> I >> I'll vote yes. That can be moved to city council. Thank you. >> All right. All right. Unless you want to talk about Minnesota paid leave. >> You're up. >> Okay. >> We'll leave that to you. Thanks, Chad.
Thank you, Chad. >> Well, we're not going to talk about that quite yet, but we'll get there. Um, so back in August, we had talked about the parks and facilities assistant position, and we had a couple of applicants for that after talking with
um Mike. uh they had requested three. I think that um he is comfortable moving forward with two in that seasonal position. Uh so I am just looking to see if council is still comfortable with uh moving forward with two in that position
that I would present at next week's council meeting for approval. >> Is is that new can you refresh us on? >> Yes. So the parks and facilities assistant that's the that's a seasonal position. and they come out and they come in and help the full-time staff
with like um the tournaments and things like that. Um stay, you know, staying open if if someone were to call in sick or just kind of that fill-in type stuff. Um I think last year maybe the most
anyone worked was two days a week, maybe three. Um and they just kind of do that that fill-in support stuff at at Kerry Park. Uh we had three LA they had three last year. One came in rather late. I think it was close to the end of the year. Um
this year uh he he has two applicants that he thinks he can move forward with just two. >> And when would they be needed? Um, they would start well I would we would put them on the council agenda ne uh next
week for approval and they typically start around November 1st >> and these are nonfull employees >> correct? So, like I said, they average 16 to 24 hours per week >> seasonally.
>> Yes. So, I think one started in November, she was done in March, one started in late November, early December, was done in April, and the other one started in late December, she was done in May. So, kind of she stuck around. The one stuck
around a little bit to do some painting and clean up at Kerry Park >> and out of budgeted funds out of parks and recreation. >> Correct. I
am fine with whatever the council decides. I'm gonna just to be clear and concise on the record. Um I'm not opposed to it. It's parks and racks and it can go to the council, we can make our decision. I'm
just hesitant a little bit because until the budget process is done and that's a moving I don't if the city gets in a position where we have to reduce staffing levels over a couple years um I want to make sure that that's dignified
and and fair across the board. >> Um if that is something that occurs maybe it's not. So that's the only thing that in my mind that I'm concerned about. counselors. >> To be clear, this does reduce the amount
of overtime that we have to pay. >> It is a cost savings from that perspective >> from OT. Yeah. Thank you. >> Paid a much lesser wage given that these are not bargaining members. >> Right. >> I'll move forward with it.
>> Thank you, councelor. Second. Thank you, councelor Wagner. Any more discussion? >> Question. >> I >> I >> I >> I'll vote yes. That can get moved on. Thank you. >> All right. Um well, as promised, the
paid leave policy. I put a draft in your packets today. Um it pretty much follows the template that the league provided to cities. Do you have any questions on that? Um there there's not a lot of wiggle
room. Mostly the state of Minnesota is will determine if people are eligible or not eligible and the city just needs to follow suit. So um uh where applicable I put in there um we
have negotiated with the unions and uh with regards to their collective bargaining agreements. Um we are still working with the um firefighter engineers and paramedics. So we are meeting with them on October 29th, but that does not impact this policy because
as like I said, I put in there that they should refer to their collective bargaining agreement. So we will have anou with them that they would refer to for those specific parts where it comes into play with regards to how we split the premium and also how you top off the
benefit if if they go out on leave. So if if there aren't any questions on the policy, I'm just looking to move it to the next city council meeting for approval. >> So move. >> Second. >> Thank you. Councilors Buller and Wagner. Discussion,
question. I >> I >> I vote yes. I can go on to councel. Thank you. >> Okay. So, I just want to give you a heads up though. In the meantime, the state of Minnesota is requiring employers to put notices out there from
Minnesota Paid leave that this law is out there. It's in effect. Um it's comes out on I don't know if it's their letter head, but their logo on the top of it. I am going to start getting those notices out there this week. And the only reason
I I would wait for the policy but uh Chief Manassa has his ambulance and fire meetings this week and I want to have them to him in advance of those so he can start getting them distributed to his volunteers and his EMTs who are not
here on a regularly scheduled basis because we have to have them out by December 1st and with the holidays in there. So the policy will not be going out. It is what the state is requiring us to put out there. So they have a poster plus they have a notice that you have to individually hand to each
employee and ensure that they receive it or there could be fines involved if you don't do this. So um we'll get those notices out there as well. But the policy will go out after it is formally approved by city council.
So >> thank you. >> Right. >> Yep. Just didn't want you to think I was putting the cart before the horse there. Um also working on open enrollment uh for benefits. It's it's pretty um it's a pretty passive open
enrollment. It's mostly voluntary benefits as all of us are under um some sort of flat rate plan through the unions. So they take care of the the major part of it and I'm sending out the voluntary pieces of it to employees.
That'll go out in November. Uh the last thing is uh the Minnesota OSHA safety grant. So the city was approved to receive the safety grant. However, the the grant was only approved for 50%.
Which means the city would be responsible for $4,136.12. So that was for the surveillance or the cameras in city hall and the um parking lot. So they would pay 50%, the city would
have to pay the remaining 50%. So since that was not how it was presented to you originally, I wanted to come back and see how you wanted to proceed with that. So they're holding it for us right now and they understand that I had to come back to you and chat with you about this to see how you
wanted to proceed. Um, and then I will I will let them know after you've had an opportunity to discuss that. >> For context, we have the full amount assumed in the 2026 budget um for both
security cameras and fobs. So, we were planning worst case scenario anticipating we likely wouldn't get the grand. So, this is actually a benefit to our 26 budget from that perspective. >> And what was that amount?
Uh if you >> don't have that amount, but it's in our um capital outlay safety. >> Yep. >> I think if you were to do the fobs and the cameras together, wasn't it close to 30? >> I thought the 30
>> because the fobs were pretty expensive and the cameras were probably around they would have been around 8,200 I suppose. >> So for the full package it would be 30,000 less to 43. Mhm. >> Or 4136.
>> Okay. And how long will they hold the money for us? >> Um well, they're they're doing a another round, he said, I think after the first of the year. Um but I have to let him know.
Well, relatively soon, otherwise they'll just put it back in the the fund to go out next year. I mean, conceivably, we could reapply again next year. If we don't want to move, it doesn't mean we'll get it, but we could reapply for it,
>> right? >> Um, >> can Excuse me. Can we play again? >> Yep. >> Yep. >> We can take 40 4100 and still apply again next year. >> No. No. No. No. No. Okay. No. You You can only apply at a location every two years.
>> Okay. >> But if if we decided to forego now, we could reapply. We didn't take it >> and then get 2,000. Pardon? >> And then possibly get 2,000 instead of four. >> Maybe
potentially >> and the whole thing like with the fobs and all that is where we get the third. But >> well, and we >> for for for out of that money they put away already in the budget next year. Not that it's approved, but for another 4500, we can
at least get cameras up and start this process, which I think is important to do and then see where we're at with the FOBs and other things later if that's how we have to do. We might have to break it up into a couple things. But I
think at least the cameras will be a good start for us to take care of some security issues here. That would be a motion if you're carrying for one to move it. >> I'll entertain it. Second. >> Second by councelor Wgner.
Is there discussion? >> Question. >> I >> I >> I >> I'll vote yes. And that carries unanimously. Thank you. >> All right, I'm done. Unless you have any questions for me. >> Questions. a lot.
>> That was quite the quite the run. >> Yes. >> Thank you, Sher. >> Thank you, >> Mayor Marshall Baldwin with rental licensing monthly report. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mayor and Councel.
Um, in the packet you have in front of you, um, is the rental licensing report, um, for the month of September. That's where we're fining up our onboarding process for the new year, um,
July into June 30th of 26. Um, all rentals are currently licensed except for one uh forplex on Main Street and the owner has been notified and he's actually traveling for work. So, um, he
plans on getting that taken care of soon. Um, so we're trying to work with him on that. Um, just getting ready to start scheduling and uh, get out and start inspecting these properties again. Any
questions? Uh I don't see any if you'd like to move on to blight. Uh blight packet also in front of you. Um year to date. Um as you can see in the last month, we have forwarded a couple properties on to the attorney. Um
these have been properties that we've been um working on all summer um and also the past couple years that uh they just do the bare minimum and then it falls back into having the neighbors
calling and having issues. Um the one property um 2nd Avenue East, 20110 2nd Avenue East. Um 1504 9th Avenue. The one on Second Avenue East is uh right behind the Holler ball fields. Um
there was some things that uh were done there with the fence coming down. And now uh this summer we got a lot of complaints from the kids at families at the ball field about all the items that are being stored in the backyard and on the city rightway, city alley.
Um, so we've tried to work with the homeowner. Um, and it's actually her brother that's living with her that's has all the items stored out back. So, um, uh, myself and, uh, the building official met, um, with the homeowner a
couple times and he claimed he was going to call counselor Kaylor, but I don't know if he ever did there. So, >> never has. So, um it's just at the point now it's getting worse and there's more overflow onto city property. So, we forwarded that one on to the attorney to
be dealt with. Um some other ones um as you can see there's um a lot of, you know, minor grass um some more vehicles that we're dealing with. Um some of them have been
addressed um and some we're working on scheduling a day for more pickups. So, um, any questions on that? >> Questions for Mr. Baldwin? >> Thank you. I just wanted to say we just finished up with fire prevention week.
Uh, last week, uh, we had roughly 275 kids back in the fire hall. Um, that was a very successful week. Um, since CO started, we haven't been able to have the kids come back to the fire hall. And this year, we made a pitch for it. and uh the schools were on board with bringing everybody back to the
firehouse. So, uh all the kids had a good time and uh I've been hearing that a lot of them are going home and testing their smoke alarms and talking about electronics because this year uh the topic for fire safety was charging to fire safety. So, um that's talking about
lithium ion batteries and some other things in your home. So, good to have all the kids back in the fire hall and they sure appreciated it. So, uh, just wanted to give you a heads up on that that it was successful again. So, thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Next with building official report with Mr. Kelly Myers. Also, thank you. >> In front of you, you see the numbers that we have. They are continuing to rise. It's typical of the fall. We're
starting to see a lot more residential people closing up of course for the winter time getting ready to go on that stuff. Um been working pretty diligently with a few wetland violations throughout this community which is um very tasking and does take a lot of time.
>> Um it is getting there and I think tomorrow I'll be meeting with the fellas and hopefully we'll be seeing some resolution of that. Uh zoning. Zoning is uh the big popularity in the community has put fences up and uh there's a lot of them gone up this year and we have to
look at their property lines to see where they're being placed in the correct spots. Um commercial projects of course we see the things going on. There's quite a bit going on at the school. We do have a um a project out at the old battalion
building that's going to be a therapy place that'll be set up and that's getting close to being finished. And then we're also I've also been working with uh um the ICS company over at the jail project and basically the jail when I talk about the old space
we're talking about the second floor what they may be able to utilize it for. So they're looking at options and I've been working right with them to kind of to make sure that we get even though it was a jail, it's life safety items come into play because they're set up a little bit differently than a than a
business type setting would be. So, we got to look at the exits and windows and that type of thing and go in there. Um, permits are basically right on track to where they should be. Probably going to see the 300 number, which is a normal
year. Um, and uh actually the fees are up pretty good, which is a good And even though it's a small project year. So >> great >> question. >> None at this time. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
We will now move to new business and at long last I believe joining us virtually it's Philip Buucy from Bolton and Mink and the Banshell committee with a presentation.
>> Uh yes. Yeah. Thank you mayor and council. Can you hear me? We can we can hear you right off the bat, which is >> great. Yeah, it's a little better than our usual >> technology preamble. Yep. So, today I'm here to provide an update on the
progress of the design of the replacement structure at Smoky Bear Park. Uh you you'll have a a packet in front of you. Um, and you know what that does is it essentially kind of walks through sort
of at a at a pretty conceptual level the the project that the the committee has kind of decided to to move forward with. Um, you'll notice that it's a a very faithful um sort of re rebuilding of the
structure that was there before. Um we are uh it's helpful to maybe talk about it kind of relative to what was there before, but um so there's it there's smaller sort of storage support spaces,
but um the new structure is not planning to include um restrooms like the existing structure had. Um and then additionally they there will be um sort of an accessible ramp
that will be able to bring people from the kind of at grade up onto the onto the the presentation platform there. Um I I think so the on the uh third page the kind of overall 3D view
um you'll see the stairs sort of on the on the south end ramp on the north end. The another difference between this structure and and what was there before is it it does not incorporate those tiered steps those tiered concrete
steps. Um again again that's sort of done in support of accessibility. Um you know people with with the use of a wheelchair can can um sort of traverse the whole performance platform.
Uh a few other I guess things to highlight from that view. Uh there we're we're structuring a couple of bid bid alternates. Right. So, so what those are is um you know it it gives the council
and city the opportunity to you know choose options based on on budget. And what you'll see is uh well we have an accessible path sort of that is a semicircle in front of the stage with a few pull-offs for people um that may
have accessibility issue and and can't um kind of walk across the grass. And then on the north end there, the other thing that we're thinking of as a as an alternate would be a pave path that would connect the uh parking lot on the northwest corner
of the site that could be used for loading and unloading of equipment for performances so you're not driving over your grass there. um with the thought that um kind of kind of less need for maintenance over time for that. Um
the within the packet uh there's a conceptual floor plan with overall building dimensions. You'll see that the structure I I guess I'm not I don't highlight this in the in the packet, but um the original structure was about 90 ft wide. This one is is 60
feet. Um because we're we just have the the two support structures on either side of the arch band shell. So we're we're building less building than was there before. >> Um we're also lowering the stage from
the 50in height that it was previous down to 30 in. Um again that's sort of in support of making the structure more accessible. there's also uh sort of less
uh less intervention that needs to be done to make it safe from like a from a fall perspective with respect to like guard rails and and and that sort of thing. So again, thinking about um creating something of with a very similar experience as before, but not
being kind of overly heavy with the the sort of fall production we need to design into it. And um also within the packet is um primary elevations of the north, south,
east and west. Um you know we'll have we'll have railings for the ramps and the stairs. The the building finish will be stucco with integral coloring. Again, the thought being that that's a more
durable and and um sort of less maintenance intensive material that that matches the aesthetic of the previous band shell. So, you're not um the in makes it so you don't have to like repaint it every 5 10 years. It's a much longer lasting finish.
Um other finishes would be um you know you'd we would have a concrete base that would be stained um to match the arch structure as well.
Um and then steel doors and you know metal flashing sort of where required at the at the top of the roof and um throughout the building. I will
that's kind of my that's my update. That's my overview. I guess any any specific questions from council or the mayor >> um from the committee? >> Well, what are the please?
>> Well, go ahead. What >> what are the next steps in the process in terms of um my understanding was we were paid out by the insurance company.
um the proceeds of the claim that if we do proceed with the same structure, which basically this is, do they do we go back to them and they pay out more for replacement or do we just have the money that's in the band shell account?
>> They have paid us out just part of the bid, the original quote from that pillar construction. We went, they've brought it back to us. We've looked at it. it's back in their ballpark on different items that we believed weren't
commercial grade um equipment that was used in the quote. So there is still that difference that we are still working with the insurance company on. But once we're paid out for that, that is what our replacement cost is. Okay. >> That is what we have to use for
replacement. >> Thank you. And so from there do we the bid process etc. And is there going to be a gap or >> uh we will I think there's a I guess the
meeting today and and correct me if I'm wrong anybody that was that the is this is to move it forward to go out for bid. >> Yeah. uh inspects at the next meeting, see what it comes back with and then we'll work from there with what we have and what we're
>> available to get um as stated before. Uh Mr. Lucach's been involved and he stated some possible fundraising efforts also depending what we find we need and not. So, and I would like to thank Phil for
coming up with the design here with all the ideas that were thrown at him at the meetings and not always so clear. But I said before, I think it it's a pretty good comp compromise of what some
everybody wanted. Not everybody got what what they wanted with the more accessibility, the lower stage and stuff like that. Yeah, but we're here today to move if everybody here on the council is happy with it, we have to move it to the
next meeting to go out for bids >> to the next city council meeting. >> Yep. Next city council. >> And is that a motion? >> That that's a motion. If I'm on the council council car, can I add a little bit of context to that as well? So, >> sure. That Yes. >> So, we are Yes. Uh we are today we're
asking essentially for um the project to be brought to the next council meeting to be voted on whether uh um to go out to bid and then sort of the subsequent steps for that would be we're we're targeting um
our our actual like full set of construction documents to be issued early December with the thought being that um before the end of the year we you would receive bids in hand from contractors um and then in early June
mid June um sort of that's when council action would need to be require or or would be required to um sort of execute or kind of move ahead with the project. So that's the next couple of that's at least like the schedule for the next two
and a half months or so. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Thank you, Phil, for your hard work. There's a motion on the floor by councelor Kaylor. >> Second. >> Second by councelor Wgner. Um, is there any more discussion on that process
before we vote to move it to city council? >> Seeing none, call the vote. >> I >> I >> I >> I'll vote yes. That can be moved to city council as it passes unanimously. Thank you, Bill. >> Thanks, Phil.
Thank you to all involved with the Banshell project. >> Yeah, thank you very much. >> Next item two, I'd like to invite Fire Chief Manassa forward to explain the interlocal contract for cooperative
purchasing. >> Thank you, mayor. Uh in a nutshell, this is a cooperative buying agreement. So uh very similar to think what state bid used to be. Um they have gone to these cooperatives now. Uh
Sourcewell is a big one and HG HGAC is the other big one. Um state bid list to the best of my knowledge has kind of slowly gone away and been replaced with the cooperative purchasing agreements. We are a member of Sourcewell already and I thought we were a member of HGAC.
We are not. There's not an expense to be a member of which we just sign up and you can be that member and get the discounts they afford. I did not count the number of companies that are on or with HGAC but it was it was a boatload
um very good discounts on certain items from hand tools to fire trucks and ambulances for example. So uh very good uh thing to be be a part of. Um,
the reason this came up is I was looking for a quote from something and the first question was, "Are you a member of HGAC?" which again I thought we were. Uh, and that that particular company I was looking at offered a 42% discount on their goods if we're a member. So that's
quite substantial. So again, uh, just this is a cooperative purchasing agreement, not the only one around, but it is one we're eligible for. There is no cost to the city other than just signing the documents. Uh the one notable thing is this uh entering on
10:21 which would be the day after the the committee me or council meeting and then it does expire at 12:31 of 2025 but it is autorenewing at the end of each year. So the way they set this up for application is the fiscal year you're currently in. So again with an
auto renew so we wouldn't have to do this again. >> I move join. >> Thank you councelor Buller. >> I'll second. >> Thank you councelor Kaylor. Is there discussion? >> Question.
>> I >> I >> I >> I'll vote yes. Approved unanimously. Thank you chief. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Moving on to number three. City Council requests. First, public works recommendation. I
approve interim pay adjustment for assistant public works director, which is a memorandum that Sherry has provided us with some time ago, over
a month ago. Um the reason that I had asked at a city council meeting um not necessarily to try and stop this but rather to postpone it was for more clarity um as we've changed the org chart of the
organizational chart in the city over the past few years. My question is um with without question Mr. Wallace has had a lot of new things added to his
plate with the retirement or resignation of Ted Broka. Um, but I think it would be pertinent for us to have at least a discussion whether
are we looking to attrition out an entire job and thus expect him to fulfill those duties in which we would give him that pay increase or are we looking to fill
a position and I think that That's the first thing that comes to my mind. Um particularly in the sense that if we give out payraises and and that may be what we do, but let's say we do that a couple
times and then we go and hire a director of public works and then those duties go away. um just as a council those are the things that we tend to come under intense um scrutiny for at times. So I think
it's worthy of a discussion but I think the main point is what what is the path that we're looking to take with the positions? Well, like I said, I when I suggested we do this
for now to see how it works, not make any decisions till we find out how it's going. And we may find out that it's too much for one person to be doing both things. Like Mike's now public works and still
in charge of the uh street department with some help with another employee. Um, that's I'm just seeing how it goes. We might find out we need to hire a director of public works or other than
if he doesn't want it or whatever and then move back to his spot the way it was if we decide we need those number of people. That's my thought. thought. >> My thought would be that if we do go that route, he should be asked if he even wants the
job. Sorry. >> Right. >> I think right now it's he's taking it as a fill in. I think need some adjustment for that. But if we're plan on going the other way, I think that's that's an important part of it because I I'm getting vibes that he likes where he's
at. But it's just, you know, I mean, there >> you don't always want to move forward. You want to be where you're at. I mean, just >> But we should ask him if he wants to do it and then move forward with that and decide that rather than try to decide something else. >> And that's why we're discussing this.
It's not we >> and if we decide we need to have we got to then we got to hire somebody. I mean that's if we decide that's the way we need to go and I know he's got a lot on his plate right now and it's what and might to be too much and that's why we
had the positions before. I think we should go ahead and give them an adjustment right now and with back pay like we do with the union when they settle down and then uh go to the uh um street committee and they you guys
discuss it with him and find out what what the plan must be. >> That's that was the point of the discussion. >> Yeah. And I I would be fine with that. >> Okay. So, um, you're willing to present a motion,
>> add this back to city council? >> Yep. >> And then we will we can just add it to public works committee >> um to find that path forward. >> Yes. >> Okay. And is there a second? Councelor Buller. Thank you. Is there more discussion?
>> Please, Council, >> what what are the increased duties? We need to see that. And why aren't we spreading them out between there's more than one person on this, right? Isn't uh Mr. Crosby involved in this too? Why aren't we spreading this out more before we move ahead too far? Um I don't see
the back pay issue. Um what is his base wage now? What percentage is this increase? Um is it comparable or is it more than what we thought of? And does he have the interim tag now
and prior experience and references before any thing for me before council, but we can take it to council vote. Those are just some thoughts. >> Well, I believe he's already sharing duties with Steve. >> Oh, yeah. >> I mean, he's delegated some out, but he
still has extra ones that he's doing along with his other job. But we can move it to council and decide that. >> Yeah, I'm I mean I >> in the discussion period I want to make sure that that information is presented
to us. You've requested it. I think that Sherry could help with that. And yeah, my feelings are I'm I I understand the duties and there's a lot going on and all of that. So, if we give the increase
and then we go hire a director of public works, are we going to cut the pay back? >> Exactly. And that's my only question with it. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, that's why I wanted to have the discussion. Um because I know where these things lead
>> and I and that in my head that's what I was doing. without it being yes. I would you go back to other >> and I think we would still request to cover our bases for research purposes what councelor Wgner um requested.
>> Is there any further discussion question? >> I >> I >> I'll vote yes. Motion is approved added back to city council. Thank you. 3B approve Derek Hell for the internal posting of
the maintenance worker one equipment operator plow truck position. >> I'll move. >> Okay. Thank you, councelor. >> Second, >> councelor Buller. This was moved back,
so I would like to ask a few questions. um spawning from the attrition conversation in the street department and I've lost track mentally today of when we advanced I believe it was a
loader operator position and then we were going to internal post and if we couldn't find somebody internally then we would decide whether or not we had to post externally. So my question is with Mr. Hell, he
serves the water department um and I believe operates the street sweeper and the excavator. So, if he moves to another job, how are we going to backfill that position? And these things I wanted
them moved back because I don't feel like at times we have enough discussion on them. My position would have to be posted internally then too for after this is would be approved. If it would be approved then that would have to be posted internally also for the amount of
time that is allowed for that and then have to figure something out from there. Okay. And is this position considered a downgrade um from the position that Mr. Hell is in to >> Yes, please.
>> Please. I'm trying to lead the discussion a bit, but we'd like some more information. >> Yep. >> So, as I recall, and it's it's been a little bit of time. So this was it was approved I believe at the September 2nd council meeting
to post it internally but it wasn't approved to post it externally for the one I had put >> the one where right the one the >> that's the next one >> um well it was approved to post the maintenance worker one equipment
operator plow position which was the position that Derek Hell had signed 4 and was going into >> um that had been approved to post 92. >> Um at that time it was just approved to post internally and we were not approved
to go externally to hire if no one internally filled it. >> Correct. >> So then that went on the next city council meeting for Derek to move into it. Um so there would be no ad to staff. It was actually a demotion for him. I talked to
Mike about that. I said, "Please make sure he understands he's he's taking a cut in wage to be able to do this, right?" And Mike had that conversation with him and Derek understood that, you know, and this was something he wanted to do. He wanted, you know, there there's many reasons
people may want to do something just, you know, something different, try something new, you know, get out of a rut, whatever that might be. But anyway, he understood he wanted to move back. So then the next request that came I believe it came along with the request
to put Derek into the maintenance worker one equipment operator plow position was to post Derek's position which was the equipment operator excavator sweeper. there's been a lot of movement in public works sweeper position and that I and
that kind of got tabled at the same point and I guess I assumed that that would probably be approved to post internally but we would not go external to hire it. So that remains to be seen what would happen with that if anyone would would sign the posting for that or
not because it hasn't gone up yet. So I I assume that it would it it would be it would be a promotion for a maintenance worker one >> to >> go to that type of a position. But >> and so
if all this goes as planned and we get to the step of internally posting for the excavator position, do we think we'll have an applicant? And the reason I asked that I'm know we maybe we don't have a answer but then if
we go externally >> are we creating a new FTE at the end of the day or has it just been a huge shuffle in which we bring in a new FTE to replace one that >> Well right now I mean since and Mike please step in if I'm missing
something here but um since Brad Hagen left in August of 23 we've just been shuffling people around. We haven't added an FTE. So, they've been down an FTE since then. >> 24.
>> Oh, 24. Sorry. 24. August of 24. >> Okay. >> Think of it like a game of musical. Well, that's why I was >> or the shell game >> and that and that's how this all started with >> right >> his retirement and then
>> because they had the all the different guys that applied >> or signed for it. They all did it for 30 days and then decide some didn't like it. That's how we got to here right now. >> So, we've just been kind of backfilling
since Rory took the lead position. So if someone approves the So yeah, I guess if someone signs for the excavator sweeper job that's already working with the city, they they sign for it.
And then if we decide to fill that person's position from moving up, then would be a full-time employee. We'd be adding or replacing Brad. >> Okay. If if that makes sense to what I
said there. >> It it does. I'll try to ask my last question. >> Okay. >> You can ask more than one. >> If Derek takes the job, okay, fine. And we internally post for excavator and we don't we have a wall where Derek is off
doing a different job. Do we have somebody to fill the excavator position on a part-time basis? Well, I know that's not me, Mike. >> That's a good question. You don't know until they sign it,
obviously. But, uh, we have some qualified candidates. Whether they want it or not could be a total different scenario. I mean, example, when Mr. Hagen retired on August 2nd of 24, um,
that person that's now in his position was in the greater position. He just been in a greater for years and he just want to help. He want to try something different. So a greater position is a full-time equipment operator equipment operator year round. So that's a
promotion for somebody that's doesn't uh he's not in equipment or is only in it for six months out of the year. Example of plow trucks. So uh somebody took that position and that's why we're where we're at now with Mr. L. and um he chose
to go from full-time equipment operator to a six months plow truck and a uh six months maintenance one worker and there's all kinds of reasons why you know he I didn't specifically ask that's up to him that's his choice but u
maybe he just wanted to get out of what he was doing you know so but we do have a couple qualified individuals whether they sign that excavator you're posting or not. I can't answer that. There's been some things
done in the last year that surprised me. So, >> understood. Well, thank you, Sherry, and thank you, Mike. And is there a motion to move B and C back to city council? Moved
>> by councelor Buller. >> Is there support for that motion? >> I'll second. >> Thank you, councelor Kaylor. Is there any more discussion on the topic? >> Yes, >> please. Councelor Wagner. >> So, C also includes the
authorization to advertise externally. >> Thanks for bringing that. Yeah, I would amend my motion to approve. >> We didn't agree to that. >> Good. Uh, thank you for the catch. Are you looking for the motioners to amend? Please,
>> I will amend that. It's in just internal posting and >> that's what I thought it would start with. Yes, I will. >> Okay. So, we're in understand to strike through externally. >> Any more discussion? Thank you, Councelor Wagner. >> Question. >> I
>> I >> I'll vote yes. Those can be moved back to city council. Thank you. D. Consider replacement options for an information systems administrator due to
resignation of Todd Ojula. I will hand this to Betty and Sherry. Um, at this time, >> mayor and council, what you have what you have before you is a some
information on the IT position. Um, what they what he's currently working on. Uh, one of the critical things he's currently working on with our police department is a an audit with the BCA. Um, that is intense. It's taken some
extra time. Um we have worked with the um the consortium that you have in the packet. Um he's been guiding and helping with that because he has expertise in that. And so that's why he reached out
with some um of statement of work for the rest of the year to help you know make sure that we don't lose anything or drop the ball on that um specific item. He is well verssed in that. Um, however, as a whole, um, I think there's
probably, um, organizations out there who can help us either on a short-term basis to, um, help with, uh, managed it and maybe come in and do an audit on our system to see
if a full-time IT is needed. Uh I I believe we do need full-time it with this with the size we are the security the data breaches that are out there um all the different things. Um however I know some of the um you know virtual
things and managed it is very very good today too. Um so I I don't want to close the doors on options. I want to leave the options open to to what what's out there. Um
so in the interim I would uh like to reach you know this Minnesota security consortium and work with us through the end of the year at least um with PD on the um BCA audit specifically and any of
the PD concerns they may have for their security over there since they're not you know with under the county's envelope anymore and they are on their own. Um, and then whether we put out um,
uh, quotes or RFPs for bids or quotes to provide it services for the city. Um, you know, I laid out a few things here. And so, kind of looking for you guys to give me some direction as well on where you think we need to go with our size,
with where we're at. Um I know we do have a gentleman in the audience today who who does um some IT work as well in the community. So he's local as well. Um he had seen it on the agendas and things. So he had you know interested in
you know coming in and helping out if there's a need as well. So that's what I have for some information to start the conversation. And if Todd or anyone else has something to add that'd be great. >> Well thank you Betty. Um, yes, Todd is
moving on. Um, it's not a secret at this point. Um, I would, to the best of my knowledge, I would consider it an amicable departure in the sense what I'm trying to get at is that I believe that Mr. Ogula is still willing to help or
give some transitional assistance or guidance um, on his way. So, I mean, these things can be tricky, but they're going to happen. and how can we have something that's relatively seamless
um as we move on and are our needs going to be um replacing essentially a body or an FTE or is that something that as technology changes we try to do um
through cloud-based or managed solutions this is not my forte maybe it's someone else's um but it's obviously I think with the water plant and police uh probably police most importantly and fire that this it's um
it's a big topic and I know from discussions um with the county that councelor Wagner and I had the the it is it's interesting shall we say so >> well for if you know my me at least
recommending that for sure we go we need to go with Minnesota security consortium for the less. So they they need to have a lasso and a security officer to for
the BCA to continue using their files and network and less things have changed. Is that correct? >> Yeah. If we're on if we're on number four, I just add like to add that quote provided are for the whole city and not
just the police department. So >> you'd be getting whatever services he offered for the entire city at that price point for you. >> And he also I talked to this morning and he told me the um 2025 you have in front of you as well as the
bank 2026 and you can terminate the 2026 at any time if you're not satisfied with the service. He really just wants to our city basically concern. It isn't just police department. The whole city. >> Okay.
>> $44,200. >> Yes. >> And just as a side note there through one of these organizations that we belong to, is this something we want to consider
reaching out? What what are other cities doing? um of ours. I have no idea. Um and also maybe back to D for a minute. Um was Mr. Ogula willing to continue to
work on a part-time basis or is just to understand um this departure? Yeah, it was my understanding that for a short period of time he's willing to work a few hours a week to to help us out through the transition. Yes. If that is if that is um something that we would
like to do, we would need to draft um a legal document, a contract in order to do that. >> Understand? Um, is that something that the council would like to pursue through council action? And at this time,
I I think I think we do need to at least temporarily um go for some type of RFP to to get us through the transition till we decide what we want to do. Uh so cuz we're going to have to keep running even
with Todd's help but he's time's going to be limited I'm sure but even just on a you know temporary basis put out for some quotes or questions to see you know see if somebody's willing to do that to help us until we figure
like I said kind of like Betty said with an audit or I'm sure we probably need a full-time one with all the stuff that goes on but we're still going to need somebody as we're looking for a full-time person if that's the way to go to get us through.
>> Please, >> I'll make a motion that we put out hire for a full-time IT person going forward. Whatever you got to do there, Patty. >> I'll second. >> We need it. >> Yeah. >> Well, that's my thoughts as well.
>> Well, I'm fine with that, too. I'll second that. I >> Thank you, counselor. May take a while till we see if anybody you can find anybody. You know, >> this they're not everywhere. >> Well, and we go through in there, >> but do you need this uh Cisco thing too?
>> Maybe. I don't know. >> But we got a motion. >> We'll move on to that. >> I jumped ahead. I thought they're all together how we're talking. So, >> okay. on the on the motions by Wagner and Kaylor to put out an RFP or post um
the information systems job. Call the question on those motions. >> I >> I >> I >> I'll vote yes. Motion carried. That can be added to city council. Now, as an addendum to item D, do we want to pursue a legal
contract with Todd for part-time services until we find somebody that just to clear up any gray area? I'll make that motion. >> I'll be comfortable with that also. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Wagner and Kaylor. Is there any clarity needed for
uh the minutes? Okay, that looks good. Call the question. >> I >> I >> I >> I'll vote yes. Motion carries. That can be added. Thank you again. Now we'll move to new business item four, which is
to consider the Minnesota Security Consortium agreement for virtual chief information security officer for the remainder of the year. um which Chief Koschek has touched on and I would delegate to
anyone else on the council who knows more specifically about this before we approve this as my understanding is as a stop gap. >> Yep. >> Yep. >> With the departure. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> And yep would be my motion.
>> Thank you. Second. Go ahead. >> Councelor Buller. discussion, question >> I >> I >> I'll vote yes to move that to council unanimously. Thank you. Is there any other business at this time? Ask Betty
or um councel or staff. Seeing none, move to councelor Buller. Uh airport commission report. >> It wasn't at the last meeting. and I was not available at a doctor's appointment
and my attendee was counselor. >> I was supposed to take notes. >> No, I do we had they were talk about a possible I know they talked early about vacating 108 for possible hangers
and where to go. So there discussion about that. There were some people concerned that live in the area. So, they're going to look at possible different locations for the hangers at this time. Um, and then just wrapped up
some of the the normal uh runway stuff coming together and ordering some equipment was what was happening. I remember >> Would you like to Thank you. And would you like to continue with Kea? >> I didn't take very good notes at that one either. I know we're going to Big
Falls next week. >> Wednesday. >> Wednesday. Yes. Uh just more we talked about what we did with Felix here. Um extending the uh p the purchase agreement time um for
another year I believe it was try and get it all together and coming through and uh otherwise we just talk about normal going on around the county I believe. Thank you,
North Cooch. >> That'd be me. >> That'd be you. >> We've got our uh NHR meeting coming up on for on Thursday this week for uh just for clarifying what uh Sherry brought up about the uh sick and safe laws and
stuff and how we're going to incorporate it to into the department there into our policies. And our next regular meeting is going to be next week, Tuesday at 8:00. >> Thank you.
>> Any other business, >> please? Councelor Wagner. >> Uh, last week, Councelor Kaylor and I met with the WCK hockey board to discuss Kerry Park and administrator Bergstrom was with us and the board from the rec hockey group on a plan going forward for
Kerry Park. >> Good meeting. Thank you for the update. Any other? Seeing no further, it's 5:30 p.m. and the meeting's adjourned.