##VIDEO ID:4uSaZmEQaOM## good evening this is our November 19th monthly C city council meeting so um we'll go ahead and have call to order roll call here counc Phillips here Pendergrass here counc Richards here here great we have our agenda tonight I have a couple quick items to add one is a uh in our department committee and reports under parks and trails the item s does that I'm sorry page um must be on page four under parks and frails under the action i i a motion to approve jef Magus son to the parks and trails [Music] committee parks and trails would recommend this approval to join the parks and trails committees second to fall I you said double I under parks and trails h on page four and another item is under new business number eight it's on page five of six and this would be I guess it's at the top of page six item number six appr the recommendation for the outstanding Citizen Award they got right before consent just before the consent agend actually be paid six right 6 G outstanding citizens award recommendation how would you what are you lettering that what are you what are you lettering that one at f g g under new business that's on page six item G before a motion any other changes I seeing none all I make a motion to approve the agenda as amended second thank you um oh you're I'm sorry you're under to finish I'm just tying so the packet that I put on there the information I put on there today with the memos and stuff that'll be discussed under my section I want to make a comment about that um since that was not given to us I believe the time stamp on that was 3:13 p.m. this afternoon um I would like to have that uh not put on the agenda tonight just because there isn't enough time for to go through it make that motion made a motion made a motion to have that uh held back and we can do it next month so um no different than the outstanding in my two suggestions of putting on so I don't understand what's the it's it was quite long and not enough time to go through there all that stuff so no I want to want to hold that back so I make a motion to hold it back yeah this is timely information stuff that needs to be addressed though I think that there was a second over here point of order for discussion yeah this is timely information that needs to be discussed and the reason it took so long is because it was an evolving situation that took time to write everything up and have everything adequately prepared for Council so this has to do with filling vacant positions resignation of another employee so we're now going to have three vacant positions as well as having to discuss uh filling those and then the board seats that need to be filled as well and per city code those need to be done in this uh this month so while the uh the U the the board fillings are done in in January well again if you in here I've posted in the city ordinance that talks about they have to be posted in October and November for a time period for any open seats so and then they're filled in January but they got to have that time to have applications submitted for people who want to to sit on any of the community boards that we have here there a friendly motion that I've already made on that um I make a motion that we have a special meeting um let's say uh next Monday uh be able to discuss that stuff for what's on there Personnel didn't know anything about this this about Personnel Personnel didn't know anything about the new positions we didn't know anything about resignation so Personnel was Sid Steed not Sid stepped I was gathering information putting stuff together and it takes time to do it I I I had ready today so we're not blindsided so there wasn't trying to Blindside anybody it was just a matter of fact I was trying gather everything and put it together in a professional manner so so we have personel committee two motions on the table to approve the agenda as was amended and we have a motion also to resend one item from the city administrator act so first question is the motion regarding the packet from the city administrator all those in favor of not all those in favor of the motion signify by saying I what was the motion not allowed to what was the motion there was an amendment a friendly Amendment your was an amendment mine was a friendly amendment to have it for special meeting for let's say next Monday night didn't hear a second that motion I did second it yeah for the special yep okay that's what I didn't hear sorry so back up take the motion for having a special meeting next Monday night review the city administrator packet information that was given to us late this afternoon is everybody available on Monday do have Fire Department fire department training 25th that's 6:30 let try to do it at like 5 yeah we can do it earlier there's I don't have on myself 5 o' Monday morning Monday afternoon yep it's f with me all in favor of the special meeting next Monday night at 5:00 pm that allows PL of time to be posted for that special meeting so to review the administrator's packet was given to us this afternoon all those in favor signify by saying I I oppose motion approve the motion that the amendment of the agenda with items that I mentioned make a motion to approve that with your addition second that other comments none all those in favor signify by saying I I oppose that's approved as amended next time is a public for the three time three minute time limit per person the city council welcomes and encourages participation from community members please keep in mind that your comments that must be pertinent to City businesses and must adhere to data privacy rules no employees names may be used please do not expect action from the council this evening regarding your concerns to address the city council during public form please step up to the podium uh State get your name and address and fill out the form that's provided there and speakers will be recognized every once there you will be timed begin speaking when the green card is raised the yellow card indicates you have 30 seconds left and the red card indicates you have reached your three stop so with that I have a card from Steve bner oh I'm sorry please go ahead yes my name is Linda band king um my partners and myself are the owners of gold cring it's been in excess of five months that we have been asking to Annex and reson our property in my opinion you are either stupid or corrup and I could be both you have all kinds of excuses but no go you already have the agreement with oronoko Township my question is what's your hold up I think we have documented is that there is a great deal of agreement ments made it un underhandedly different rules and perks for other folks but not for Gold Rush Crossing I guess you must be a member of the good old boys club to qualify for that all without the public or council members not knowledge or consent why are your books only open to Pew not to the council members or to the public the taxpayers and the council members have a right to know seems like there's a lot of under the table agreements you tell us that we have to put in B ponds and easement for Mar Mar's not even within the city limits you also told us we had to Annex to the city of or oal to do our deil again another lie that's not true we are considering doing the same development in nor opal Township and we have visited with them that would cut out your questionable crap which I have had enough of I don't like dealing with dishonesty or perceived corruption and that's what we think we're dealing with if you as a tonight do not agree to a forensic AIT I will consider and my partners will going to the state of Minnesota with the information we have you guys have a good evening and let me know you st Hi C Max 1115 Southwest and uh and I just wanted to voice concern with the new EG Market that came to town I think it's great ex here and everything but my concern is that from a safety standpoint I have like three grandkids on the other side over here so I hear from them directly that they love to bike over there maybe walk over there to get their candy bars or they want to get but Minnesota Avenue as you all know it's a very busy road okay and you know to try to cross that on uh Street there is where they normally would do it you know I ride my bike through town all the time too it's just not a safe intersection you know especially during R shower so I strongly recommend that we put put a four-way stop there that would be the most advantageous you know it would slow people down coming through town and definitely make that a safe Crossing for pedestrians and if that can't be done I i' recommend like we did at the post office years ago we put a pedestrian Crossing marking in the the street and had a little sign in the middle so the cars and trucks going through can easily see that you know you need to look out for pedestrians and slow down and stop if anyone's there okay so I'd really appreciate you taking action of this in the future because you we all don't want anything terrible to happen especially our children so as a grandfather I'm here to support it so thank you very much for your time second call for a public forum hi my name is Jeff wses my wife and I live uh at 95 fth Street Southwest and uh we're here to express our concerns about the variance about a new garage at 435 Minnesota our property borders 435 D to the South and um our neighbors are proposing to build a new garage the the which I not against the garage um the size of the garage seems to be kind of an issue uh 32 x 56 is what we were told we talked with Dyan Barb here this last weekend and that just seems like more of a fullard possibly machine ch sh and they're planning a new driveway which will border our land and that involves some tree trimming and from what I understand they want to take off half of our trees just LP off one side of the tree which is not not really acceptable to us um when they're done with the shed the the shed looks like it could be possibly 20 ft from our bedroom windows and I guess they talked about a w woodworking shop in there which kind of concern is about noise um the the survey of the property line or said it's been done but I don't know it's legally done nobody knows where the property line is for sure and the setback there kind of concerned us um we really didn't know about this this construction until last we we received the variance notice in the mail and that uh that was the first we really heard but we didn't know the size of theity or the new driveway or anything like that so we're just a little concerned about the size again and the location and that like the ask the council to take that under consideration before they vote on this did you no I didn't I just get you the phone I apprciate it L button 940 Woodlands Lane Southeast um when looking through the packet for tonight uh under the department and committee section g you're going to be talking about a $3,200 contract with Ceda um when looking further into that in page 56 of the council packet if you look at it it says this $3,200 goes for someone to be um for an average of eight hours per week if you do the math of that that's 8 hours time 52 weeks a year that's 46 hours divide the $32,365 7.25 per hour that we would be paying for that type of support um I would question um are we really getting one first eight hours of support from our current Ceda member today I don't know that it's not uh transparent so I would hope the council would ask that question um and and for getting that support two have we um as we are looking at tax increas increases in budget cuts is this the most pertinent 3,2 $32,000 that we're going to spend should we be not supporting maybe our fire department or First Responders or others with those funds um three have we actually seen outcomes that have re we've recouped our $332,000 uh before that that was the previous rate or whatever rate it was previously add another Point here um if you look at the uh page 67 of the 725 2020 for special counsil meeting packet the SE the sea individual sent a letter in was that approved by the Eda or was that on uh her own um Accord and so as an employee is that that was that supposed to happen or not my understanding Thea representative also spoke on behalf of the Eda without approval during the spe um the meeting that you can find on 7:16 at the city council meeting at 1 hour and 7 minutes she used language such as not my backyard mentality local government your neighbors get to determine what you as a resident can or cannot do with your own property this is not what anyone would want um exactly what will happen so I ask you today if that's the mentality of who we have representing us from Ceda can I put any uh garage shed barn on my property can I pour oil in the back of my property that would then get me into the into um into the river no there are laws there are regulations there's Planning and Zoning so if our seat of Representative is going to have that type of mentality do we have the right person in place finally I would say this as well on five if you look at your city council agendas 521 618 716 and 9917 there was no additional report from Theta or from our Eda I should say um so what are we getting for the $332,000 that is my question to the council and as you discuss that later tonight please make sure we're using our tax money wise thank you third and final call for public for Joy Binger 66 Street Southwest in oroo um I wasn't going to speak but I just wanted to speak uh to you just a little bit about what age friendly or noo um has been working with the Eda to try to get an $80,000 grant for the city part of that would be for a park assessment housing assessment for the seniors uh trying to revital revitalize the seniors group trying to get a speaker system that we could use affordable so that we wouldn't need to rely on the city giving us permission to use any equipment um trying to think with other things but it's an $80,000 Grant so just to speak to you and to the council too that we do appreciate that we're a small group there's no way we could have applied for that without her help so thank you anybody else Annie Johnson 475 River Park Road Southeast um I too wasn't going to speak tonight but after the first 30 seconds of us all coming together I feel like I need to give a public thank you to our city administrator and our city staff for working as hard they do against the constant barriers that are throwing up to them to do their jobs um we all just saw it here again um about taxpayer being responsible for taxpayer money holding special meetings is not free so they come together on Monday they have to be paid to be here so that costs money so instead of working together like adults and listening to each other and using the hard work of our city administrator who has put in his hard work and using our tax pair dollars that help pay his salary in a responsible way you forced a special meeting because you refused to be an adult in the room we see this over and over and over again I'm glad there's this many people here tonight to see this you'll see it again tonight if you stick around for the meeting you'll see it there's certainly agenda item on here that these guys are prepared to fight our city administrator about and another note Personnel committee is obsolete there's no need for a Personnel committee that was created historically here when we did not have a city administrator you can laugh at me that's fine but historically the only reason we had a Personnel committee is because we did not have a city administrator we now have a city administrator who in any other well functioning city is the Personnel committee you can watch over and over again these guys deny our city administrator's hard work when he tried to find a Financial Manager for the city he had 17 applicants he interviewed eight people and these guys told him to go out and get more applicants 17 for the city of or noal and they shot it down again I'm glad there's this many people here tonight to see this of what you guys do over and over again it's not free when they do this they're not being adults in the room let our city administrator do his job that we at least appreciate the work that he's doing Final Call uh Morgan coacher 1240 Cedar Drive um just in response to Joy what you had shared that's great that the cedar representative was able to help you with that $80,000 grant that you're working on again the the feedback hasn't been transparent so we have no idea what's been worked on my husband's been to I think every meeting since June and there's nothing to report There's No Agenda items that she's given so again just wondering what the taxpayer money is going towards also to um just in addition maybe we could reach out to her as needed for advisory from time to time versus the 32,000 year contract that's it thank you anybody else like to speak other Forum third and final call see that we'll close public form at 655 thank you for the comments first item on our agenda is our um hom state county sheriff I don't see the gentleman here but there is a report in your packet next item is a u renewal of the execution Services agreement with the county of Olstead it's required for the years 25 2025 26 to allow the M county attorney's officer to continue to handle prosecution of criminal offenses occurring within the city of or so I make a motion to approve the renewal of the prosecution prosecution Services agreement with the old state county no second then now I do now I do have one question we didn't use all the St County who would we use you can yeah it's well I do that work but it would cost you way more to hire our firm pretty much under bid any law firm I I understand that talking about prosecution criminal stuff like well the prosecut go any place else well other cities I think do hire private law firms like in 10 abasa pretty much every County but I would recommend you use the county and not hire us or hire a different Pro private prosecutor just because I think you get a better you know they're willing to do that so what's happened with a lot of counties is they there's they're down so many attorneys that the county attorney's offices are really hurting for staff and they're not willing to do it anymore for certain cities and then the cities are stuck um and that's why we rescued some for the city of Little Falls which is three hours from her St Paul office because the county won't do it so you're lucky that they're willing to do it and you should just hire them thanks for your clarification I had no idea that terms him to prosecution oh sure sure yeah that's I'm the city prosecutor for new Al in one on I mean it's a real problem the lack of lawyers in R Minnesota is a real problem um that a lot of counties are facing so um Homestead seems to be pretty well staffed but they're a bigger you know like uh Mau County we're albertly as they were down attorneys I mean they had a case backlog that was unbelievable because they couldn't staff they tried to hire and they couldn't hire anybody so yeah but I think they charge pretty reasonable the only thing they don't do in that contract is they don't do ordinance prosecution so that's if you read that contract it's cared out and that that has occasionally been an issue here but um you know that's just what it is I mean that's what they're willing to do so thanks mik other comments seeing none all in favor be saying I I poos approv Public Works your packet was a bid for the um that was open for the city Moore stff you would have gotten the DAT yesterday y so we received bid we had a minimum bid set at 6,500 and we received a bid for [Music] 7,637 so very good great I'll make a motion to approve it a second any other comments to add Kane no all in favor of accepting the bids bid signifi by saying I I I close approved sewer just a quick update one of our committee members Larry sto has retired from the water and sewer committee he's been on since 1965 and we appreciate his time part of that time he was on Council for a couple years as well but he brought a lot to the committee of history and we all appreciated that on the committee so we're very very appreciative of his efforts and his time so with that we have an open position in the committee and we'll be posting that here very shortly to us for a person to replace that position for so we have a seven member committee next item is a change order number five and Joe if you'd like to speak to that briefly yeah we did review the change order with watered sewer and actually we've been kind of talking about these items with Council over the last five six months probably um two items in the change order the first one uh deals with uh some waste activated um Sledge pumps uh these uh pumps were supplied as part of the spr um uh facility at the wastewater treatment facility at the startup we discovered that the pumps were undersized uh so talking with supplier uh it was determined that they needed to upgrade those pumps and so really what's happening with this item is they are um upgrading those uh four existing pumps um to a a pump that'll um function uh at all head conditions that the spr is exposed to and and meet the requirement there so uh the second item deals with the lab testing equipment um remember that uh peoples came in and asked if they could purchase uh a specific type of uh laboratory uh equipment testing equipment that would allow them to test for both night nitrogen and phosphorus within the raw water um the equipment that we ultimately did purchase because you guys authorized it um is they the the operator does have that and it allows them to test waste water kind of in real time rather than send it out to a lab and then wait a week to get it back so they can make incremental adjustments in the process very efficiently uh and so that was added to that um and in fact we had an allowance within the contract for lab equipment but that um purchase put us over the allowance we need to have a change order item to increase that allowance them out um to allow us to pay the contractor and so really what that that's what the change is four um so we have item a for the waste activated Sledge pumps uh that total cost is about $7,350 and then we had um the uh lab testing equipment um allowance addition and that cost was about 9518 so the total cost of the change order is$ 2,868 um that increases um this is the fifth change order for the project and will be the last change order um the total amount of the change order is about 226,000 um almost $227,000 it's summarized in the back uh but it increases the contract amount to 20 million um um $894,000 24 um this will allow us to essentially pay the contractor um for for those expenses as that that that work 20 million number uh the original contract uh amount is 20,666 th000 uh plus the 227,000 uh it's 20,8 8 $94,200 you didn't write it down it's all on the on the document questions on the on the chainer you get any money back from the other pumps like they were that were under s they do they actually self them they take them back so they are retaining the old pumps and supplying the upgraded pumps and so that's really what we're paying for yeah they they were very good about it in fact I was pleased that they were Fair I make any other comments Jo no questions for Joe with that I make a motion we approve change order number five 868 second all seconds any other comments see none all those in favor seei saying I I the next item is a uh a letter that was sent from people service for myself it's in your packet regarding um Consumer Price Index which in which affects our chemical cost I guess it is compensation for the contract be increased from 800 8,717 to 9,372 that's a monthly compensation and the base amount of chemicals be increased from 16 $70 to $1,632 so that's all written under the contract that we signed a year ago it was spring yeah n 10 months ago yeah do we have a total of what the chemicals were so far that we've used on that this past year uh peoples does report that on a monthly basis yeah I just see the increase I just had not seen that what what it is on a monthly basis I don't I don't have that in front of me Jim but I know they send it to the city every week every once a month so with that I make a motion we approve people's Services 202 live CPI new increase of Two and a half% that second it any other comments okay do just for the public we do get monthly reports to our water and sewer committee that's all part of our minutes all in favor sign saying I is that where those is that where those numbers are related to the this this monthly cost to the city for chemicals is that come to coming to the water and SE committee meeting is that where that's coming in at uh no bills are sent right invoice they sent to the City Hall gu call see yeah maybe that's see a St Tech Bill what do they look like I don't know I know exactly what you're talking about for their chemical usage yeah they they basically have an allowance for chemical usage and so as part of the contract if they you know exceed if their chemical usage exceeds their allowance then they basically have a true op function within the contract that they tell the city what the additional costs are and up at the end of the year but if they're not they're not sending a report because how much they actually used each month or are they I think their their report does talk about you know test results and the chemical usage and where they are and their maintenance budget and that type of thing well I've seen that off yes don't recall C either Kane I think probably has them too he can help you oh hey kan's thanks Kan thanks k um just an update our city staff is working on finalizing the assessments with the sewer system Improvement in the Riverbend estate subdivision with the county auditor's office so in process next item is Planning and Zoning like to update on WSB steering meeting uh yeah briefly we had another steering meeting that took place uh just before the Planning and Zoning meeting last week uh going through we were looking at different uh evaluations of lot sizes especially in the R1 area and just coming with comparisons that there are with other communities and so it was just an open discussion of of what we had um there's a lot more to be discussed to go from R1 to R2 B1 B2 and some other other special um codes that could be put in there uh so it's a work in progress but definitely working our way through and having a discussion it was U it was well attended which is great you know so next meeting is uh next month and it's going to be an hour before we have the Planning and Zoning meeting for the steering committee meeting and that's also on zoom zoom as well next item is our um public hearing number one regarding 4:15 Minnesota Avenue South regarding a variance take go ahead okay um yeah and and um it was interesting listening here to to Jeff um he should have been notified of the public hearing that there was for planning and zoning and uh uh he wasn't there for that that date that there was actually actually they were here and they left a little bit early oh they did okay here that night his white yeah after it was stated that a garage was going to up okay all right no I'm just because I was just wanted to make sure but anyway we turned around and we took a look at um um the conditions that there were for approval of the the are the locations I have that correct 415 Minnesota Avenue South um and it was for an accessory building that we had and originally the building was going to be larger and they had down siiz that to fit under what our our code called for so um the conditions for approval um and this was after they did a revised uh footage for that to be 1792 square foot garage uh the conditions for approval one is the existing 480 square foot garage on site will be removed within one year after the um issuance of a building permit for the new garage and we looked at that also to possibly extend that to when the completion of the new garage was there for them to remove the old garage and so the finding effect fact is Barbara Shane owns residential property at 450 Minnesota Avenue South in oroko zoned R1 the property is .966 acres in size the city of Boko zoning code standards allows the accessory building to Total 5% of the lot area for which the property at 415 Minnesota Avenue South yields 2,13 Square ft of allowable area without a variance orocos number three the oroco Z zoning code standards allows up to two accessory buildings per lot number four the structure on the property consisting of a house a detached garage and a garden shed the square footage of the existing accessory structures the garage the shed is 740 Square ft the applicant proposes to construct a new garage of 1,792 sare Ft resulting in 2,532 square fet while the three accessory buildings are still standing the applicant proposes to demolish the older garage after the new garage resulting in 252 square fit of accessory structures once the existing garage is removed number five is reasonable to allow for the third accessory building the existing garage to remain on site until the new garage is available to remove the contents from the existing garage and then allow the total square footage of the accessories built building to exceed the aian maximum during that period such Arrangement would be altered would alter the essential character of the area and limited to one time when the property would be in compliance against once the existing garage is removed number six there are practical difficulties emitting the code if the existing garage and its contents must be removed before the garage is available and number seven the request to keep the third accessory building on the property for that limited time period not to exceed the area of the maximum during that time meets the standards of approval for a variance in section 15141 of the oroco zoning code so that's what we had for um the approval of that and so we had a unanimous vote from Planning and Zoning for the approval of the variant make a motion will I make a motion to approve the variance I'll second in your discussions um with the location um I understand it has to be on the south side of the house because of the RightWay for the street that's on the north side of the property so that location was pick versus further back in the further back in the lot I guess [Music] or that's where it was presented to so does the uh where the existing existing structure is going to come down is that in the way for where it could be to yeah Jeff Jeff explained a little earlier that he was uh concerned about the setback so I just wonder if the garage where it's the existing garage that's there it's forcing forcing the the building to be back in a different location on the property where it couldn't where setbacks could be changed could it beage is yeah exactly so it's like their issue with that is they have their old garage full of things and they want to build it away from that so once that's done then they can move everything from the old garage and I know we we did allow that um actually next door where it was right next door their place I get that no I I mean that that's a good question um and and I can see the point too if that was located in the other location where the existing garage is it would not be a nuisance that way for noise or or other issues that there are which is something to to take into consideration um in which case I I could see that being a good point so again it was it wasn't presented that way because we were looking at keeping the existing garage um you know if if if we want to send it back again I think we have time uh to send it back to pnz and look at it that way for the the difference would be you know to have the other one removed and then move all the the the stuff out there place to put their cars or whatever in the meantime would would be the other the way to take a look at it um I'm just looking for the date on this can I make a comment well I would guess part of the reason that we were moving it to the other side was because of that street Act access that is slated on that north side of the of the property and to build there with the slope Edge and everything was too impossible what street access I'm not familiar with driveway oh new drive if you look at page 22 of 146 you'll see what the A's referring to this after the driveway is right now is in from the city right away from the lateral it's so they need new Drive saw the the new building behind the current garage it's very sloping and so much C prohibitive to do it there so it's probably the flattest place on the L on the lot itself so I think the driveway location I was just going to say I looked at the driveway I was asked to look at the driveway the driveway location as it exists is near the crest of the hill and there were some safety concerns cited by the resident the proposed location uh as father their sth uh and has better site characteristics know which I can see makes sense um anyway that was a pnz you know recommendation was was to approve that after we looked at everything that there was when we went through PNC so how far is this going to be off the L it's going be the setback is a 10 setbacks need setback it was from Phill had to say so you have any comments on on that one do uh as far as I know it meets the setbacks yeah yeses um yeah if it didn't we'd have to state that well I'm sure that Phil would have brought that up I'm saying I gotta think application doesn't ask for the variance from the setback so I can see how if you didn't have Phil that you would just look at this one request the lot the square footage request but I got to think Phil would look at that if it was right on the lot line he's going to say something right and there was a certificate survey completed and the pins are out there I myself there was nothing brought up that it didn't be you're right on that one and I think I thought we discussed that whole issue is the Aesthetics that it's going to create that um there was a description or picture for the the Clary building you get a chance to take a look at it too see that it's on page 2 the side 12 any other comments thing done let's all for the V voice report what's voice mayor hi councilman Phillips HIC Richards hi p no council all that's approved next item is our public hearing for 12:15 West Center Street plot postponed from October packet resolution 20 24-37 go ahead you can take okay this is for the lot split split at um excuse me 12:15 West Center Street and um this is for the estate of Randle Wells Barts and uh Kirk is asking for the split to be done in in two Parcels parcel one will be about 10.5 acres in size partial two will be 4.9 ACR in size uh oroco zoning code uh 151.2093 Frontage of 15 ft for each single family lot uh parel one of the proposed Lots would would have Street Frontage on First Street of 16.5 ft whereas the Planning and Zoning commission reviewed the request heard the testimony in a public Hearing in its meeting on October 10th 2024 whereas the oronoko city council reviewed the request in the meeting of November 19th 24 and um therefore it was resolved that the city council city of Oronoco approves the lot split at 12:15 West Center Street with the following conditions and finding of facts conditions for approval for the lot split the recorded survey for the lot split shall show and you have 20 ft here we had agreed again at planning and zoning it was 10 ft City drainage and utility easement on the east side of the property once received by the city the approval by the city engineer and the legal description shall be attached to the resolution as exhibit a I believe that's been done and submitted to the city and the survey shall be attached to this resolution as exhibit B the resolution shall be recorded with the omet County registered office if the resolution is not recorded within 6 months of the date of the approval the resolution shall be null and void and no further force or effect number two the LA split is only approved of a variance further the L brage for parcel one is also approved finding of facts number one Kirk B is handling the state for Randall Wells BS owner of the property at 1215 West Center Street or NOA Minnesota number two the applicant has requested a lot FL of the property divided into two Parcels a parcel one about 10.5 acres in size and partial 2 about 4.9 acres in size as described in the legal description exhibit a attached and depicted on the survey exhibit B attached number three the Oro zoning code section 15102 sets forth the procedure for the LA split number four the Oronoco zoning code uh section 151119 sets forth the minimum required Street Frontage of 50 ft for a single lot parcel one the proposed lot split would have a frontage road on First Street Northwest of 16.5 requiring a variance uh of the zoning code Provisions in section 151119 the proposed last split meets the standards section 15 1.02 for approval of the lot split and the lot uh Frontage variance for parcel one is approved so I I make a motion to approve this that discussion I've got a couple of concerns um this resolution um that you have in front of us that we were vot on does not have exhibit a or exhibit B and um if you look at our code 115 151.2093 for uh the Pine Island Sound Investments and in that resolution that we signed there was a legal description and there was a certificate of survey attached to that resolution when we and those were then recorded the next item was a slot split just recently in December of last year at 452nd Avenue Northwest that also had a legal description and a survey and that was attached we've also had another one earlier this year at 405 2nd Avenue Northeast the resolution had the survey certificate and a legal description and that was all approved at one at the one meeting and it was sent out to be reported and I just feel like this is It's setting a bad precedent by approving this resolution tonight with no certificates and no surveys yes we do have a contingent uh in it within six months but I just feel like that's really setting a bad precedent for future lot spits it was it was submitted yes I submitted it last Tuesday okay so our packet it shows the one is the 10 foot right East show 12 foot we agreed on 10 foot yeah we agreed on 10 foot iny we agreed with 10 foot that's what I had Jus scoffield include in his description so the resolution shows 20 so that needs to be corrected I said 10 which is what the planning and doning went with on 10 and it was 10 we kind agreed on 10 Fe at the last city council meeting too that that was as long as we I mean we talked about the 20 feet but we agreed that 10 feet would be sufficient and then I would include that in there so surveyed and if if the documents need to be corrected with that Ryland okay then what we can do I still think we have time on this to be able to put that in maybe next month's packet have everything with no no I we're kicking this around I guess I provided everything yeah the landowner provided it this is wrong I think we approve it with the change no and they're done because everything else is submitted as 10 foot is what you're saying yeah yeah it's been approved by The Zing it's been this is not the land owner fault the Planning and Zoning have the survey when they do that because he had already said it was sent in and so we didn't have it with us when we went through this but he had submitted it to the city so which was the request that we had well he had to submit it to the city or or Phil wouldn't have known them lot lines and stuff how how to split it how how would he know how to split that you didn't have that Jason that's correct I handed it to you on last Tuesday yeah you came in I and I know it wasn't 10 days but we going to try and get it to fill as soon as possible yeah and I know we got could be reviewed all that stuff brought into I got copy all the truck so the legal description I didn't see anywhere in our packet did I miss it I saw there's a certificate the certificate was I think part of pnz M but it wasn't it was clearly wasn't included with the resolution that's why kind of a peac meal approach here to this resolution I just think that's not a very thorough and complete resolution I guess what I'm saying it's just setting a bad precedent if it was submitted and he had it in here that's not setting a president because it was already done you know if it wasn't included that's what was out in the city but he had already submitted it to the city so is a resolution written incorrectly if everything submitted we don't need six months no so the certificate of survey is in the packet it's on page 36 the legal description is on page 37 certific the survey is dated November 12 so so it just should be attached to the resolution because you got to record the resolution this is what I brought up at the last meeting like you really should for future reference you ever get a lot split application that doesn't it doesn't include a survey and illegal you should reject it until applicant cannot move forward on until they provided at the time the application so we addressed this at the last month's council meeting and there wasn't a survey so the council continued it to today's meeting it looks like they do have a survey description I just don't know if it's you know it'd be nice if Phil would have reviewed it and then attached it to the resolution so that we know that they they match I guess what J was saying is that it's fine I mean if you're comfortable that that's accurate the accurate survey and the accurate legal description and you want to approve it you should just amend the resolution you know to make those attachments to the resolution because honestly like when it goes to the county I don't know how that works if it's not attached to the resolution they have to create a parcel ID for these Parcels I don't know if they can even do that you know unless there's something from the city I mean we did one once in good view where it was 130 year old parcel that never got a legal description they made a mistake and so they did it in that instance but I I guess from what I understand Jim read is if they don't record it within six months it was M inv vo that would be the right but if you have the resolution without if you try and record the resolu record the resol resolution without a legal description they're not going to record it you need a legal description to record it so it's always got to be attached to to the and I guess I don't I mean I don't have any problem if you're comfortable that that's the correct legal description you're comfortable that that's the correct survey then you know I just think you you should make a motion to attach it to the resolution or to redo the resolution to create the correct number of feed apparently there's a problem with that and then to attach those as exhibits make amendment to your motion yeah I'll make a friendly Amendment to the motion to to make a correction from 20 to 10 ft and also to attach the three pages that we have that were in our packet page 36 37 and 38 to go along with the the resolution make it complete there's problem with it he goes to the county and they won't record it then you're gonna have to redo it right I guess so it's on you that it's correct think it's correct I know it's correct yes I Johnson scoffield for both surveys the original survey with the perimeters and then he came back and the split survey and put a pin or marker down on that Center of First Street so that's all been done and recorded enter and he was going to submit that to the C so what may the legal description if we include the pages 36 37 38 that's just a survey but you're saying the legal description will take some more time that's what's going to be missing when it goes to the county no has to be put in there what they're saying is this is that you have it it's just not referenced as like exhibit a and exhibit B to the resolution didn't Pat it we just make need it's like a scrier error is what they're saying I think so I think that's as long as you're comfortable that this is correct well a lot of a lot of the wording for the description on page 37 in there right it's all there the just the reference isn't yeah it's not Incorporated by reference in because that's what they need I mean they need to know what the council approved and then what land they approved it for you know where is the so we just need that agendum to resolution you seconded yeah yeah second so let's uh could you just restate the motion uh the the new motion or Revis motion that I had off of that was to turn around and and U make a motion for approval changing the description from 20 ft to 10 ft that we have in writing and to attach Pages 36 37 and 38 in our Council packet to be attached to what goes to the county for approval so is there an actual resolution or is it just a staff report it's 2024 d37 package you got today what page of the packet is that a there was an addition to it I see that's why I I'm like I'm confused all right it's fine as long as there's a res like a document titled resolution somewhere what pages did you say for it's going to be 36 37 and 38 any other comments for the clarification saying none Mr be Voice vote M course hi Council Phil hi counc Richards hi councel PPH hi counc 202 24- 46 this is for the variance 1215 West Center Street regarding the 50 Foot and this will go back okay this would be resolution 2024 46 um you want me to read the whole but again I can but um it's basically looking at the resolution part of it it's the city council city of oroka Minnesota approves a variance for lot Frontage requirement per carcel one of the lot split at 1215 West C Street with the findings effect number one the Randle warts estate owns a property at 2015 West Center Street in oronoko in R1 zoning District number two the applicant Kurt Bart's requests have a lot splits grade two lots with 16.5 ft of Frontage on First Street Northwest number three The oroco Zing code in section 151119 requires 50 ft of lot Frontage for each single family Lot number four the applicant has applied for a variance of the above lot Frontage requirement to allow for the two lots in the split lot each having 16.5 ft of Frontage on first Street Northwest number five the unique conditions of the property that justify allowing access with limited Frontage on First Street Northwest the property is large for residential lot and more or less regular in shape a unique feature is that the the stub of the First Street Northwest is only 33 ft wide not enough to give a new lot the required 50t Frontage let alone to Lots the partiel is narrower East and West than it is tall north to south suggesting that the lot split makes more sense to have the proposed at the First Street Northwest versus splitting at the Center Street Frontage number six the narrow row of First Street Northwest abing to the east edge of the property is a unique feature that the landowner did not create number seven uh splitting the property as proposed at First Street Northwest makes it makes more sense than dividing the Center Street Frontage into two narrower tall Lots number eight the proposed lot split and variance would not be detrimental to the public Ware welfare or other properties and would not alter the character of the area number eight the request is in harmony with the general purpose and attend of the zoning code but not the specific lot Frontage standard at number 10 there is no specific reference to the lot Frontage in the comp plan and number 11 the variance request meets the conditions for approving a variance in section 15141 of the Oronoco zoning code so I make a motion to approve uh resolution number 2024 46 and I think we should probably attach those pages 36 37 and 38 along with this as well second any comments regarding that is motion I think this was a nice change from the October meeting about the colos ACT being mentioned in Phil's report what can possibly be done in the future any other comments seeing none let's do the Voice vote May course I Phillips hi councelor Richards hi councelor penr Hi councelor D hi next item is fire department anybody here from Dan or thanks Dan um yeah once you Mo on forward you can kind of explain the updates there's a memo page 47 of 146 that Dan had submitted com talking about the different items here on our agenda just to summarize it quick yeah if you want to and um now the U the update on the three quotes I guess is that are you expecting action tonight or just the updates oh let's discuss Abol just yeah a quick overview so mayor councel administrator so we uh tried to get that ster County grant that would give us a new compressor and new packs uh we were going with multi- agencies we did not get it so that was our hope that we could get all that equipment replaced what we did not appreciate is over the last few months uh the compressor that we have which is the compressor fills air bottles which we use to Fe fill the bottles that we wear that died we had been repairing it and maintaining it uh I got both the packs and the and the compressor that we had back in the old 809 time frame with a grand so that's how we got those the first case but compressor has died now and so the little letter was saying you know that's probably the most critical right now is we have a compressor that can't fill our bottles last night we were training at the regional train Center and we had to go to Rochester Fire to fill all these air bottles so that we're prepared if we had a call so the first little part was we would like to we got quotes to buy a whole system which we don't need we just need the compressor we got a quote for a refurbished for like 14,000 and then we got a quote for a brand new compressor which was 17 plus installations probably around 20,000 so that we would like to pursue getting uh that replaced we had 23 $24,000 as kind of earmarked for this grant that we did not get so we'd like to use that money to pay for this compressor which is kind of a kind of an urgent need so that's kind of the first first ask or you know request for consideration then the second thing was our packs we the bottles have a 15-year life we knew we'd have to get new bottles even if we didn't get the grant we thought we could keep our packs but just replace the bottles we have S since found out that the company that we bought our packs from a company called spean got bought by Honeywell Honeywell is now decided that they no longer want to be in this business so they're no longer going to maintain this n certification so it kind of puts us in a pickle that I got a pack that won't have current n certifications and so for me it's kind of more of a a problem of if I had a firefighter use a pack the pack had an issue somebody got hurt could somebody go after us say Hey you normally are using a pack that has an expired invalid you know nias certification so again I was not expecting that at all that was very frustrating so we're kind of now in a point where we got a huge expense now to replace packs and bottles and so we got some quotes uh that the the resolution that you have next for this joint Powers it's kind of like we did with our truck if you remember back Ryland we got we joined this buying Consortium so we get pre-bid pricing so that the Scott packs that we get that I I showed you the quote I think we had quot was were 25 but you can do the math for uh whatever we're going to have it's pre-bid quote so that would be what it is but since this was not a budget expense it's not a planned expense you know between the charitable gambling that we do between the city budget we just weren't ready for this big expense so we need to figure out how can we do this we we got some uh rental packs that we're going to put in service shortly that will get us by for a little bit but we need to have a plan so I'd say the compressor is probably the first thing we'd like to get that figured out how to pay for that get out that on order so we can get that because that's really you know it's it's hard for us to use air bottles and then have to go to Rocher every time to fill them and packs how much time is left on the bottles they're done I mentioned we got the Grant and the 0809 time frame 15 years later which is this year so that's why we were really hoping to get that that Grant with with the rest of the other counties so that we could you know get new bottles we also we're hopeful to get packs that are standardized between the county uh we have this honey well other people have Scott so we were going to have the benefit of also having the same pack but I was planning if I didn't get the Grant I would keep my packs and just buy new bottles but now I don't have that as an option so um on the second page you list 2024 2025 and and yeah so that was just Association that was just a proposal a suggestion uh let's work together of how do I pay for over $100,000 with equipment without having over $100,000 so this was just an idea you know you guys are smart maybe you have some other idea where we can get funds you know we have our gambling funds but we don't nobody has enough to buy it all at once and we really would like to get the packs purchased at a similar time frame so that you know they are of the same you know generation they're the the same functionality and so we're kind of in the grant we were hoping to get we wanted to get 20 is we have 24 people on the department but we're going to we think 15 is kind of bare minimum 13 is what we need to outfit our two trucks 13 15 is really close so we said let's go for 15 so I I like your idea what you proposed but I think I'll throw up for discussion because that's what we're talking about here so well what happen if you took um the relief Association gambling funds and bought the first five packs 10 bottles and five masks because I don't believe you have 44,000 in today in this year's budget 2024 to do any purchasing I'm guessing because you're using part of it to pay for the compressor 22,000 so there's that takes that out so if you were to if you were to request a relief Association to pay for the first first five packs 10 bottles and five masks and then and in the 2025 budget I don't probably that 40 44 42,000 is probably not in the 2025 budget either no no like I said this is unplanned expense so is it a budget expense could it be a cfp pass do we go out and get a a lease or a bond you know for it again this was just one idea there might other ways to purchase this you know larger expense thing I have some questions so why do we need to do a joint Cooperative purchasing so that's what the vendor gave us so that we get we get pre-bid pricing for the PX so everybody in the state gets the same it's not required here right because the the value of the contract is not $175,000 it's only about 100,000 9 90 something right so we wouldn't have to do that gave us that letter for the for the joint powers and then and then the second question I have is um where is the agreement so the resolution you prepared references an agreement this agreement is to make available ises there an agreement attached 52 of 146 is the 52 that's the resolution that's the resol resolution the agreement that the resolutions okay we can ask that's all IED what I was given yeah I'm I'm I looked at this beforehand I figured there was something to it or would be supplemented but you know I don't think we should approve a resolution attached agreement without the agreement where is the agreement so it's a it's not in here so the intent of this agreement is made to purchase by far self-containing breathing apparatus um which Cooperative purchasing Alliance are you using is it one of the main ones the Jake jpu that's jpu okay what's that one you know what that stands for I dealt with the number of them over the years but I okay we can go back I just I forwarded what I had received with the vendor saying Hey give this to city council to join this Cooperative to get pre bid pricing so I'll ask a budet agree yeah jpa just stands for joint purchasing Alliance that's the statutory or joint Powers agreement I mean that's in the statute but typically there's a couple of like if you're G to buy a fire truck for example there's a couple of companies in United States that do that and that's that's the one where it makes a lot of sense to me because you're buying used right you're buying like a used firet Tru and then they can do a nationwide search for you and get you the best price this I'm not I mean I I'm not saying not to do it I'm just bringing up the fact that this kind of seems like stuff you could just go buy right I mean aren't we paying this but purchasing Alliance don't they get a fee and you know when you're buying a million-- dollar fire truck you want to get the best price on the fire truck right if you're buying $96,000 worth of small equipment you know have you have you looked into just buying it on the market Ian this is the local vendor that sells Scott Air packs and so I'm sorry if I I don't know how to answer your question well I guess he said here we you need this to get the best pricing for what he's selling I maybe I didn't know what I I should ask who is like where clary's SA fire safety clary's safety equipment here in Rochester that's on page 50 50 yeah 49 and 50 bids so they are the they are the Scott brand uh distributor okay so they've already given you the quote yes and I sent it as kind of an example of if I buy 10 or I buy 20 it's the same price we had asked if we get a discount if we went in with other departments and they're like I see so you already know the price of this yes gotcha okay yeah I still I mean you don't have to do unless they require you to sign this joint purchasing agement okay I can ask that because because I mean it wouldn't the statute wouldn't require it here I don't okay I thought it benefited us to join well it might it might I guess that's a question I would ask them is like what what are their fees and what you know why can't if it's under the statutory threshold for competitive bidding why can't we just go negotiate and buy this stuff at this price maybe we can maybe we can't I don't know local fire departments are using we're not doing this on our own no I'm not saying signed it yeah P Island signed it Byron signed it cast signed it and I'm not saying not to do it I'm just saying why do you need to sign an agree I mean good question I I'm glad to asked yeah is it need they they need an agreement because the statute doesn't require an agreement if they have you can only get this price if you sign the agreement and that's what they say then I understand that that makes sense okay um yeah but yeah otherwise it's fine I mean but there's no agreement here so what kind of lead time are there with these new bottles order me we time for the packs 10 weeks 10 weeks how many 10 10 weeks 10 weeks so right now you won't have anything for one January that's correct that's why we have as I mentioned some rental bottles in what are the rental bottles cost in you 50 bucks month or one time right five $50 per pack one time so it's that's a reasonable cost and we're going to transition this shortly while we figured this would take some time well you still need the compressor first because you can't fill those botles there're two separate things right so that's that's got to go to be able to get that Tak care of so I I need a comp I need replace the failed compressor so I can fill the bottles and then of course I need packs and bottles to wear so there are two things but unfortunately they kind of came together at the same time do we know the lead time on the compressor that was also weaks for the compressor the compressor would be three months three months and there's no fixing no yeah so we've been maintaining it we've been you know repairing it as needed and now safety which is a different company has said it's brok do not put any more money into it and that you know that's when we got the quotes we thought 14 for refurbished 15 for a brand new compressor plus installation allows us to use the bottles that we have we have three 6,000 PSI bottles and we have a fill station we can reuse all of that so one of the quotes I think you saw was for 50 60,000 I mean that was for a whole fill station which we don't need we just need the compressor yeah and breathing the air if you have a bad compressor that goes along with it being a scuba diver is not friendly so you don't want to bring that I know not even just bad right now we have no error so it might be that that that quote is all you get the resolution is the agreement that could be it I don't know but you don't need this approved tonight do you or do you need it approved tonight no I I I think we're at that this month and next month I mean again sooner you know better than later but I I will ask the uh PR uh safety for clarification what does what does it take to order it does it have have they have to have payment up front or how does that work for no payment up front no payment no payment up front you disorder it then payment upon delivery then yes did you go back to the numbers that you mentioned is are you the two engines how many ta one engine so for us to have guess yes for for NFPA seated positions on the vehicles for our engine one and engine two that we have it'd be 13 would be the minimum and so we just we have 15 today we said let's shoot for 15 because it gives us a couple extra packs that people could have for training so they're asking for 13 which seems like an odd number we said 15 13 packs 13 packs two bottles a pack it's kind of the minimum so you looking at 26 bottles 13 packs y so there is something by spreading out between 2024 and 2025 Le there is you can stagger that 13 is that what I'm hearing so that you could use just say seven initially or whatever that number is something less than 13 because you're asking for 15 over a twoyear period maybe that's that's total I think what they they want a total of 15 we were trying to have one purchase that potentially span maybe since right here at the end of the year a couple budget Cycles so that we can make one order have it come in next year and then make a payment with funds and that was just such a suggestion on how to pay for this pay part now and then we don't pay anything until we get but you just dedicated to be paid for next year when it come in from the the 2024 funds and you're right you know what we have left in 2024 right but is you know there other sources of funding should we pursue a different way to purchase them but right now your only source of funding is really through the relief Association we had no planned budget so yes yes so right now it's f equipment fund that we've been holding right you know is luckily we have some money there but we were not prepared for this larged expense so right I will not bridging that with the budgets of I'm not sure what 2025 budgets like but I doubt we did have an extra 42,000 because it wasn't planned so we don't so it's a double whammy of what we don't have but I think they're also trying to contribute whatever they can also as a relief which is trying to help you with the burden that there is so trying not to to hit the city with everything but but uh try to participate in the expense as well it's well it's nice they wrote the Grant in 2009 and put this over a barrel and they all come do it this same time right like I said we knew about the bottles I was not prepared for the packs of course and also not prepared for the cror to you know decide I think I remember you mentioned before that the bottles were coming do so yeah you have to hydr test them every five years and then you get 15 and the our thinking is the manufacturers just want to sell more bottles so that's why there's this 15E life we don't think they would you could probably Hydro test them forever and theyd still be good but again back to the legality I don't want to be running the pack that technically people tell me I should not be use can you stagger the amount that you buy at a time so that they all don't go out at the same time Ian well you're you're right now in a situation where they're all gone okay so you got to do it bought them at the same time I I think that looking down the road in the future you know because there are different expenditures like this it might be a good idea to kind of have a fireman CIP fund that that is kind of just isolated for what the fire department has to be able to plan in advance to this stuff I think we got caught with a lot of things we were kicking the can and the can finally hit the bottom and and that was with the truck and also with this that you know these things just happen but that's a way to plan in advance to set something like that up so that we've got it looking ahead for what needs to be replaced well that it wouldn't that it wouldn't it also would wouldn't hurt it halfway through this 15year cycle is to order a set then right that's where you into the planning with your budget where it's going to be something that's an automatic update included in your budget you don't need a separate CIP necessarily no but I'm just trying to yeah figure out how to do that but it's just a way to kind of isolate it to make sure that it could be done that way how much is the Fire Relief talked about putting forward to help cover the cost it was 42,000 we could probably you know up a little bit we're going to meet tomorrow night and see how much we exactly 42 with that one it doesn't we have to figure out what we're going to do with the compressor yeah they're separate yeah because that's 17 or whatever 20 let's say because you have to install it right so everybody right yo yes it was like 17 for the compressor plus let's say three to install it we about 20 so so potentially the if we real ocate re the journal entry for the air packs for this year into a compressor um that would cover that cost and then for this year's packs that are listed here 2024 around 44,000 the Fire Relief would cover the cost of those yes 4 you going do more you have down here is 42 but you want to do 44 I'm just looking at their estimate for cost for this year fire Rel would make up that we're in that yeah that ball part yep cuz I have concerns with the budget so you know from from our end where we're at you know we have money remaining if you will budgets are tricky and and but all that money is assigned to certain line items you can't just say oh we're going to you know we've got this pool of money we're going to take from here and here and here no when we do taxes the citizens expect that that money is going to be allocated for those expenses so changing those expenses is a big deal um and then you get into the fact that the fire department has used the Year from our 425 account $154,000 for various uh vehicle maintenance upgrades and things like that um that's also a concern especially when I know speaking with our finance adviser that that was not supposed to be touched because of the water sewer project so we need to talk about the budget and where that's all coming from especially going into 2025 so we need to make sure we sit down and do that thanks for the update and um it's unfortunate the grant money didn't come through and U but we have the challenge ahead of us and if you want to follow up on the agreement and um maybe come back at the December meeting do you want to wait till December to talk about you know using that money budget of money for the compressor and you know separate discussion for that well I think we need to have our our budget workshops see where we're at for 2025 I don't think we can really comment on that tonight but sit down before that to work on that so we can come to the Council need to be prepared with how that's laid out and what it's going to look like and where that money will come from okay um so we'll hold off on the uh agreement or do we until we get an agreement to go with the resolution we just ask them if they have if they have an agreement if they don't they just need the resolution and the quote they have a quote you there what I would call a quote that's all we get I mean I think in the past when we did the fire truck we had an agreement certain of it because I reviewed it it so and this isn't a huge amount of money but you know yeah I will talk there is there is that I mean I think if we're approving I think the resolution it didn't really specifically attach the agreement but it referenced the agreement um is and that's their standard resolution that all these cities are using I'm sure right but you do have the money in the fun in the Fire Relief Fund for the compressor is that you're saying we have some money in our in our equipment F at the relief to pay for something so will it cover the compressor I mean it would cover the compressor but then wouldn't cover the packs and so we were hoping that this line item that was going to cover a compressor and packs could be repurposed for the compressor and then we could throw all of our money then toward pack I guess I'm more concerned about get getting it getting it on order and not waiting another month and you know now we're four months out before you get even get a compressor I guess I'd like to see at least get the compressor on [Music] order that's kind of my thought I'd like I'd like to see I'd like to see the compressor get ordered I would too to approve that funiture um for the compressor and do that out of their budget and then we can figure out the remainder cost between the Fire Relief and the city with the SCBA that was budgeted for in 2024 so maybe asking that if you if you kind of bifurcate the two things do you still get the same price if you order them in two separate does that make sense if you order the compressor you know so the the from my understanding this the resolution was just for the packs right compressor the compressor is the compressor price they already are separate and you're not going through a GPA for that gotta that's just the compressor part I understand so I need to do I need to make a motion that they in order that or how is that do we have to do if I'm paying for it I'll I'll bring it up tomorrow my meeting that's did you repeat will be different meeting fire Rel because they're own separate entity they make their own they've got their own finances and budget so they can make their own decisions on what they want to spend with that so as far as the resolution goes for the um agreement should we wait for that or approve it pending a copy of the agreement wait wait sir that's my recommendation I think all right we'll do that have that um another item on the uh our department was an update of the monthly minutes and the consent agenda that's last month's minutes yeah it's last month minutes payroll is that the yeah and first responder payroll that's something you approve going make a motion we approve the annual payroll for the part perment second so it was any other comments here um I we have a question about payroll stuff so we're trying to figure out and we can't U maybe you can help us find this when it was discussed because this is pre my time here about the rate for the fire and First Responders um when that was discussed and where that was talked about because right now we have a city ordinance that spells out what the rate is and so unless that city ordinance is changed that is what the reate is um so we want to make sure we got that right but I we can't find anything that talks about a new breed um but Rene did say that she remembered something coming up we discussed it last but yeah we discussed it last year when we were going through because was there an ordinance change I don't know if they officially did an ordinance change as we were going through different things but they went out and got competitive bids that there were from other communities that there were around looking at at what those rates should be and that's when we had agreed aund at that time and I can look back through but it was brought up and it was discussed so yeah in the last year we had at least six meetings where we were talking about changes to our budget one of them being the amount per C going from 10 to 15 and then the salaries of people and when we we said this would be near reflected the city code they said it would be reflective in code because you guys were updating the code you're right we've been also waiting to have it updated because it still says 10 it still has the old pay but the new pay took effect in January yeah that that was that was agreed on so okay Mike legal I mean where does this fall understand so they've got in city code they've got it laid out as to what the pay is for First Responders and fire department um and there was a discussion had to increase the pay rate for this year but nothing was ever the ordinance wasn't amended so I don't know how that works out I'm not sure I'm not sure do that um I'm not sure if it's normal to actually set the pay in ordinance or if it should just be repealed then you should set the pay and this is for on Call fire staff right first respond which I'm kind of in the same mindset I've never seen it like that before but I do know what's in there that's why never resarch the issue so I guess I clarification I mean because we had voted on it last year when the C and everything that was done so it was all done so it's got to be in the minutes of of the council that there was at that time because that was all all approved yeah I mean I said suppose if you pay people more than what's in the ordinance you just do that yeah and that's fine I just want to make sure that we're okay with that so well I think you should change the ordinance right I mean well yeah one way or another whatever it says I don't think you should violate the ordinance but without looking at it that's all I can say so if it has to be done tonight I mean I I don't know what to say well we got we got to get it out so I just want to make sure that you know we're fine paying them the the rate that was agreed upon so systematic if if you can find that we can't go back to yeah you got it written somewhere we can't find it anywhere and that's PR my time so I would appreciate that just shoot you Rene myself an email with that rate that way we can get the correct payment for you guys well the fire department probably has that on hand too don't they well I mean copy of that so what we have is what you know the budget that was approved in December had our increase of our salaries would broke down we're going from 10 to 15 and these officers now are at this pay so yeah that that's easy documentation to prove be easy doc it sounds like what happened is it was never updated or reflected anywhere else told is because you guys were going through your city code you were going to update it and that's when it would get updated well there was also a time where we had different administrators that were in there at that time and there was a point where we were minus an administrator so some of those things could have just fallen through the the cracks we got in there and did did the other because she came in I think in December surely came in was like the first part of December but it was after the budget had already been agreed on and approved well we the final budget but everything else have been approved on by Sunny because we were doing that in June and July left October so that was already done except yeah yeah I think surley came on mid December maybe yeah so that could to be the reason why Jason off that stuff but what happened so well we'll look back at that part two and then if you do find it ten I just want to double verify make sure we got the right stuff so we're making the right payments out I tried to that was a spreadsheet I updated with all the new values so it should be pretty intuitive for you to see was that something you made or was that something this something I made no the the the the pay amounts for your guys was that started with sunny done okay I just trying to understand yeah yeah yeah this is just my way of yeah pulling it up oh we should go approve what's in agenda this year yeah our motion then need to make motion done I'll make a motion to approve that it's already been done made a motion you second vote any other comments with the part pay being none all those in favor signify by saying I I oppose approve First Responders do that next the monthly minutes are in the packet and um same thing yeah yeah they will increase the total from 15,000 to 21, 560 so quite a jump in training cost so again with the increase in our you know per run calls and our increase in calls itself more members and the increase in the salaries you know we did our best to guess so we went I think we went from seven or eight to 15 but obviously we didn't enough that also brings up a question on on this for the First Responders um are we going to get an increase out of uh the township on that and get something firm on that one Jason um we're still working on it so they went in and they're going to be starting their budget stuff um what they do theirs in April so you have a proposal of what you were asking for for them uh yeah we've worked on one and it's been sent to them is that going to make it so it's cost effective for us yeah I think it was what 24,000 we it was roughly it was the the cost of coverage from what we had set down and looked at the numbers of what we were spending for it so it was a break even cost it wasn't like a overcharge or anything like that it was just to try to break even with I mean that's pick up from where we were at before I think we were what at 5,000 at8 8,000 years with no change yeah then we got I like 14 out of them this year which was nice but it's based on them being 80% of our calls we need to be more so with the First Responders I make a motion we approve their annual payroll second comments all those in favor signify by saying I I [Music] thank next item is our Eda contract for 2025 I make a motion to approve the contract for25 $3,137 back it you I'm just um looking looking at this and and what's going on I you know it would be my suggestion on this um to take a closer look at at at the Eda or cup um I know that they've did a good job on on doing the the report that that there was on the survey for the city I really appreciate that I you did a great job um I'm just looking at at what we're really getting out of it and um what's going on also with with budget items and that's looking at things I would kind of like to to put this off until the December table is till December um for what particular reason I just want to go through the budgets and just see what we have and see what's going on I think that that just makes sense for where we're at we're kind of putting everything else kind of with the fire department too to go back through but um I think think that we should hold off of this until the December meeting and I do question you what what has been the return on our investment over the past year with the Eda I know we had a survey which was but beyond that you know what have we gotten Ed that's a good question I thought some Ed minutes there are some things going on that vda is is working one is but um we've um Rebecca applied for a grant for our um a branding program from um southeast Minnesota I think it was initi ship it's a $10,000 grant that we've gone ahead and gone to look at branding of or noal which is something we think we all need U we in a position that we throwing so I think that's a that's a a good first step um we've also applied for a $225,000 grant to help with some Paving some paths uh unfortunately that we did not get that Grant uh they are working with age friendly um age friendly is um they've written a grant for $80,000 that will help with uh Park assessments uh also there's a housing study involved with that proposal and also there's a housing study and also which includes some senior housing these are all studies that we're looking at bringing to the council for review so there is there is a lot of of activity that Eda is proposed and doing and I think that's yes we're just starting out we're in our first year but at the same time we've established our bylaws we've um established an action plan our action plan is um shared with age friendly addressing Park amenities buildings um setting up um social groups working with our seniors group and expanding that there's I was surprised I didn't see the Eda minutes in the packet I we didn't get she didn't she didn't provide this we didn't get in time okay so there's there is a lot of activity and if you want to put it off to December we can have Rebecca come to us and she can share about an update for the council uh Paul is on the Eda committee do you have any other comments Dad no not really just you've seen what's what we've been doing so I think CA brings a a good service to us uh we're also proposing uh AA is also e is also involved with um loans for new businesses and so in our budget we've talked about this at our Workshop of having a a starter fund of $115,000 um if we can contribute $15,000 every year into that uh revolving fund that will help as a transition loan for new businesses that would come into oronoko um it's not a it's a transition loan um mainly the fact is that they can take that when a business comes in and they want to go out and talk to their banks for future money this is an indicator that the city is interested in having them develop in orovo and that's why they call them a transition kind of transition him into bigger financing so that's what Ed brings Eda brings to us and there's that 15,000 is that part of this 32 r no it's separate it's all part of our Ed development budget plan that we have so but those are all things that you know Eda is something that every city around us has had probably for 30 40 years we didn't have an Eda before because we didn't have a sewer program sewer project so we have that now we have developers coming they're here there's more coming and that's what an Eda can offer those businesses as we develop and I think they offer a very great service for the city of boroo and to uh cut the legs off from underneath and would be a very disservice to Ceda and also to the city and the taxpayers the tax are going to grow from this benefit of Eda and what they can provide to the city with business opportunities whether it's small or big um they also monitor deed grants deed grants um offer a lot of infrastructure grants um so that's something that we could look forward going forward working maybe with some developers in the future is to uh obtain one of these infrastructure grants some of those are matching some are not matching but there are hundreds of thousands of dollars that e that can provide that guide to get those spunds so they do provide a very willing service and U and by having a CA contract that is what enables that it's a it's a modest investment for the city of oronoko um we talked about the hourly rate they are here every eight hours um on Thursdays um is the plan she works remote from home as well but she is here present and people can come and talk to her age friendlies come and talk to her anybody can come he's always here on Thursday morning Thursday afternoons and Thursday mornings so um it is a high rate but at the same time we're paying for her benefits and her salary too so that's what goes into any Professional Organization that we purchase services from so so I'd really like to see us continueing the way we're going with the approval of this um CA Grant contract I think it's very worthwhile we've had it for several years and um I think it's just it's it's the backbone of our Eda and I think it's very important so well we kind of go off that with that we're we're not paying for her salary her salary way more than $32,000 we're paying for the the knowledge and the the backing of Ceda the you know the ability to just like we do with any contractors to use their their full establishment to look for Grants to bounce ideas off each other you know she puts in more than eight hours a week she's someone that we can reach out to a staff and and reference for things and asked for things and uh no additional cost us so she is a a tool and an asset to the staff as well um so like I said it's it's a small cost to pay to to have this and like you spoke about with the Eda getting up and going I feel there's a lot that's been done in the short time that they've been around and will only continue to benefit the community what are the two yes she's here on Thursdays and she covers um I think three or four other cities but at the same time she draws from all the seat organizations throughout Minnesota Iowa Illinois and Wisconsin so they can bounce ideas off all the other associates they work in the other towns so there's probably 50 60 other cities that that pool of information that she draws from so that's another advantage that we have too it's just not her doing it by itself but she's working with her or her whole organization so and she brings that to the city so does she have a list of everything thing that she's got in the pipeline for Oren o yes we have an action plan that's available it's U it's out on the warle Eda website and it identifies the different all the different things that we want to do over the next several years and we have an action plan for 2025 and 2026 unfortunately I didn't been bring it with me but there is an action plan we've spent time over the last year um with all the representatives that are on that committee so so very well thought out very projected or project oriented and results oriented and I think you're going to benefit from that too it's just that this is the first first u 11 months I look so we're g to start seeing some results we're going to see more results this branding program uh that branding program will um in the Newser that's coming out here very shortly she's be asking for Community input people that want to be involved with that branding program and uh so we're there's more City involvement we did have our meeting last or Community engagement meeting last February face to face the fire hall and we've talked about having a a follow-up face to-face meeting with that sharing those results we've done an engagement survey it's a multipacket page we've shared that with pnz for the WSB uh additional input into the planning program so they have been a value service and I just real like that's just be very shortsighted of the city to consider not approving their contract like I said I would like to T this till next month I'd like to make a motion that we put this up till next month no you're saying budget planning yeah one question I would have Ryland are there deadlines on some of these things some of these plans like the brand a second oh I'm sorry I'll so are there deadlines on on The Branding project and and uh you know the age well the age friendly Grant that's already written yeah submitted November the 8th she did it within 10 days of being requested to do it okay bylaws they came with her uh she developed those committee input yeah I I have no problem El let it i' g to ask Rebecca to join us for that meeting and she can share more in depth and I'll share that with her on Thursday any other comments we'll move the seat of contract I don't think there's a time frame long to happen by the first of the year we can share that with their president it's been delayed any other comments none all those in favor signify saying I I oppose I talk about that in December December meeting um works and trails the next item um in your packet is um resolution 202 24-38 make a motion to accept that it's second the only way we're going to get that fence put on right you second I seconded it's the only way we're going to get that fence put along Highway 52 they're not going to put it in until we purchase Kane and I did meet with them and they showed us they St where they're going to put the AR RightWay fence and it's going to work very well with the path under the bridges and plenty of space there and they all the right away and then at buol rivers from um they'll go up to the bridge of Bret so it should be finest to have it done next year would be great I thought I thought the I thought the plan was to have it done by [Music] 2028 now they've came back and said you you purchased the land by November 29th they they're going to do with the maintenance program and now they're going to do it with the contractor they come in next year and do that so that's a great start so any other comments no a Voice vote right course I councelor Phillips hi councelor pentag hi councelor Richards hi councelor dck hi that's approved Let's see we have a motion I make a motion we approve Jeff Manus as the new parks and trails committee second that se at the last parks and trails meeting and uh she's pretty excited about joining the committee so we appreciate that there's no other comments all those in favor saying I oh same sign approv he um there other couple items that Jason if you want to respond to yep so I got the monthly memo that was put in there big thing on that we talked about um the change of the DAT for the budget Workshop to December excuse me December uh councilor Richard said some other things come up so working with everybody we putting those forward um looks like the fourth is probably not going to work because there is a another meeting ANM lmm L yeah uh meeting so we're looking at the third and the 5ifth for the budget dates so still sticking with that first week of December those are going to be the two dates the 3rd and the 5th any final issues with those dates those work all right um memo in there about the holiday um next one is the update with the Cannabis um ordinance resolution so again last meeting we talked about the Cannabis and the um basically looking at the county is um delegating them to uh be responsible and have the authority for the administrative powers and and reg registration Authority for cannabis within the city of oronoko again that's the Olstead County um so we've got that but we've also got in here I wrote up an ordinance for cannabis we don't really have that defined in our chapters I know it was talked about having something in there but nothing was officially added online that I could find um we did find an old resolution that just had a definitions so what you'll see here is with this um ordinance change basically went through and at the top you'll see an ordinance creating sections 143 .3 through 43.7 and then amending um chapter 1 34.1 and 0.2 um basically it's updating the definitions that we currently have to Encompass more items um this was something that was is used across kind of Olstead County this was provided by Rochester um and is kind of the the template if you will that a lot of cities are using to help create their new ordinance um this is just a a draft of this this is for everybody to kind of review and look at if there's things you want to mandate change think need to be in there one question uh I know this went to Planning and Zoning a year ago or 13 months ago and I'm just kind of curious if have they come up with a place where this could actually be in oral know what we did is just put everything on hold for till you know actually it was January 25 which was a recommendation that we had at that time you didor yeah and it was just because nothing had really been developed yet by the state at that time and so we were waiting for them to come up with with something more that was specific off of that so and this doesn't discuss the locations this just talks about the usage in town and the amount of like businesses and I understand I understand that part I just wonder if it' been on Planning and Zoning agenda as to to where we were kind of waiting for everything to can take place I think it's important I mean I think that's a good that's the main point here is that you know there was a moratorium until the state the office of cannabis management created their model ordinance and then so all the cities in Minnesota waiting for this great model ordinance and then I think Jason's ordinance here is based off the model ordinance but cities can then pass specific regulations for example zoning regulations like you know you you might limit currently in your code you probably limit what types of businesses can be in the R2 Zone it's probably something if it's like most R zones in Minnesota it's probably like churches schools um gas station and stuff like that and so you could amend those I mean that's not what Jason's done here and that's not the licensing piece of this that's the licensing piece is just so the county can issue licenses to cannabis retailers you can adopt in your code zoning regulations and you I would recommend you consider doing it and I I mean I'm not guarantee I mean I think you can Brantly restrict the location of those businesses I you know most cities are at least considering that and many cities waited and are now asking us to do it because January 1st is coming up so what I would suggest is you put it on the um we have a lawyer at our firm that's kind of doing these for all the cities because he's just very familiar with it at this point and that we represent so he's doing them for a number of my cities right now so if you want to take a look at that I I would recommend that but that's not before the council tonight what we could do too and that was is maybe put a and extend the moratorium until got a chance to go through everything legally you can't extend them the moratorium was capped at January 1st in the stat we could do another if we wanted to or needed to do that but you know I looked at this and everything kind of makes sense on what you put in this thing Jason I think you did a good job you know and and the main thing I was looking at is is the penalties which is the the 134.0 7 you know and basically it's restricting everything out of the the public but that there is and of course a penalty on that would be $300 but it's our community service but it it's it's keeping everything private not the public yeah which is the main thing that's what most cities did they eliminated in public parks and that stuff the use use restrictions on that not not sales but use restrictions so sales is still at at 12,500 right population per cor act the county there's only so many licenses that'll be issued in the county the licensing will be done by the county but you can restrict greatly restrict where they would go within the city like you don't want Canabis retailers probably in an R1 or R2 zone no I think that this is the stuff that would be coming up with WSB too we just haven't quite got to in the work that we're doing so this is one where you might want to I mean I well it's up to you what you want to do if you want to wait that's done in March but you don't know that's going to be done in March so is one where you might want to do something now sooner so will we do this or wait for your gentleman to finish his stuff that he's got well nobody's asked us to do it for or noo yet so we can do it or do you want to Ian you can probably do it by December if that's what you want if you want or do you want to go with this one Jason well okay so we're I think we're talking about two different things here talking about two different so the the the one that I'm talking about just lays out the G guidelines for cannabis in the city as far as use location of use as far as like you know public private stuff like that and gives definitions penalties things like that whereas he's talking about okay in the zoning side restricting cannabis businesses to certain areas of town certain districts if you will that's not something I have prepared I would be more than happy to work with them to help get that prepared I wasn't sure what WSB was doing again we can ask in in December what's going on with w us with that but the problem we'll run into is come January you get you get what you get yeah right place I mean I don't think it would be a great task for us to do an ordinance Amendment between now and January if that's what you want but so I just and I want to sorry Mike interrup if we can get something put together for to go with this in December because this is just the draft of this one I want you guys to review it but if we get something to put together for December because I'm trying to think of the process we need to have a public hearing for new ordinances for well for land use ordinances you do okay so for that one we'd have to have the public hearing for that so I just I don't I don't think you need a public hearing for this one this is just like basically a nuisance ordinance you know no I don't think you need a public hearing for this I I think you need to you're going to regulate how people use property that's in the planning you have to have a public hearing so why don't you just do a public plan on a public hearing not adopt this tonight and just adopt everything yeah this was going to be adopted tonight I was thinking that the public hearing would be at the next council meeting for the the one the so as soon as we get that that'll be something that we'll send out to council to say okay here's this um and I I mean what I'll do is I'll write an email right copy you to David ASAP as our attorney he's old handed this at this point so he can do it a quicker than I can and um he'll put something he'll he'll meet with you to discuss what you want to say he'll tell you what the options are and he'll just put put an amendment together for you to go along with this in December and then you just need to notice a public hearing for December then December I did a good job on putting this together so um but with that there's a resolution like I said this m kind of covered the delegating toad County and then the ordinance so there's a resolution and that'll have to be so that one I think you need to do sooner because I think they've been asking like for Yoda my one of my other clients that almost yeah that's why I have that on here tonight that we get it if you want if you want to opt into the County ordinance so I you which is what there kind of everybody referenced that last month is just letting the county handle it which is everybody's kind of doing from my understanding I don't know if anybody that's taking that on themselves so yeah I mean most even Rochester Rochester is doing like delegated to the county that's I I figured they would be the one I would do but they didn't with that I make a motion we approve resolution 202 24-42 second that turns it over to the county correct comments see none I'll take the Voice vote mayor ior hi councelor Phillips hi councelor penr hi councel Richards hi coun dck [Music] hi next item is in regards to um signatories uh y uh as you see in my memo here again just going through all this budget stuff and everything floating around it came to my attention of the state statutes that are laid out in the memo 41 or 412. 20101 talks about every contract conveyance license other written instrument shall be executed on behalf of the city by the mayor and clerk with the corporate seal fixed and only pursuant to Authority from city council um again looking over this talking with the state auditor's office um lawyers making sure he had everything there um this does you can see the letter that's attached from the Minnesota Office of the state auditor from this is 2014 this talks about this as well basically states that the mayor should need must be the signatory on I'm going back up here uh on all contracts conveyance license or other written instrument um so that's being put before you guys as a resolution I noticed it's not being done currently I know there was a vote before my time um again just trying to correct this and get us into ordinant excuse me get us into uh what state law states okay I'm not so certain you're correct uh you you quoted a couple ordinances or ordinances I appreciate it you for statutes appreciate your work you've done on that with the 4121 71 number says which one are you talking about your 171 number says that it's repealed in 19 refers back to Minnesota statute 1982 and it says beart the council and that and that rattles off section number 4121 111 is amended to read Council May create such departments and advisory boards and appoint officers employees and agents for the city as deemed necessary for proper management and operation of City Affairs and I did some further research on the 40 41221 and I found that it says if the city council revokes the mayor signatory Rights Council will you need to designate another official to execute an instruments on behalf of the City Minnesota statute State 2 41221 requires that contracts convenance licenses and what you with all you said it says in in such a scenario the council would likely pass a resolution or ordinance specifying who would assume the mayor signatory responsibilities this ensures that the executiv execu see documents remains valid and in compliance with legal requirements what are you reading from Paul if if you remember on this one Mike um this was voted on and and approved last December when you were at the meeting of what went on and if you also look at some of the other SE factors that might lead to a mayor signatory rights being revoked by city council typically include it could be misconduct ethical violations okay um and maybe vot signatory rights because of that the other one loss of confidence city council loses confidence for the mayor's ability to perform their duties effect effectively and they may decide to revolt signatory rights as a precautionary measure and the other one is policy disagreements a significant policy disagreements between the mayor and the city council can sometimes lead to revocation of the signatory rights especially if the council believes that the mayor's actions are not in the best interest of the city uh and we found that and we took uh the signing abilities away from Rand last December and I think that that's where it should be I remember the I remember it um but I didn't I mean I don't what I told Jason when he asked me is I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of every statute no I'm just saying that that that this is what it is and the council voted on it and that that still stands and if it's up again I make a motion that we keep it the way it is so I don't I mean I looked at this and that I mean did you guys read the Attorney General letter on that yeah but again it depends upon what the city council votes on and the city council is the one that that runs the city on what goes on and the council voted on that so we put it up to a vote against the city council actually actually it was audit letter an Auditor's letter yeah in the auditor's letter down it it says uh the the last in the first page the last paragraph with the letter says Minnesota Law requires City checks to be signed by the mayor Clerk and Treasurer put note four but note four says C Min statute 412 271 go back to it's been repealed goes back to se subsection 1984 I believe it was and it refers back to 4121 yeah I'm looking gives the council the authority to do it I'm looking at it right now on State Statute it's not been repealed that's where I had that question I was trying to ask you because it's it's right here on the State website it's not repealed the statute's still there so I don't know yeah what which one do you say is repealed with 412 271 dispersements that's where pull it up off Minnesota State Statute off my phone no I'm looking at it right here on the but say Ms 182 repeal 4121 well the 1983 was that's not right that's 4121 91 also states that the council has the power to regulate its own procedures well I think what that means though is not not in contradiction to other statutes I mean I the Council could regulate their procedures and just say we're not going to follow any statutes we're going to regulate our own procedures based on that statute why have all these other statutes with all these other rules I mean I I just I can't see it any other way Jason asked me to look at this and I just don't yeah I don't I don't think you can do that I think the other statute that's involved here that I saw is the acting mayor statute which is 42121 and that one that one reads at its first meeting each year the council shall choose an acting mayor from the council members the acting mayor shall perform the duties of the mayor during the during the disability or absence of the mayor from the city or in case of vacancy in the office of Mayor until a successor has been appointed and qualifies so I think you can and then that attorney general opinion up here the auditor opinion I apologize the auditor opinion references that statute so I think you can do that I just I mean the other statute that says the mayor has got to sign the instruments I just don't see how you can get around that I mean that's my opinion at least on it unless unless you can convince me otherwise apparently we needed to make a resolution authorizing which we can do off that but um again that was something that that you approved on last December when we did that and I just I think it should absolutely stay the same way and there's been no problem with with timing on getting anything signed that there has been since since that point in time since January yeah I mean when I you say I approved it I I remember the meeting very specifically and what happened was one of the council members amended the meeting agenda to add an item called checks and then the mayor asked what does that mean or what's at reference and then no explan was given at the very end of the 4-Hour meeting it was explained that the mayor illegally or allegedly illegally signed a check of some sort and then was requested not sign any opinion I give under those circumstances ain't no opinion I mean if you want me to really riew something and research it then you got to tell me what's on the agenda and I will research it and tell you what I think I I disagree with that analysis that was ruling at that time so yeah okay fine based on those circumstances I'm changing my ruling well then if that's the case it's up for for a vote so if if we vote not to have it that way then it Remains the Same right so put it up to a vote I mean I don't I I don't know about that I gu I haven't thought I make I make a motion that everything stays the same of what it is or we can be the the resolution that's here for 2024 I mean like I which is 202443 the only comment I would say I uh Ryland you're not you can't be a part this is about you you can okay then let's put it up to a vote all in favor I I mean I'm not I'm not that hell bent on this I just think it's pretty clearcut area of law I mean issue law well as a council I think we are pretty much much bent that that that it stays where it is right now well I don't see if there's ever been any problems no this year no that's why I said I've been able to sign everything that there is in a very timely manner there hasn't been once that hasn't happened well I don't I don't think that's necessarily the issue I think the issue the legal issue would be if you sign it and it violates a state statute did the city really sign it you know is it an effective signature for the city I'm I'm unlisted as the affected signer that is absolutely I've been doing it ever ever since and I'm on there so I'm the signatory one that there is so absolutely sure yeah surely went through the paper absolutely well I mean Jason asked me and I said well if you think it's not legal to do it that way and I reviewed it and didn't think it was legal to do it that way then you should bring it to their attention he's bringing it to your attention if you decide to keep it the same you decide to keep it the same the vote is there and there's a second already on the floor on this one Jason you're not a part of the coun not trying to get ification for notes please I'm asking what the motion is so I have it because I have predesignated Motion in here hopefully Council to follow and then vote how you will but the motion was changed so I want to make sure I have it documented correctly so what was the motion the motion is to keep everything the way it is right now that I'm the signatory for for the city for the checks down his man someone say well there has been you doing let's V on that one and I the question I guess I would have with that is we are a statutory city right the mayor has no more Authority than any council member other than running the meetings and in states of emergency so what would be the the difference of the mayor signing versus a council appointed designate the difference is there's a statute that says you can't do that why why did the legislature approve that statute I don't know why they did but they did you know so I guess that's all I can say I didn't think it would be that controversial I just thought it was a something where there was a vote made I didn't I wasn't aware of that statute I was given no prior notice to research it so the council did that and that's fine but now that I figured we you know Jason figured it out actually so you know that's fine I mean if you want to keep it the same I guess you're on notice that I don't think that's that you should do that so it's up for a vote so so a resolution have to be drawn up to keep it the way it is we can do it that way and we can do a new resolution or we can just I don't think you need to do anything I you've already adopted the the res prior resolution so yeah there were two prior resol I think he's asking for Jason's asking for a motion to adopt his resolution if there's no motion to adopt the resolution then then there that it won't be adopted right I don't think you need to do anything okay let's leave it the same any more discussion no we have all the burb correct CH I yeah I'm going to have to watch this later and figure out then yeah figure out all in favor sign by saying I Iain right who was the second for that motion sorry thank you item is um new business first item is um council member philps wishes to have a request for a proposal RFP conducted for a new city engineer company to get competitive quotes for a new city engineer and to get competitive quotes for stantech yeah it's um been my understanding that it's it's been a number of years um and not saying anything negative about stch or what's going on just for us to to keep track of what the competitive bids are you know so that's all I want to do is just for us and I think for what we need to have for a city it's good just to to keep up with what's going on and know what's out there so that's my reest so it's a it's a cost matter it's just it's just to check yeah it's just to know what's going on absolutely and I think too back when Sunny was here she had stated that the contract was so old think 2006 that the contract should be updated that should be competitive but I I agree I don't I wouldn't say that Joe's doing a bad job at all but you know I think that the the contract definitely needs to be updated and and yeah to check that's you know I think that's good for it's sitting I think it's um it's been several years since we've had one and U yeah sant's been here 17 some years um Been instrumental in getting us our sewer project working on for the last nine years yeah so absolutely I I agree with that I mean I just I think it's very smart for the city to do that for us to do that I'll tray this one more time you know they've been here for 17 years and I think they've added a lot lot a lot to the city their City all the projects have been working on especially the city sewer project the city sewer project is not complete we have phase 1B that mpca is asking us when are you going to start phase 1B so there's a tremendous amount of background that stantech has brought to the city with design of the $43 million project project itself has been under budget the Engineering Services have been under budget so there's a lot of good cost things that they have done in administering and monitoring and controlling and making sure the Project's done correctly so I U it seems like it be um difficult for a new company to come in and complete a um a sewer project that have no knowledge of the history of the Town um whether it's projects the whatever it would take um and maybe people will recognize that too and and we won't get any for I don't know or we may get a lck but I do know that there are opportunities to reduce costs if that's the concern with stantech um and that's that's a very big POS possibility of riging Staff Administration if if the concern is we can work with stantech and our city administrator to realign those costs in the contract they have people there that could take care of the day-to-day activities under supervision from uh from Joe but that would help reduce the cost that the bills are concerned but I do think that it would be a disservice to the citizens of or noo at this point if we had a sewer project in place and it's been going great for five years sure I think that's a very good opportunity to to go out and see what the the uh the industry has to offer but we're right in the middle of a sewer project and to consider changing I think would be a would be very detrimental to the overall project not only the project itself but the cost of the project not having that background of how they connect to what we're doing today already Phase 1 a so I I understand your your point that you're making R and and like I said it it wasn't that that you know Stant could very well win whatever it is and and see what goes on you know but 1B coming in for for that part of it is just connecting with with the sewer the the main part of the plant is already done um I don't think it's as big of a deal as what there is to have somebody take a look I think for the city it's smart for us to have a competitive bed and and see what's out there I think that that we owe that to our residents to be able to check that out yeah I one way or the other it's yeah I'm not saying that you won't you won't get it I mean it's just it's a matter we've got to we got to do that otherwise not doing a good job for the citizens here well I just I just really concerned about the purpose of the the RFP if it's uh if it's you're not happy with the way stanch has been operating or if it's jailed or stopped for that matter we as a council made that decision we you know we chose the lesser of the the Lesser cost and uh and Joe explained that to us when we did it so um no I'm not I'm not doubting any of those things at all and and you know how many water and sewer meetings that I've been to and watch the development of everything from the ground up of what's been going on you know that's that's not what I'm I'm questioning at all and and I think that that that he's done a really good job I think we just owe it to the the residents of the city to take a look and just see what's out there this has more to do with like the budget right yeah it's all a part of that absolutely what what's going but I'm just saying it's all with without us looking we don't know and and I think that we're foolish not to look you know that's what I'm saying and I think that we owe that to the citizens to well I don't I'm not saying it's foolish not to look I just think you're you're developing a um a risky nature of affecting the taxpayers as well well again it it it might work out that that you know Stant is in there and everything Remains the Same I'm sure they will provide you know so I mean that's you know there's nothing wrong with with having competitive uh looks and it's been a long time since 2006 I just think it's worthwhile for us to do that well there are professional organizations and all the other Professional Engineers and companies they're all very competitive and uh you know I think that's that's is it what we're paying Joe for contract that we have every year versus company ABC there's probably not going to be much different so I just I think it's going to be a an exercise that will that has risk in it and I don't think our taxpayers really should have to be dealing with that risk I think and having to deal with the npca to a timely matter of getting phase 1B done I won't go to 1B because 1B could be five six seven years out in the road so I mean that that's that's again and putting everybody in without taking a look um I think that that you know again if we have a discussion afterwards of what's going on when we're comparing what it is that's one thing but I think we're foolish not to our citizens I think most of them agreed that that it's well worth you know just seeing what's out there otherwise we're not doing what we should be we're protecting our citizens and what the costs are what's the date for 1B or Island that you're talking phase 1B is the Northwest yeah I mean what's what 2030 plus schedule is had being completion by 2030 that's five years from now you so but that go ahead Joe just a couple notes there's more than you know we're obviously trying to finish the project up so there's the completion of the construction the completion of record plans um preparation of the final on manuals and then the agency submitt so honestly to have somebody come in and take over that process at this point would be be very difficult um in terms of um a competitive environment I completely understand that uh engineering firms are competitive with one another rates are similar really what you pay for is experience so if you want a lower hourly cost somebody is going to give you somebody with less experience and in some instances that might well be fine um I have nearly 29 years of experience my hourly rate is high I have um I bring value with that experience um we have had some very large successful projects over the last 11 years I think we secured about $ 38.5 million for oroko for the Water Project the dam removal project and the Wastewater project and so in terms of engineering fees compared to the grants that we've secured not even comparable um the thing that I would note that sometimes a change in face or the firm is good sometimes a lower qualified person can do the job just fine especially when things aren't that complicated well we're finishing out a very complicated project I don't need to be reviewing driveway permits um my hourly read or doing development reviews or other things we have other folks that could do that work and I'd be happy to serve as a senior consultant and bring somebody like that in you know you could save you know a fairly significant amount having an engineer with say 10 years of experience rather than nearly 30 years of experience and if you'd want to talk about that we could certainly sit down and talk about that if you want to look at the terms and conditions of the contract happy to do that with you um but to make that change at this state in the process where you're at today would be difficult for the city and I agree would introduce some risk and then selfishly from my perspective when you do these types of things proposals take a lot of effort I mean we'll spend five to $10,000 on this type of a proposal because everybody else will um we have some inherent value or inherent um um advantages given the 17 years of experience and all of the stuff that we've done for you you know we know how things were designed we know how they're supposed to be expanded you know or they were intended to be expanded we know um a lot of information about how things were set up and intended to function and do function as well as having you know the history of what's happened over the last 17 years you know I've been the city engineer through you know a half a dozen Mayors and half a dozen City administrators and probably a half a dozen uh Public Works directors so I've been that kind of stable force and there's really value to that um understanding that information and those pieces of the puzzle so if indeed you do want to um reduce cost why don't we sit down and see if there are some other Staffing Arrangements that would meet your needs and would reduce costs well you know and and again you you've done a wonderful job Joe there's no question about that and and the number of meetings that you and I have been in when when it comes to doing stuff and and the way you've handled thing and especially with the the Wastewater system that there is and everything that went along with it there's no question about that and so I'm not questioning your integrity or or what you have I think that that your suggestion that you just brought forth on taking a look at that for a way for us to reduce costs is is what I'm looking for for us to take a look at and so that makes sense you know I would I would love to be able to do that and sit down so with that in mind um I'll be more than happy able this okay and for us to be able to take that time to take a look at that and see if we can't find a way to save cost for the city okay and then to do a better job that's that's what we're we're after yeah and I and I personally I I would not be in favor of changing the horses in Midstream I mean that's dangerous to the city it's dangerous to this project so yeah I mean that's I and I my personal opinion goes back to when Sunny was here updating the contract and and what you said Joe I think is is perfect yeah you know sit down and okay how can we reduce costs um I we can't afford to lose you in the middle middle of this project we can you know you got all the knowledge of it and I I wouldn't want to see that happen but yeah can we reduce costs by sitting down yeah you you'd be the one that would have those suggestion and then then the contract you know is updated right you know yeah and that can be done too you know it's a contract from 2006 but frankly it's a simple contract um but you know we can work through that we can get Mike involved um happy to do that stuff and and find uh uh a place where we're still meeting the needs of the city and being cost effective you know and TR truth to be told I I don't want to you know I i' like to apply my experience to things that are challenging and certain things are are not right you understand that oh absolutely same token we've been you know really working together for a long time here and um there's been a tremendous push to to get through the project work that we have and I think we've really done so together successfully yeah you know again I there there are no complaints off of that okay never once okay and and you know we work well together off of things okay so it's not from that you know but I think that this is a good way for us to take a look at saving some costs which I think is good for the city you know and for the residents of the city and still get what we need to have so I'd love to to sit down do that so so you change your am Amendment yeah like I said I'll put this I'll table this one if we've got that direction or what we're going to go you know okay and I think it's a smart way to go and and and again I think all of us can win in the end of doing that I think I will work with Jason to uh put some thoughts together on that maybe we can have a little work session or how would we do that yeah we can do it as a work session work session after it's first of the year well yeah you're not going to do this there's a lot going on I get it that's fine yeah so but I mean you can start working on it but I think that with what we got with the budget Jason's going to be pretty much swamp from there so to put something else on his plate right now that that wouldn't be fair for him but so we have a motion to table this subject for further developments with paper second saying I sign and thank you J good discussion all right um council member Richard you some want to discuss something can we put a time limit on that for time you want to discuss pardon you're you have the next item to Independent audit I'm just asking if we could put a time limit on the discussion not to let it drag out we still need to finish our yeah absolutely um so and and actually this this there was some context based on Jason's email to me um but I I I wanted up for discussion um we talked about it last year about having a and I believe even the previous year about having a a forensic audit in some areas um I would like to see if forensic audit in the time tracking Personnel time tracking um we heard from Linda King tonight and I think we're losing trust our citizens are losing trust in in uh some of the financials so I think as a council we need to look at it and and and uh maybe every other year pick a category and and do some type of an audit I know we talked about doing one before we had a new city administrator in so we were zeroed out but we didn't pick that discussion back up didn't the last City administrator want to some kind of an audit or somebody somebody wanted an audit before they took over is that geralin or was that oh um I mean Shirley mentioned it as well so I guess I would like to know some thoughts of the rest of the council I know these are expensive I was GNA just to take off that like I emailed you my my thoughts initially were okay what what specific area for an audit and you touched on that and then cost you know I have concern if this was discussed beforehand the preliminary budget time would have been the time to decide that that was never brought up so I didn't know this was something that was Prior discussed to me being here so it makes it a lot harder to obviously try and figure out for next year's budget and they are expensive um so trying to figure out where that's coming from is a concern for me obviously as a city administrator for the budget just making sure that gets decided and all that and then I can't remember what else I put in the email to you councilman but those were kind of the the top ones was figuring out what we're what this was and then where the money was going to come for it basically so right and I and I know we do have Audits and it's with our own accountants but I look at that is if I was getting audited by the IRS the IRS wouldn't say I'm going to just take your word for it I'm going to take your numbers and take your word for it they're they're independent they're going to dig into it my understanding is those audits we have are in considered independent audits they yeah they don't work for us we hire them to do the audit so they are an independent audit um and I know again something else I've been working on if you've been able to flinker on online one of our updates to the website there's a f City Finance section under city government and I have put the last five years of the financial audits online I'm working to get the budget stuff on there it's just been playing around trying to figure out the website to do all this when I have time but you know so we are putting those out there but those are you know like I said those are independent audits so okay I was that's the other confusion I had is those to my knowledge from what everything I've Been Told is those are independent audits so now as I understood it last year Ryland had mentioned Smith and Schaefer they I think it's Smith and schaer accounts that they audit every year and that was my point that that'd be like me auditing my own taxes you know so if if it is independent yeah independent because that's what we pay that's that is what we pay them for for that function so that's it makes it's Independence not like we hire them contract them have them in- house working hours as an auditor for us and then doing that is that is what we contract with them yeah required by law have to do an independent audit every year all cities have to do that so I I think if you want a further audit you should contact the account maybe you since you're the one who wants it and explain to them what what they're not doing that you would want okay what what you want and then quote a price because they might or are you suggesting using a different company not as long as it's independent that it's not our accountants audit auditing their own you know what I'm saying well that's yeah because we we do all the work in house and they audit the stuff that we do we are our own accountants if you will and they audit everything that we do internally and and it gets reviewed I think I think it's important to you make a good point I do think it's important to get into benef I think it's all good also good just understand exactly what Smith and Schaefer does because they will pull invoices and match them up against our records they do the balancing of our end of month checking so there are involved you know well there might be things I mean because the statutes that require that require certain things so they're doing a certain style of audit to meet the the legal requirements so you might want something more in depth than what they're required to do what they're doing does that make sense yeah so you know I think you're going to have to give them something though if you want them to quote a do a proposal y BL yeah I think well just they're not going to be able to do a proposal of just a forensic audit I mean they're not going to know what that is so like what what what what do you want or maybe they have maybe they do have optional services and you can say and and they'll say yeah we do these sorts of things this is what it costs things sorry City aits run from 20 to 25,000 so it's that's just you're raising city audit so that's that's just a is that what we point in the sand but that's is that we is that what we p and shap for each about what it expensive and that's just a very general AIT we're looking for forensic I don't know what that involves but it just sounds so there's other companies I mean other cities use other companies nsmith shaper so there's other I mean there's other games in town the cities I represent use by four different companies so you could ask them too maybe they would you have a list of those companies yeah I mean you can Jason can probably get that no no problem um sure you had I mean you wanted to do some research maybe you know the other thing I I will mention too that I think is is very promising is the fact that we we do have a new software system coming up good for us to do that that will allow much better transparency much better tracking um but you know and I know we've all heard the fire department money um it's those types of things that that the citizens question I've heard the fire department argument for so many years it's just time to to know what what's going on with all of that right it until the air is cleared on it with that in specific it's going to hang out there and I remember it that was brought up when Sunny was here and I I believe it was said that yes it is it's it's it's we have it it it's not gone but she had to find where it was yes and what and I got to believe it is um and and I don't know what the value you know what that dollar amount is you're on fire department find what we talked about it in July yeah there was some money that was out of the yeah this has always been a question that they had uh behind it and and you know they've got some records but again it's it's some of those things that you know and and Jason you and I talked about this too when you first came on that it's something that I always wanted you to have the clean books that there are when you start so that that you know everything and nothing can be pointed back at you you know and I mean I think that that might be an interesting place to start is is with the fire department looking that one you know in particular and just just see what what what what they find I just you know just might be interested I think it might be well worth it just to put that to bed and it's done you know so well Jason I found a there's a Association that has a list of government Auditors the one that a lot of the cities around here use is Hawkins Ash and they're not actually listed here but the other ones that I I've seen are ABDO and Baker Tilly which is a big fancy firm it used to be our account Baker Tilly did yeah they have a large ABDO and Baker Tilly or ABDO ABDO then separately Baker Tilly then Hawkins Ash which is a one owna U firm and then I Bailey yeah Baker Tilly I Bailey those are the two big gigantic probably most expensive and then ABDO Baker till is a nationwide they're gonna be yeah so so is I and then um your local one would be better well I think that I mean I think it's basically what you're using Smith chafer I mean I don't know if there's any other and Hawkins Ash is in wiona I think they they have multiple offices but they're just in Minnesota so but you can look at that I'll send you this list you can okay I don't know um yeah well let's that's all I have I'll get with J so let's work and come back with something in a packet for next months either more questions you have that you want Direction on or okay thank next item is a addition of the ior program cost savings I have one question on that one oh go ahead if you want to make a motion with that um I just going to make a motion to update the contract with I word with CMS okay uh and and and I'll second time um but I had a question with that one um and and ey works is great you know there's no question about it and I know the cost saving is there and I think that makes sense to do it and especially uh being able to add a little bit more for the residents to be able to operate with when we were looking at the new program that you guys got was was there a a permit thing in the new program too for bsna yeah no that's that's focused on like internal budget and okay I thought that that was the only question was off that it's focused on that okay well that that answers that question that was my whole thing so make a motion to approve it I made the motion discussion we do also have Tom here to discuss and you have any questions this immediately then yeah we just have to work through the transition here talking to each other but it won't take long we're just January one super jary okay all right any other comments all those in favor signif by saying I [Music] I okay liquor license I make a motion to approve two sisters um then should be gas and go a little bit of a typo off of that one second oh I'm sorry I'm just going to crack that right here right now like what okay when it's spelled correctly it doesn't like to there comments seeing none all those in favor signify by saying I approved next item is a uh mitigation planning process with County a toac tobacco there's one more there was the liquor was the first one sorry they were both in the same they were supposed to be in the same motion to approve okay they're all together right the next was This Disaster mitigation Act of 2000 County resolution 2024 d41 make a motion to approve that resolution second a question on that one sure we fin done with are we done that's mitigation I was thinking the other one that's the next one that there is for to approve no that was from 2000 I think it said it Act of 2000 whereas resolution is established and I to that point I did look it up it's a 300 page document to print that off that's quite spinny to print that off seven copies yeah but it is available on thead County website if anybody wants to go read it plan that we work with them we worked with them again this year CL June with the FEA all part of our H County as a whole any other comments do a voice V mayor aor councilman Phillips hi counc penr hi councilman Richards hi councilman lck hi the next action item is resolution 202 24-44 and this is a resolution to accept the coronav virus local fiscal Recovery Fund established under the American Rescue plan act in 2019 or 2020 um so we've been using this the funds we had 66,6 155 that we started out in September of 2021 and we're just finishing up the usage of that money and the last three items in this resolution identifies the mun Municipal wastewater treatment plan lettering and on the outside of the building the city hall Community Center lettering on the outside of the building and inside Hall door identifiers which I think will be done soon and then it also covers the uh transformer for the electronic message board on Lake Shady Avenue of $720 so with this resolution we've concluded in using our funds and so that'll be part of our report back to uh through the state whenever the report is due um documenting how we've used the money with all the resolutions that we have including this one in place a quick question where are the letter is going to be for the city hall is that it's right on the wall up there now as you walk in on the right okay I up on the wall above the flower pot above the flower yeah I make a motion thank you Jim and a is working with um Chad Tracy on the wastewater treatment plant lettering and Rec location or location so yeah you also see we have a bunch of sticky notes on the doors around here they came in um and then I noticed that the signage was damage so I said we need to get that fixed and so they're fixing it repairing it and going to have new but they noted everything so they can just come in and get it done so hopefully those will be done soon any other comments see we do a voice vot hi councelor Phillips hi councelor penr hi councelor Richards hiic then I added an item there a one page memo regarding a recommendation for candidate a for the um 2024 outstanding citizens award second Jim that'll be presented at the December meeting any other comments discussion none all in favor signify by saying I first and Phils second okay make a motion to approve the consent agenda um there was a couple I wanted to go on for second second um going through and and looking a couple items that were on here um on the general fund that that there is um so looking at that for the total on this is on page 133 can follow what's going on there um government Aid if I'm looking at 33 631 are we still do some more money off of that or was a difference off of that because I've got [Music] 143,00 407 show short 332 say yeah I have to go back and look into that I thought we got that 143 and no I was just you know that's so that popped out I mean property taxes too um we those in December the second half okay so that's okay that ANS that question I what there is so that will bring the difference on the total we're pretty good off of that uh engineering Cost U we had budgeted 12,000 we 24,300 that's I'm trying to figure out what that's about sorry where we at now that's item number 3579 [Music] um so that would mean that we have brought in over 12,000 more for engineering I'm just kind of wonder where that where that came from I'm guessing permits and things like that I don't know I'd have to research yeah okay I was just you know mentioning on that the other one let's see um let's go over to page 135 okay I'm I'm looking at legal fees which is 42305 we budget 27,500 we're at 54,1 166 what number is that 423 that's 42305 p is 135 that number number your this month was only $345 added to I think just lot of our our development agreements that type of thing no I was just you know making note of of some things that we're are as we're looking at the budgets and this kinde of stuff too so if you look at that brought the legal services for the year instead of being 91,000 you know 323 it's uh at 123 631 so we're over like 32,000 um engineering fee on 42303 same page we budget 12, we at 18,820 I'm assuming that's a WSB payment that came out this year 6975 think that for the month I don't know I just I mean I was looking at look at that I thought WSB had the planning Services those are planning services for that's been going on with Planning and Zoning okay fire department looking at that I'm just comparing to what it was to their budget if we had amended budget at 185,000 730 year to date actual it shows 101 518 so if that's the case then we should have some money we got $84,000 left okay and we're looking at U getting close to the end of the year so maybe we've got enough in there to be take care of some of those packs is what I was thinking about um well with that I don't we do not have $84,000 if you take out what they're looking at Rough estimates and this something enough to sit down with fire chief but looking through everything you're looking closer to 50 and then take into account the 150 they've spent in the 425 accounts um if we move any of those items over there they're still over by $100,000 in the fire department okay I mean I'm just was was going by what we report that's why I'm and I think it's good to sit down and wor and talk to those guys and see what's going on how we want to do that um I think you I mean we go there I think the shop is is a little bit over year to date actual but I don't know when you get into the details exactly trying to figure that one out were 42,1 192 and this is on page 138 and year a actual 61826 you also look at 21,000 salaries and wages that are taken out of there that weren't accounted for okay well I mean that's yeah any I just wanted to make note of of a few of those things yeah if you have any questions talk to staff before the meeting they can help answer your questions too I just think it's good for the community to know too going on just by that's a good thing the packet's on the line so residents can look at it as well the one comment I would have is that pnz committee meetings minutes you know it's been 11 months now we haven't seen a pnz meeting minutes on the agenda in the consent gent we talk about the items that come through we don't have any meeting minutes there's no history there there's no history except for the motion but whatever happens in pnz we never see it the citizens never see it yes we can go out and watch the videos but I don't understand why pnz doesn't designate the secretary to do the minutes but more importantly I really think that beginning of the first year pnz really needs to look at changing their dates of meeting as a suggestion to from the third Thursday or the second Thursday to the first Thursday for short months you would never meet um the council packet due date so you seriously need to look at that for the residents so they know what's going on for the rest of the council Parks fire department First Responders Water and Sewer we all have our minutes done and pnz is never done and I really like to see that changed and R I'll take some ownership for that because we have gotten some done I know they've been in some of the pnz packets um and just like you said with the closeness of it and trying to turn around get the council packet done that's gotten slipped through by getting those from the once they get approved at the meeting and getting into the packet so that that part there are like I said there are a few out there we just they've slept getting through it would be nice to have a different date but that's a discussion for a different thing I just finish that if it was moved to the first Thursday we would have that time for secretary would have time to get you the minutes before the council packet due date I think it's something to consider I know we talked about it once several years ago but I think it's um something that we should seriously look at after the first of the year so it just makes better sense in my opinion and Jason software will with that yeah AI y we've been getting some good trainings on it we're all moving forward so it's that new program yeah the dilig just up for and I had another training on it today so it's cool it's m forward super exciting so all right um we have a motion any other comments with consent n all those in favor signify by saying I I before we J I'd like to thanks IR for joining us for a few months appreciate you stepping forward volunteering what I could do I guess appreciate you being on our Council and thank you again well thank you it was my pleasure great Ser thanks I see on some committees opportun no well I will you open hope you do with that I make a mo meting second say I 94