Reese here. Council member Oz here. Nelson here. >> Gilbertson here. >> Here. Davis >> here. >> Butterfield >> here. >> Shoulders >> here. >> Council member Gardner is excused. Eight present, one absent.
>> Yes. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Lesie, are you gonna
introduce Shane? >> I have Melissa to introduce Shane director. >> Okay. >> Good evening. As you can see, we have Shane with us uh virtually tonight. Uh Shane Stefanic. Am I saying that right, Shane?
>> Uh close enough. It's Stefonic. But >> Stefanic, thank you. >> We're gonna get it right from the beginning or it will never get corrected. Stefanic. Um Shane is our recommendation for
public works director. Um so we uh vetted all of the candidates that we got. Um we did first round interviews with Leslie and Kyle and Christopher and Carl. Um, and then we did second round interviews with Leslie and myself and
Rob and Jason and um, Kyle Reduns and Carl. Um, and at the end of that process, Shane is our recommendation for public works director. Shane is currently out in Wyoming. He's working
in Gillette, Wyoming right now. He's been um he has extensive experience working with uh wastewater um some engineering and some public works out there. So I will let him introduce himself a little bit as well. Um but
because of the distance he has to do a virtual meet and greet with you guys tonight and then he will hopefully be moving out here shortly. So Shane, I'll go ahead and give you the table if you want to do a little introduction of yourself. Absolutely. Uh good evening everybody.
Thank you for having me virtually and understanding the distance. Um I appreciate the opportunity. Uh my name is Shane Stefonic. I currently work at SNS Builders. I'm a project manager for a heavy civil highway bridge construction company. Um I kind of
started right out of high school in the public works department. I was a park it was considered a public works operator. Basically, I did some snow plowing, uh, irrigation maintenance because we actually have to water our grass out here to get it to grow. Um, and then
followed by, uh, some I was, uh, lead for the mowing crew. And then, uh, after that, I transitioned into a wastewater role with the city of Gillette as well. um worked my way up to from just an operator to a senior operator all the
way up to a treatment supervisor. And while I was doing that, I got my master's degree in uh business administration with a a uh certificate in energy business. Um after that, uh I kind of fell in love with managing
projects and really wanted to expand my uh public administration knowledge. So, I transferred over to the uh local multi-events facility, the Camplex in Gillette. And that was a really great experience because I got to get deeper
into budgets, got to get deeper into um learning a whole new se sector of the public area. Um and then after a while there, I ended up getting offered a job as a project manager for SNS Builders. Um, and that
was kind of a great opportunity because not only were the budgets bigger, but the projects were larger. Uh, we have projects, we have bridges, um, that are sometimes over 300 ft long. And we've got, um, we actually did a bridge in Yellowstone, which was a great
opportunity. Um, so that's kind of where I got my engineering and, uh, larger project experience. Thank you. Mayor, would you like to introduce the council, please?
>> Tom on the left front. Start Tom Butterfield. >> Vicky Davis, >> Rick Bagley, Doug Reese, mayor, >> Justin O, >> Audrey Nelson. >> Good evening. Tom Gilbertson, and Carl
Schultz. >> All right. Great to meet you guys. It'll be a test. >> Yeah, I'll study hard. I promise. >> Have you met the other people that are here?
>> I have not before. Um, well, hold on. Sorry, my screen is a little tiny. Um, >> yeah, >> I don't in our second interview, Christopher Corbett. Uh this is our police chief,
Mike Holm. And then you've met Leslie and Kyle. Down at the end is John Johnson, our I as coordinator. >> Oh yeah, he was the one nice enough to invite me. >> And you've met Rob. Pablo is our back
here uh our community growth director. Sarah is our environmental specialist. Uh you've met Jason Lindall. And then I don't know if you can see way over there we've got Frank Hansen, our >> Frank. >> Oh, okay. >> Fire chief.
>> Nice to meet you, Frank. Sorry I could barely see you back there. >> We've got right in front of Frank is Jenna. Jenna is with the West Central. >> Jennifer, >> nice to meet you.
So you guys, I believe at your council meeting next week, we'll be voting on Shane, but this was the opportunity that presented itself for you guys to have a meet and greet since not that feasible for him to fly or drive out for a fivem minute meet.
>> Um, he did come out for an inerson interview, but was asking a lot for him to come out just for a council meet and greet. So uh, appreciate that we could do this virtually. Anything else? We did a tour also with Shane. So he has toured
our facilities. You have any questions for Shane? >> No. Anybody got questions? >> What makes you excited to come to Walmart? >> Oh, um I mean really uh my wife and I, we spent we drove up Friday night and
then uh we spent Saturday and Sunday in Wilmer before my interview in person on Monday. And I mean, we were we were just very impressed. Um, we we we love the amenities you guys have. We love the location. Um, and we did a lot of
research on the city as well and the county. And we just we love the community involvement. We love that you guys seem very involved with your community. Um we're we're just very excited to be part of something and part of a municipality that's uh wanting to
actively change for the better. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> If not, welcome Shane. Look forward to working with you. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. I'm excited as well.
you're moving into what uh was called last week by an outsider a warm community. And I agree. We have a very warm community. >> That's great. Uh my wife and my both my kids uh I have a 15year-old and an
11year-old and I know that they're just uh the the younger one was a little hesitant, but we showed him the skate park and he was and the city pool and he was all on board. And then we we told him that the turkey factory was there and he's like, "What is that gonna smell weird?" And he's like and and we told
him, "No, it's gonna smell great because they're cooking turkeys." He's like, "Oh, heck yeah." So, we're we're very excited. And my wife is very excited, too. Um she's currently a city planner uh for our municipality, but um she's looking forward to maybe
going back to school or something else that's nearby. So, I think we've got a good plan and we're pretty excited to be here. >> Oh, anxious to get you. >> Yeah, I can't wait to meet you guys in person. This is a little more awkward
than I imagined. >> Thank you, Shane. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next is budget and we need more time. you want to address.
So, we'll do we'll have Kyle's going to do an overview of the budget and what we've done over the past months here and um then we'll be asking council what your wishes are. >> Thank you, mayor. Thank you, councel.
Um, so just taking a step back here, uh, the 2026 proposed tax levy that was included in the agenda item, the truth and taxation hearing last Monday was 10,281,650 657. Now, this is a combination of our
operating and CIP levies.4,810,000 respectively. Uh since the December 1st TNT hearing, staff have reviewed the 2026 budget and uh frankly are concerned without clear or explicit direction from the city
council's priorities may fall short of the council's desires moving forward. part of the reason that we're having the work session uh this evening. Now, staff have aligned the current budget as well as previous budgets with policies, programs, and direction
established by the city council, including active street improvement and maintenance programs, implementation of a $30 million local option sales tax and the projects that go along with it, and really the reestablishment of our capital improvement program. Uh, also
included is the staff, the equipment and professional services that are needed to run a variety of these projects and programs. Significant variations in the 2026 budget at this point may result in unforeseen complications next year in
26. Departmental operations, including processes, procedures, and budget expenses have not been thoroughly examined beyond what is currently proposed in the budget. And just to be clear, Wilmer is in a financially strong position. Proposed
general fund revenues and general fund expenditures are balanced. The city council was presented with a balanced budget at a 0% tax rate increase on December 1st. Any further reductions without reallocation would result in a negative
tax rate from year-over-year. One of the some of the items that we want to make the council aware of uh what it means to go negative in tax rate uh is really we want to be able to maintain the maintaining that tax rate helps absorb market value fluctuations.
reducing it the rate in a year that strong valuation stronger valuation growth. Well, it may look good in short. Uh but during years of stagnation or declining values, uh the city may be forced into longer rate increases simply to maintain the existing services that
we have. Keeping rates steady helps avoid volatility. Lowering the rate can create an artificial budget hole. And what we mean by that is a tax rate reduction in a good year. uh while it lowers the city's base lowers the city's base levy going
forward. In the next year, we could be looking at inflationary cost pressures, unexpected capital needs or state cost shifts, specifically local government aid. The city really does have fewer recurring dollars to absorb these
impacts. Uh this often results in larger levy increases, which can be harder on taxpayers. And really uh Wilmer just like other cities uh in Minnesota are limited in revenue diversification. Unlike counties or states, cities
heavily re rely on property taxes and local government aid. Because property taxes are the backbone of municipal finance. Maintaining consistent rates help ensure stable, reliable revenues to operate a regional center city like Wilmer effectively.
So, as we go through this the discussions this evening, I just want to make sure that the council is aware that we have presented a 0% tax rate increase to our budget. This is not a levy. The tax levy is increasing, but the tax
rate is staying the same. Before we go too uh much further, Mr. mayor and members of the council. Um we do have as staff have a couple of questions that we would like I guess just to prompt the discussion at the
council table um resulting from the tableing of the budget last Monday. Uh, so what, if any, operations, programs, or projects would the city council like to see reduced or eliminated in 2026?
If there isn't a specific program, operation, or project, is there a specific reduction in dollars that the city council is aiming to achieve for the 2026 budget? I think I'll I will pause there. Mr. I uh
I have one that's not a voting member, but uh I think if we cut any more, we're going to be cutting into future investments, investments that will be
higher than they are now, delaying some of these projects. So, it's just going to cost us more money and we've got grants that we get because we are adopting this budget and
I think we need to stick with not in danger receiving those grants. I'm I'm I'm all for reading the the budget just as it is right now.
>> I guess I would agree, Mr. mayor that we the staff did what we asked earlier and got it down to zero and now at the 11th hour to say that we want maybe reduce that even more is
general hardship. Um, I also agree with councelor Derer from last meeting that budget cycle. We need to take a pretty hard look at tough calls, tough decisions, but this year and getting it at zero,
which is what we asked is a good accomplishment to try to reduce further is pretty difficult. Ricky, >> yeah, I agree with both of you. I feel like You know, every year we just cut them
and next year we have to look at those things again and they just keep pushing down and sometime has to get paid for they are better off just to stick with this budget not cut things out. I think Kyle
explained it pretty well that we be ourselves to cover >> like to see a 1 to 2% decrease in operations the budget. I would agree with um with Vickiy's concerns about like if we
continue to if we'd have a negative impact the tax rate. I don't want to see that. I think Kyle raises good good points for what we're doing there, but I think those dollars need to shift from the from a budget to CIP because we're woefully behind where we need to be in
CIP and we keep robbing from those capital improvement needs to pay for a budget that I think has some extravagant items in it that are beyond what we can afford. Right. Can I ask a quick question about um
where director Odins is tonight? I might have missed that when I came. >> Yeah. Um unfortunately he is not able to be here tonight. Okay. >> I'm devastating with what we've done. Can you talk about program reductions
for different areas? I think we can put upon our directors to not expand and to look at where we can, you know, we can't afford to do everything. And
yet, you know, some of the things are vital to getting people here and and all of those things. But I do think that there are opportunities different questions to look at and say,
you know, no, let's not do another program. what can we streamline and maybe that's a goal for next year and for us to do a review you know to do a quarterly review of
where are we and how and I'm willing to what we have and um to like get to take a look next year of what we might be able to to help us because there's just some things we can cut.
>> I'll agree with council member Os that we do need to lower here a little bit. And this all writing on on the backbone of the residents, constituents, people that live, work, and play here in Walmart. Their voice has been very clear
throughout this past couple months since the tax two two stations come out. It's just not the city that needs cut county school board. Why these people can't be a board $10 raise here, $20 raise here, $100
raise here when they're getting the one, two, 3% pay raise. It's not covering it. We had the guy of social security, you know, talking at the last council meeting. His cola was not even covering hardly anything any of those increases. That's who we're here
to represent are the citizens of Wilmer. And we have to make a tough decision. We have to start helping them move along with city. We need the city here for the residents, but the residents also need the city to come in at a time when
they're hurting, too. I also think and you know I hear what Tom's saying but I don't think people understand how their taxes are you know property value what goes to the county what goes to the city you know this went out with
an increase we're going to go to zero so they'll get a new one but you know various people ask about how does this work you know the county assessor to, you know, maybe we need to bring the
county assessor back to walk through the process. You know, we have that when you have that um meeting the people who, you know, few people show up, but you know, people just need to understand how taxes are calculated.
The fact that property values are going up in this community is both good and bad, but you wouldn't want our property values to go down, you know, either. Um, and so I think maybe we have a better we need to be a
little more responsive in explaining how taxes work. >> It's been uh on council for a year. I haven't gotten through as many of these as as many of you have. I'm curious, has this been an extraordinary year of
people reaching out to you, Rick? Um there's more people that have called this year, but it's because of the valuation of the homes. >> Sure. >> You know, you have two sales in a neighborhood, the county sees that may
increase everyone even though some of them haven't gone up, some have decreased. The state has to do something about the valuation. I can't remember what their their standard is. They start at at like 125,000 then they go in increments.
Well, they might have to go up to like 200,000 increase. But something else has to be done but the state >> but the assessors are following the state. >> Well, I know. >> I know. But I but I mean for us to understand that it's not just I mean it
comes from here. It's just not >> it's not it's everywhere. >> My question there is have a balanced budget. We aren't increasing property value.
Why are we here tonight? We should have had this discussion August or September then me. We're just wasting our time here. I know. My understanding was that staff had discussed like at the direct level
um numerous cuts that wouldn't be recommended, but there are possibilities. >> Yes, thank you, Council Oasque. Um, and just just so I get it out there as well, I did get an email from council member Gardner who is not able to be here
tonight and he had a similar to council member ask was what the impacts would be from a one one and a half and 2% reduction as well. So I just wanted to make sure that was into the record. Um, council uh mayor and council, yes, we
did meet uh directors did meet uh last week to um try and put together some options uh for the council to consider. Um none of these are explicitly being recommended. Um but at this point feel
these would have the least impact to operational budgets. However, a lot of these would be future requests immediately in 2027 unless other direction from the council would be received uh next year. Uh so there are
some areas with some part-time salaries uh that could be reduced approximately $13,000. Uh overtime we did look at another overtime line item maybe maybe another $10,000 there.
a larger request um or a larger line item in that the 2026 budget is under professional services. The council may recall that Robert um Sakura presented at the council late November. Um and
that motion or that recommendation was more or less tabled, but there is $69,000 in the 2026 budget uh to help pay for that professional services. And again that was staff consulting. Um
right now uh again um the city auditorium uh we do see an opportunity to essentially again looking we'd be looking all of these for council direction. Uh but start reducing services at the count at the city auditorium.
Essentially, we could eliminate $21,000 from that budget and essentially would just keep the lights in the heat during for that building. Uh there is a potential um to look at the Dorothy Olsen Aquatic Center. There's maybe maybe $10,000 that could
come out of maintenance, but again, a lot of these are unknown. Uh we put these in our budgets to prepare for the unknown the best we can. Uh, and again, that likely would be a future request anyways in ongoing years for ongoing maintenance increase costs. Another one that we could potentially
look at, the council could consider is our civic request, Wilmer Fest. We did look at a $10,000 reduction in the request for that as well. uh not necess not recommended, but another one and this isn't this this
wouldn't be a wouldn't be ideal, especially if council is considering wanting to consider a future city hall, but further reduction of the city hall fund as well as
future positions that would need to be backfilled. But again, that would be not recommended by staff and really would want to take more time to evaluate direct or how reorganization would need to be done within departments before
staff would really feel comfortable looking. Really, all in all, between those items, we're looking at anywhere from 100 to 150,000 that could potentially come down. Just ask a quick
follow up about the the main street coordinator. I understand Main Street dissolved. >> Yes, >> the coordinator quit doesn't work here anymore. >> That's an open position, but that's is that in the budget?
>> Yes. I I apologize. That is on my list right here. Uh so there is a a new position or a reallocation re reorganization of that position within planning and development. Um director Corbett is here this evening and I if
it's okay with you mayor councel Christopher could maybe elaborate more on that position and the what he envisions what that could bring. the position was vacated probably February of this year and shortly thereafter we took a look at the job description
wanted to reimagine that for the city and fill some of the gaps that we have. So I do have a draft job description D1 I can share that with you. We'll keep the range the same. Um this would we had it graded and it set a pay scale of um a
range between 61 and 82,000. >> What's the line item in the budget currently for that with benefits and salary? >> My note on here is right around 80,000 for the for the position. Um
benefits are roughly 30% whatever the salary range might be. And so this position is again I'm not requesting the board to make a decision about approving it or not. I think we still have some work internally to do
but just looking at the position we still have a need to have some targeted outreach for downtown redevelopment throughout the city including work that we want to do in the industrial park. So from our future planning priorities, we
feel this will be a good fit where we would have someone who can support our implementation of some of those initiatives and making sure that we are attracting new businesses and retaining businesses here uh throughout the city. The position
is still in the budget. So the proposed 2026 budget that you all are looking at um takes in consideration this position as well. So, I'm happy to answer any questions about the department or how we see this position being a benefit, but
ultimately it is an investment into future initiatives that we'll like to see uh continue um since we do have an adopted comprehensive plan as well. >> Right. I'm still confused. So, we're at zero. If we do any further reductions right
now, we would go negative. We just said we don't want to go negative. But it doesn't make sense for us to to do that and have to I I'm just confused what don't have to go negative.
We can send those dollars back to CIP where we took them out if we could send them back to the you know the debt service for city hall that we took them out of. We asked staff for a for specific for zero, right? And what they brought to us was some reductions. I
think, you know, as council member Gardner said, some some of them weren't county tricks and and then we reduced city hall and we reduced CI. Yeah. So in my opinion based on somewhat what
you said about let's not add anything the professional services for 69,000 is is an easy decision in my opinion main street that's 150k by not adding those two things for next year which
have already been put into the budget >> but this isn't long main street >> it is not correct >> it is not main street or main street went away Right. And this is new. >> This absorbed this took the woman main street position and put it into this
department. >> Mhm. >> To replace. >> It is not a new position. This position live in our department. And so we're just reimagining the duties a little different and changing the name. >> So who held this position prior?
>> The employee name was Riley Kennedy >> and she vacated in February of this year. >> Right. But that was for Main Street which no longer exists in charge of Main Street. >> Right. >> Right. But it was in this department. >> Yeah.
>> With new duty. >> They already you already did that with her in Main Street. You took her into the department and you worked at what could you do to for to do help in your department.
>> Perfect. I would agree. >> You have to pay membership fees. We had to pay like 40 grand a year. >> No, it wasn't 40 grand. It was only >> right under 5,000 total. But we we did do away with the membership part of the
position. Yes. It wasn't originally though. >> Uh the contract I've seen was on the $5,000 for me. Mayor Kell and me met with the lady that was from Granite Falls that worked for
>> first year we could do it for a low fee and then it'd be 40,000. >> It predates me. What I can say is that position similar to this position lived in part there's still a need throughout the community. You know, we heard feedback during the comprehensive
plan outreach that um downtown should be a focus. Three council members, council member Oz Gilerson and Gardner just had a town hall downtown and one thing that was screened out to all three of them was that there's the need for intentional um reinvestment into
downtown. And we feel that this position can to some of that concern too. >> When you say reinvestment, what do you mean? >> Just some targeted outreach and making sure that we're bringing businesses into downtown and making sure that businesses
that are currently in downtown have what they need to operate from what the city can control. >> One has everything they want. I think there's still some work that we can do internally and things that the city is over that we can be more of a
resource to our businesses downtown if we're truly serious about making sure that um downtown is a community of itself where it's the central hub of the city. So, >> but they got to work together with the city.
>> I agree. And currently capacity capacity there's a few that are, but most of them aren't. I think that's something that this position could explore. >> So then how does this deal with EDC then? Because that's supposed to be the
project of county and city. >> That's another reason why we're pushing for uh a reimagination of the position instead of relying on just another organization. Uh currently you all know that BBC is experiencing some
instability and so in order to take take the reigns on some of the economic development and really drive it for the city of Wilmer, it's only that this um the city is in charge of that. When did you when would you plan to have brought this to the council propos I
mean you said that this is very much in a draft form and what would you assume? >> The first quarter of next year. >> Okay. felt probably like by the time we interviewed and everything like maybe we're 6 months into the year
>> four or six I just say >> sure maybe this is something we don't budget for next year and revisit in 2027 >> I disagree with that we've got an interim PDC person but let downtown and the rest of it trouble more quickly
sooner we can get somebody on this ro the Guess I have more I have more trust in our current planning department. Our ability to continue to produce the current department,
>> but they've done a great job without them. with >> I don't I don't see downtown in a better position than it was 5 years ago. >> Bacon buildings are there downtown. Yeah, there isn't.
My read on the professional services when we had that meeting that night was that the consensus of the council was opposed to that. Was I wrong about that? >> No. No. >> Can we eliminate that 69,000? >> Send that back to
this year's budget. >> No. >> No. >> Yeah. So the intent that when that item was brought before the council in November um we will have we will have dollars in 2025 that will be unspent. So our our plan was to utilize 2025 funds
about half a little little less than half with the additional new dollars of the 69,000 to cover the entire program. >> But we said no to it. We said absolutely not. We weren't interested in doing it right now. So why would you
>> the C if I if I may council member Nelson there was not an action at the that at meeting so if that is the consensus tonight we can remove it from the budget. >> If there was no we just >> there was no motion because no one wanted to do it
never called for a motion. That that was unclear to staff, but if that is the consensus tonight, we we can remove that. >> Well, that money that you had budget for that, then we just put that in the IP give us a little bit more
flexible on it. >> Even if it's like my thought is just that it's in savings for for the next time we come around to a budget cycle. Like isn't there a community investment fund that we've drawn out of >> uh the community investment fund for 25?
No. If that's only Well, it uh yes, but the only funds that are withdrawn from that are to pay debt obligation, pre existing bonds under community investment fund. uh in 2024 2.3 the county did utilize community
investment funds around 700,000 to help pay for some capital improvement. That was a one time one time fit. >> So we were going to shift that 79,000 the community investment fund be a good place to put that. I would recommend it
would go to the capital improvement program >> since that would be I think that the staff's recommendation for it to remain in that fund. Uh so it continues to be in that fund moving forward. If it was to go to a different fund those
those dollars wouldn't be necessarily available in future years. >> Thank you. >> Justin I have a just one to 2%. You're not asking necessarily for a cut, but more of a reallocation. >> Correct. Okay. Make a motion.
>> No, right. >> Explain what you just said one more time. >> 1 to 2% cut where >> like operations like the the heart of the budget, right?
What happened in order to maintain the budget and the funding for all the departments and the staff, all the operations, in order to keep that where it is, you we took money away from what originally was proposed for the for city hall and what
was originally proposed for capital improvements. Those capital improvement needs aren't going away. Just underfunding them. This is why I my belief is that the the budget that we currently have is not sustainable. So either we're going to have to raise
taxes to to sustain the budget that we currently have and address the CIP needs or we're cuts for the budget to reallocate those dollars to CIP. >> So what do you want to do? So we signal to that $69,000.
>> Where do you want to put them in? >> CIP fund. but not allocated for CIP this year. >> Correct. >> Or I'm open if we want to go back and revisit the CIP allocations for this
year. I'd be open to that as well. Mr. If I may just offer a suggestion if that was the desire was to reallocate the any funds any funds to a capital improvement program. Um
those dollars can sit in a fund and council can reallocate or assign them to a project at any time. So a decision would not necessarily need to be made for a specific project prior to the end of the year. just if if timing is a concern,
but they would just live in fund 450 uh capital improvement fund. What is going to be the motion next week? staff just bring us an updated consensus proposal then >> is there a dollar amount you want
1% one and a half 2% >> that's what I want but I don't I don't sense that this table's in agreement with me >> that's but I guess that's what we're looking for because right >> we don't want to bring five different things >> either >> like I'm assuming that whenever we get
to where we have a consensus tonight that staff would make the adjustment and bring us that proposed budget. >> I'm good with the 69,000 being reallocated and leaving fixed. Make sure we have billard.
>> Yeah, we should start early to this point. I >> with that Justin >> I had more questions for the other department >> and I think as we're going through and looking at numbers I think there's
others that we still have some conversation about but that might just be me >> maybe next year we should do each two part
doesn't tell us what they're doing, what they need. I also think it would be helpful and I've had some conversation where I feel like this is already what staff is thinking about is getting started like in January for the budget, but I think that should come from us telling staff
here's what we want for a bottom line, not come up with your big wish list and then return it down saying here's what we're okay with. Figure out your priorities and make it work within that range. I think that reviewing budget, approving
this budget and then start reviewing the budget with where are we at. We've asked staff to do what they can to do any kind of reductions. But if we review it and see where we're at, that will help us to
understand with when we build the budget next year. Just one thing off that, we have coming up. You know, if we don't get enough people on on that passes,
then we're in big trouble. Our taxes are really going to have to go up to pay off those bonds. And that's next Monday. We got to vote on that probably. So,
you know, if that passes and it fails in 3 years, who's going to be living a long, you know, we can't make a a little cut here and there now. and fiber passes and we're not able to make 100% of the bond
payments for my calculations. I think we'll take about 1,400 people in phase one for the just the bond and interest. >> I can I can verify that. >> That's what I'm thinking. And we have
800 signed up. We signed up for a whole city >> and I think our staff are doing a great job figuring that out and will bring us a proposal next Monday >> with whether it we can go forward or not. >> But let's take a look if it does go forward and it does where are we going
to be at in three years? >> Yeah, Mr. mayor, members of the council, since it was brought up, I think it's only fair to let the council know that there will staff will not be bringing a action item on broadband on Monday. Uh after bids were opened, um and we
started our vetting with apparent low bidder, uh it was apparent to us and in the contractor that line items were missed in their bid submission. Uh and they have withdrawn their bid. Uh so we have reached out to the second low bidder which was roughly
$300,000 higher or 7.6 million um through that vetting process with them. But we'll have it absolutely have an update to the council or next steps. There's some more information that we need to u to bring to the public t or bring to the to the council table. Um
but there will not be an action item on Monday. Just on participation and signups, what was our original target? 212. 212. 8:18 p.m. We have 938 total orders. Um,
that has to get redistributed by phase. We have 300 as of last week we had 326 in phase one number. I think that tells us
that people are very interested in want to see a system that delivers. I don't want mean to derail the project or derail the conversation broad, but um no action item on Monday, but we'll have
a more comprehensive update for you all. I'm looking for consensus on it as it is and then put this 69,000 for professional services. I agree. But there we go. One, two, three, four.
Yeah, I can go with that. The conversation about auditorium. I was looking at that budget item specifically. This year we budgeted $75,000 for it. Only spent 37,000. We incur a lot of the expenses in the
month of December and November takes a lot to keep. So maybe that's where where it's off. But is that also I mean right now it's functioning and open is that one budgeted too high I guess is my question.
Council member Gilbertson said I'm pulling that budget up right now. I get an actual year to date. you know, the largest expense at I can verify, but I believe it's right around 65,000, which which is current the current 2026 proposed budget,
$64,518. It's a 9 and a half decrease from 25 to 26. Our largest expense about 40,000 37500 is utilities that the heat and it's just a old
building. Uh we've got 6,000 uh 18,000 in maintenance, just ongoing maintenance for the building, as well as $1,000 for small tools, that kind of stuff. Just in more incidental or incidentals, of course, we have to
ensure and license the building. That's an additional cost. But um one of the in the initial proposal we could potentially be looking looking at eliminate all of the ongoing maintenance costs out of that building which is right around 20,000 but that would still
I mean we can't shut the water off or shut the heat off um till nothing freezes but right >> that means no basketball >> essentially it would shut the doors >> which people are using on a regular basis
>> just had bunch there the other day. >> Yeah. >> You know, reverse that. I think there is more that could be done there, but I don't know that it brings in any revenue. So, >> um revenues are very light. I know Rob, we talked or we talked with director
Bombgard about auditorium revenues. Um it's very very light. It's used for morning basketball. >> This is less than $2,000. So is the 64,000 higher low I guess is the single bit my takeaway
if we're budgeting for 2026 518 even though we've only spent 35,423 right now. >> Yeah, the utilities will be some of the colder months. I'm sure that increase will go up. Um >> I don't know if we'll hit 40,000 in in
in utilities. We've been averaging the mid mid30s to high 20s, but we're we've already exceeded our we're very close to our 2024 actual. >> Okay. >> Um >> again, we'd be looking nominal
reductions. Recommending nominal reductions. >> The maintenance of structures could go down. That's at 12,000. So that's why that's up to 64,000 compared to what actual wasn't 2024 was
35 35,000. >> Is anyone still checking for any grants or anything? Have we talked to Lindstrand about museum there? Do you have any funding? >> He has no funding. I talked to him
before the veterans Have you heard me as a group that's looking? >> We've never we haven't met with any group that's been looking or what they are considering. >> The two of you has five people that are
researching discussing options and all kinds of people. O'Brien was doing work on it. We never were approach any room for anything to make further discussions and move that discussion further.
>> Yeah, it's only been five years. >> We still don't know rew auditorium. >> There's no current projects planned for the auditorium. Just briefly check that the vote they have students that could
work on it. I don't think I was just going to say I don't know that you might not be able to get to it, but I would feel a lot better knowing that we sold this building, those funds could
move into the capital improvements as well, but we could start taking a look at some of those other projects, the funds. So, that's beautiful. But at this point in time, we weren't
talking some talking about other things to do with it. >> I don't think the council's ever had a conversation about >> I think we have last going to do we're going to sell it and they back out.
>> Yeah. >> Not a full council meeting. We've had briefings on. Yeah, maybe that's something else we need to talk about. So, >> and beyond to do can't just keep moving along with it
like it is. We either need to fix it or costing us money. >> I agree with you. I do think that there just needs to be some decisions made probably on this building and that building and early and you know >> we just keep on
>> city hall talk about that. >> Well that we're waiting on the county that's public the countyy's not going to do anything. So in real life with the auditorium, no
city. >> Well, I've gone through about seven or eight different locations for city hall in the past year, year and a half. >> I know. >> You know, something pops up and something else going to pop up and
something else going to pop up. We we have to make up our money. We're building brand new, we're just going to fix it up. Same with the community center. We just have to make our decision and say we can't afford this, we can't afford this, we can't afford this. What
are we going to do here? Something has to come and go to be able to do something. And right now, if we're going to hold on to this, then the community centers something's going to have to happen with that.
>> That was the conversation. >> Yeah. I just think like sometimes it I think for for this building it would be good for us to have a conversation and and set a direction for staff to work on so they know we're looking for
which I think you tonight's a good example of sometimes we don't give them enough direction and then and I think the same thing with the auditorium I think that's never going to come to us with a perfect plan to save the auditorium or to sell the auditorium like we just need to set more direction
about where we want to go and it's been a new council. We've had some new people added since we've had conversations on these things in the past and we get to have some conversations on the property that we own early. But it is one of the things I struggle
with with their console briefing, >> especially when people don't show up or they don't get in. >> And so we spend two and a half hours going over something and talking about some things and doing nothing. We show
up the council meeting and people who aren't there don't have a clue what we talked about. I guess when it comes to the budget, bringing it back to our our original topic, um seeing properties come off the tax roll
is not something I'd like to see. So, if there's a property that is on the tax rolls, I'd like to keep it on the tax rolls, which would ultimately be this building, which is on the tax roles currently. And so, um, having the city
take over those properties does not help our budget at all. If anything, it hurts it. And so, uh, if you're looking for direction from from my perspective, I'd like to keep privately owned companies owning majority of the property in the city of Lman uh, to help make these
budgets fit together much easier. So, >> but hasn't that already happened with this building? because the city owns it. >> Well, they also want to join the property. >> I'm curious.
>> Next year, it'll be out tax without tax because the city owns it. Yes. >> You transfer 20 paid yourself. >> Yeah. Well, the county got their cut though. So did the schools. >> Yes. we've lost it.
But if we use it for our own use, we're saving money then because we don't have to build. It's a >> and you could be cutting utility expenses because the community center is
probably a lot more expensive in maintenance and upkeep and such than this building would be. because it's also small. It could be saving and then we can sell that land and put it on tax
which is a lot more than this one or city hall. We're just removing are we consensus that we I don't 69,000 CP and keep it at zero and
>> start in January try to figure things out one one more out for the group. Um, I guess if we're going to put it towards anything, I guess rather see that city hall go back up to where it was rather than be reset at a flat
rate of 500,000. If we have to do that, keep the bond payments going, but >> well, I know bond, but for future $10 million bond, you need about 575.
No, I guess what I mean is we've reduced the city hall line item in our budget. We backed it off to 500,000 instead of letting it continue to be what is it? 5%. >> 3% >> 3%. And so I'd rather see it at 3%. >> Yes.
>> Yeah. When I first started out, I think was 487,000, >> right? >> So we're still up over when we first started that down the road if we take from it. stealing from Peter or take it down further. So if you were gonna actually
get something done here, stop cutting. Stop doing this. Make the hard decision today. >> That that's what we did in the fires. It went for four 487 the night and I back almost every year has gone up since
then. This year we had to make cuts. you did >> and we we had him do it and we talked about this and uh I'm not buying with adding any more onto it. I actually want to see a little bit lower budget because I'm actually listening to the citizens
of Wilmer on what they want. >> They also want streets and safety and they want all of it and >> you have to pay for that stuff. I understand it's hard to pay taxes, but if everybody wants all the things, we
got to have taxes. >> I will say I'm very impressed with the plan. >> I do want to point out that we did trans in actuality in this budget to get 0% tax rate. We did have to take out of the
general fund operating dollars $175,000 to pay for the street bond. So it there was a reduction. I don't want to think that there was no reductions. There were reductions in the budget. And I think if
um I don't Carl does have his book here. If you go through the object code and this was before that that was the preliminary object code. There are if you look in operations like communications and
things like that we made reductions in operation expenses. So there were even before before the preliminary budget that that there was at the preliminary budget time. So
through small tools communications >> maintenance >> maintenance there there were reductions within those kind of objects. Legal was an increase.
Professional service was an increase. I didn't find but I'd prefer to go back to sitting home. going back to what you were talking about, Tom, and
investing in our fund for a city hall enough to come up with the money. Second of all, keep pace with construction cost and return on funds.
It's uh are we making it anyway? >> I guess I'd rather see it in in CIP just because I think it's fairly easy to imagine a scenario where we're not moving on city hall for quite a while and we're probably moving on in the community center first and then we'll have money to do. Yeah,
>> we might have squad cards. We keep cutting achieve squad cards every year. Number eight, snow. I was going to say that's >> Yeah. >> What? last year or what was it agreed to agree to
>> is it is it city hall or >> CIP CI >> I would agree with CIP as well that's just >> it's a holding area we've got things that we projects or something like Okay.
Anything else? >> No. Well, I can let you know that we're we are going to have an open house for the fourth street reconstruction to see what the residents want for design. So, that'll be on the 18th.
Postcards are going to go out. >> What? >> Will you send us an invite? >> Thanks for changing the stop sign. Oh, she called and thanks public works. >> Saw Rick out there doing it by himself.
You should get register.