I'd like to call this meeting in order and welcome you here this evening. I'd like to call on, oh, let's see, how about the public works director?
Ingenious 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.
Thank you. Roll call.
Martha Sellers.
Here.
Mike Meese.
Here.
Jim Simon.
Here.
Russ Nelson.
Here.
Chris Menekucci.
Here.
Jim Doyle.
Here.
Renee Manimo.
Here.
Very good.
Next on our agenda is the public forum. This is on every council agenda.
agenda. Before starting your comments, please state your name and address in an audible tone
of voice. For the record, this is a time for individuals to comment on the matters falling
within the purview of the Belgrade City Council that are not already on the agenda. There
will be an opportunity in conjunction with each agenda item for comments pertaining
to that item. Please limit your comments to three minutes. So first call for public
Second call for public comment.
Third and final call for public forum comment.
There will be no interest in the public forum.
We'll close the public forum.
We'll move to our consent agenda.
We have just items relating to drafts of minutes.
Motion to consent agenda.
Second.
Moved by Council Member Simon,
seconded by Council Member Meese.
Is there any discussion?
There being none, those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Those opposed, same sign.
Motion carries unanimously.
Next on our agenda is a proclamation.
As soon as I find it, there it is.
For Arbor Day, April 28th, 2003.
City of Belgrade proclamation for Arbor Day 2023.
Whereas Arbor Day in Montana is officially the last Friday in April.
And whereas natural areas, trees and landscapes provide not only community beautification,
but also economic and environmental benefits.
And whereas trees provide many benefits to the community,
including air purification, windbreaks, noise reduction, shade, and energy savings.
and whereas planting trees and maintaining older trees provides an opportunity for community interaction,
volunteerism, economic development, and environmental conservation,
and whereas our efforts to improve the environment benefit present and future generations.
Now therefore, I, Russell C. Nelson, the Mayor of Belgrade,
hereby recognize April 28, 2023 as Arbor Day and encourage citizens to participate in appropriate activities
and to take advantage of the benefits of the parks and other natural areas in our community,
dated the 17th day of January 2023.
Next item on our discussion agenda is to consider, discuss and consider public access and utilities
meets for tract 1A of certificate of survey number 78A.
Mr. Eastwood, welcome.
good evening as you said that public access and utility easement this is
associated with the FedEx ground project just north of East Frank Road and what
will be through the easement if approved the extension of Yukon lane from where
it ends currently by our water tower on that side of town the property
The party owners already signed the easement and we went through that easement and agreement with the city attorney and came to reasonable terms, I guess, for everything on that.
So if there's any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.
Any questions of Mr. Eastwood?
So this will punch the road down to Frank then?
Yes.
And complete that?
Yep.
Cool.
Good.
Yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
I'd ask if there's any public comment concerning this utility easement, any public comment?
Is there any public comment?
They're being done.
Is there any representatives of the applicant who wish to speak?
Nope.
Very good.
We'll let the council make a decision then.
Based on the recommendations of staff and the discussion heard,
I move to authorize the city manager to sign the public access and utility easement with Osterman associated with tract 1a of Certificate of Survey number 78a
Moved by council member cellar seconded by council member Matamol. Is there any discussion?
Is there any discussion?
There being none those in favor of the motion please signify by saying aye.
Aye.
All right, motion carries unanimously.
Next item on the discussion agenda
is to discuss possible changes
to the wastewater allocation policy.
Hello again.
Hello again, Mr. Eastwood.
As I guess some of you may be aware,
our current wastewater allocation policy
that was approved by city council
For properties annexed before January 1 of 2020,
and then they had to be within 500 feet
of existing wastewater system lines
to be able to be considered for allocation
of available wastewater capacity.
That's issued on a first come first serve basis,
based on them submitting construction plans
for any connections to the city system,
and that those are reviewed and approved by the city.
Prior to that, I think the only differences were that the annexation date was June or actually July 1st of 2018.
About the time, I guess, when we were doing our wastewater treatment plant upgrades,
and as we got to see that we still had some available capacity, we shifted that to the 2020 date.
So I guess kind of what we're presenting is going to discuss among city council what direction you would like to go with allocating that available wastewater capacity as the new water reclamation facility comes online and then to make any changes I guess with recent annexations that we've had in the city.
When the new plant comes online, will that allow some additional capacity for those subdivisions that are in various stages?
It does. Where we're sitting at right now, and this is just to grab a number from memory,
is about 2,000 dwelling units of available capacity with what's been allocated and approved up to this point.
We do have some developments currently in for review such as yellow iron
subdivision and jackrabbit crossing. Both of those have infrastructure plans in
that are currently under review that would take away from some of that
available capacity. Where does Ashton Meadows fit in that? Ashton Meadows
actually has allocation they're not approved they would way we've been
doing approval is at the final plat stage but we will kind of allocate it
once we've reviewed the plans.
Ash de Meadows phase one has their plans approved
and talked to the contractor this morning.
They're just waiting on getting a right away permits
in order, traffic control plan
and finalizing the construction contract
with the development group on that
before they start construction.
I think they were thinking sometime here
in the next two to three weeks.
And that's infrastructure.
Yeah, water, sewer, roads, sidewalks, those, I think.
Okay, very good.
We do have some others, you know, hanging out there, some commercial stuff that will use some of that capacity that's available.
And then I have not heard from the airport what they're planning on doing this year.
What they did last year, I do know we have some hangers in the works.
And the airport did mention that they wanted to have a meeting to kind of go over some
things, which that usually means that they have something coming up that they'd like
to talk about.
So I guess the direction we're looking for is how the City Council would like to proceed
with the new plant coming online.
And as these other developments come in, what methodology, if we continue kind of
what we have and shifts the annexation date again to, you know, 2022 or 2023 along those
lines or change course a little bit, but in the interest of the city, and do we look at
where we allocate, you know, based on type of land use, do we give preference to commercial
development, presidential, you know, what's in the best interest of the city, you know,
And for you know that limited available capacity that we have until we can get the next upgrade done
The staff and
Have a recommendation
we have discussed just
for the
benefit of the city that preference is
Leading towards allocation on the commercial development as it comes in that has not had already a
capacity reservation
I guess explaining that, stuff we're working through at DEQ is when a final plat goes and
we basically have to reserve all that capacity on paper, even though that development may
not happen, it could be five years, 10 years or that down the road.
Those ones that don't have that, like say a FedEx ground is a perfect example where
that came in on that property annexed and moved forward with development, something along those
lines that giving them preference over a residential, a smaller residential project.
Yeah, a lot of the commercial will use a lot of, most commercials won't use a lot of water
and sewer, is that the correct statement? That is fair statement, they're not as
intensive as our residential uses, they put less strain on the limited resources that
available. Residential also has impacts beyond just the water and wastewater side that you know
snow removal and additional maintenance needs and additional traffic demands typically on your
streets and that that you don't you do have with commercial but some of that's from your local
resident population that you have already. What's the amount that we're actually pumping
that is a significant number less than what's on paper.
Do you know what that number is? Oh, we average
right now it's like around
880,000 gallons per day. But the
new planting, I think that's what we've been seeing coming in. The plants
rated for 1.74 million gallons per day.
The new plant. The new plant, yes.
And some of that, oh, as you may be aware, you get to see when you get to get to do a tour of the water reclamation facility.
We were not pre-treating or screening, I guess, any of the inflow coming into the lagoons.
And so anything that's in that inflow, you know, the paper products and things like that may have affected some of the inflow measurements.
We're still confirming if that is correct or not, but that has an impact on capacity as well.
So now the system, we are measuring that a little more accurate with the new equipment that has been installed.
And so we'll refine kind of that baseline number that we're at.
So that may help on the capacity side also.
Yeah.
Very good.
So Tom your alternative B is kind of the direction I guess it would be here that
you were leaning was that your alternative B all with the commercial
development yes maybe because look like alternative a essentially no change the
current policy and alternative B would be the kind of take out the
seniority. Oh and that'd be something we have discussed in the past on doing
basically it's kind of on a first-come first-serve basis I think the
difference here is given that preference if you have two competing
developments would be with the commercial project.
Mr. Cardwell. Thank
you Mayor. Councilmember Meese the policy that you're looking at there is
the last update that the council adopted back in 2021 and that the motion for what was adopted
is attached to the very back of that. That's not the, that's not a staff proposal for updated
changes for now. What the hope was tonight is to get some overall guidance and direction of
what are, are we comfortable of staff looking at maybe adjusting the first come first serve
policy and if so we can then go back and write that type of policy up and bring
I would like to see us take a closer or harder look at commercial properties. If we have an
opportunity to get something in here, put some revenue into the tax base in lieu of another
residential area, I'd like to see us lean towards that direction. You know, not to get us in
trouble or anything, but generate some revenue so we can get some commercial entities in
here maybe some jobs. I don't want to have a situation where we had that one
outfit that was going to come in here with the cookies and they couldn't get
allocation and they pulled up stakes and went somewhere else. That would have been
a good commercial business in Belgrade and I don't want that situation to
happen in the future. So that would be my suggestion. Yeah another side would be
we're low on housing and we need all the housing we get but we do have a
a fair number of subdivisions that are already annexed and have capacity and have building
more land to build, so I think there's enough being built that what council members suggesting
probably works in both ways. We still have housing going on. It's already been approved
and tried to let this go, so that's what makes sense to me, too.
Everybody else?
Are there any housing groups, possibilities, in the works that are moving more slowly and
they've already had something allocated to them and that's sitting there and could be
used in a different way or obviously that would make everybody angry.
I'm just trying to understand what they're doing.
Suggesting we do that, I'm just trying to find like are there same things in the
hopper that are actually large and aren't moving very quickly and others could move
past that?
No, and I haven't seen either moving slowly.
The ones that are kind of in the works
is Mayor Brown, Ashton Meadows.
They're gonna be getting going.
One's actively under construction
would be the Middle Arc Ranch subdivision, phase five.
I've been told they're looking to get in phase six
going on that.
That's all the infrastructure stuff,
no home construction as of yet.
West Post subdivision, I think their plan
is to get all of the infrastructure done and I can't, you know, spend their
checkbook and I guess, well I'm standing here, but that is their intent as
they've told me is to get all the infrastructure done for the whole
subdivision this year if possible. There is a substantial residential
component with that and then, you know, we do have the other ones that
are kind of, haven't really submitted on the residential side like the
But there's the inventory out there and then we continually been having meetings even since the holidays of other developers looking and a lot of it's what we got residential and commercial mix of both.
I think any alternatives need to be explored so we can kind of continue to grow and don't, you know, stall out.
And so if that has to play numbers with the paper game, essentially, I think we need to look at it on top of trying to get the EQ rules changed as well.
The other thing is that the West Post, the Davis property, that's been in the city a long time, so all that business has been approved already, is my point.
So there's a lot of business there. I guess this the the other business would be the development on check the jackrabbit that's commercial that
Would and what's the time frame for those developments related to needing that service?
Would you guess but yellow-iron jackrabbit crossing or hoping to start construction this year that would be extending the water and sewer means from
No, it's roughly like Thunder Road
South the Frank Road and into the development
So, and then I've been in discussions with some engineers, I guess, on the design side
of things for some commercial development out that project that they're already looking
and wanting to get going as soon as they can.
So, I would say this year we should be seeing some things on those projects, but, you know,
or the next, you know, up through the next five years, I would say you would start
to form, build out on those projects.
Yes, Mr. Cardwell.
Thank you.
So a couple other comments.
I think overall, as we've talked about this internally
with staff, is like Tom mentioned,
that we're leaning to suggesting a commercial first approach.
And then talking about, from a multifamily perspective,
probably being second, and then moving
into lower density residential being third.
However, there's a couple caveats that will probably present to council in a formal report that want to throw out here.
One is that we know is that the school district is looking to add schools on the south side of town and looking to be annexed with that DNRC property that they've procured.
I think it would be very wise for the city to make it in its policy that we will pre-allocate the capacity for the school district that would be needed over there for any schools that could come in.
We also know that there's a Central Valley fire is looking at adding a station over there as well
And so while everything is coming down and we could get into a point where we're talking very small edu
Capacity limits. I think it staff would be recommending to council that we carve out
Those government entities that we know we're coming in as well in whatever policy that we bring
So if we had a first, second, third layout, like you just said, so the people in option
number two with the more dense housing, how are they knowing whether or not they should
keep plugging forward?
What does that look like when somebody's in category one and they're not as far along
as the people in category two?
That's a great question and that's not an easy one to answer either because a lot of
times we're going to have to go based upon what they're communicating with us because
our first question is going to be, are you shovel-ready?
Are you building this now?
And we'll need to work with Rick on some of this language as possible where we can
get commitments from them of if we're going to allocate this capacity to you, we need
an understanding from you that you're actually going to construct this in this time frame.
And that would then allow those individuals to know where they're at in the pecking order
a lot better versus us just saying, well, we know we've got all these coming down the
pike and we think you're going to fit in, but we don't know.
I think overall with our until we can either get this is solved with DEQ, which we're
making some progress on or the phase two of the plant is done we've got to kind
of hold some of our developers feet to the fire of look we don't want we want
you in Belgrade we're happy to have you but we need to maybe reduce how big your
ask is up front of some of these large low density residential areas that are
builds out of 20 years we may be going to them saying we want to see this
phased in instead of asking for it all at once.
So those are some of the ideas that staff has on the table.
That would be new development with that,
or is that going back and asking current developments?
I do not believe it's on the table for us
to change anybody that we've already given a letter to.
Thank you, yeah, very good.
Would there, with the scenario that you just used,
would it be smart to have an allocate, deallocate?
I don't know what the right word is.
but if they don't meet the time frame that they're talking about.
Because if I were one of them, I'd say, yes, I'm going to get it done by then.
Right.
Which is exactly why we've got to get our legal RIC involved to make sure that if we
are going to hold them into that type of accountability,
that there's not a risk that we're violating some MCA statute that we're not aware of at this time.
Yeah.
Because recent history, Ryan Glenn, all that infrastructure out there,
than downturn or what, 2008 and sat for years.
Right.
It's a good place to teach your kids how to drive.
Right.
And as staff, I think it's very important
that I want to put this on the record
that we know that this is not an ideal situation.
We want all of this growth to come in.
We're excited about it.
We're happy that we're known as a community that
is open to development and not very difficult to work with.
and we just ask for patience with our development community
that as we work through some legislative hurdles on this
that these are some of our best options that are available to us
and if they want to join the fight with us in
trying to get these rules changed we would be happy to
work with them on it because ultimately as Tom just said we're not even close to
50% of the overall operating capacity of our new
plant but yet on paper were over 95 to 96 percent allocated. So it's a big difference.
It just seems silly. Every time I hear that my blood pressure goes up because it just doesn't make sense
the paper deal. That's the rules today unless we get them changed. So good. Well thank you for
answering the questions. I have a question. My hand's been up, but nobody looks. That's
all right. Well, thank you, Chris. I always have something to say. My foremost thought
always is illegal ramifications of changing the order. And I just am nervous about that.
So, and I know you thought about it, but I need to hear out loud how, what's the approach?
Oh, and if I may.
Yes, please do.
Well, and as Neil alluded to, that what we would do is take feedback,
I guess that we've gathered here this evening and kind of draft something up
and then present that to council at a future meeting, probably relatively soon,
but at least give you an opportunity to see what the actual proposal is and then to discuss
and consider that and if that's a direction that you would like to go.
Chris, I have a question of you.
Are you thinking that some of this might seem discriminatory?
Is that your thought or when we allocate to one to the other?
Yeah, I didn't think discriminatory, but I just want to know how we're going to go over that
line and what ramifications have you thought that through, or do you expect any?
I'm just nervous about the very thought of those who were in line for a while.
And I see where we're going and I'm all on board with that.
I just want to make sure that I'm comfortable doing this
if there's a 90, 80% chance of no legal ramifications
then I'm good with it.
But if you figure out there's going to be
everything held up for a long time,
And I'm sure you have the answers to that, but I'm just nervous.
Thank you, Chris.
City Manager Cardwell has some thoughts he wants to share or our attorney.
Well, I don't.
I obviously want an opportunity to review any policy that comes up.
And Chris, I agree with you.
No one has a crystal ball here, I guess that's my first thought here, and we certainly don't
want to prevent a developer from going ahead with the development, but there's a reality
of how much capacity we're going to be able to use.
all of the annexation service plans that were adopted for all of the annexations
talk about limited capacity and you know they they may not we may not have the
capacity for them to develop when they want to develop so I everyone's been on
notice I think frankly I think everybody's a little bit surprised at
this last you know the recent upgrade for the water facility isn't enough to you
know do everything to satisfy growth further into the future and but that's
just the reality of it so we're doing everything we can and but anyway that's
kind of a long answer but we'll look at it and and certainly you know I'm
I'm certainly going to do everything I can to protect the interests of the city.
Mr. Cardwell, do you have any other words?
What our city attorney said.
Go ahead, Chris. Anything else?
No, just a request to the city manager to upgrade the sound system on this deal.
I think Jim will agree. We get about aptly said.
We've got a Amazon cable ordered that will be ready for next meeting.
Sweet. Thank you.
Any other questions
of Mr. Eastwood?
Or if you have some other words, go ahead.
Well, the only other thing I would add is that there's anything,
other alternatives I guess the council would have that they would like us to consider other than what we have presented.
And then we can certainly take that direction and incorporate it just as a council member
of Manukuchi mentioned, you know, some of these other things you need to consider when you're
putting this policy together.
But if there's a different allocation method you'd like us to look at or that help represents
the people that you represent, we'll certainly take that into consideration as we put something
together.
What I would like to see is whatever program we come up with, if it's as you've spoken
Tonight, commercial first, and then if we could have some, rather than just that, who fits into
each of those that we know about today? So we can maybe see who gets left out. That will
tell us that. Okay, so I'd like to see who the commercials are that would use what we
think and then multi and then single family. That may be subdivisions, that may be whatever
it is. But I want to know who's in each bucket. It would be useful for me.
One thing it might be good to is that if we get everything on our wish list from
the DEQ for changes, how would that impact this as well? It goes away.
Seamless transition. Well, I still think you're going to have a pecking order,
right? Because you're still going to probably end up using building permits
and allocation and combination to then define resources
and what triggers an upgrade.
Yeah.
We could certainly write that in to the policy so that we wouldn't have
to necessarily come back and do another one,
because that's a relatively simple ask, very easy method for us.
If DEQ grants us what we're looking for,
we would move to a CO-based allocation level
that it is strictly first-come, first-serve at the moment that you are
granted the CO and then it becomes the city's responsibility to monitor the
pace of that growth and the actual capacity to know when we need to be
adding that additional capacity. So it would be a very simple transition once
that hopefully takes place and we could definitely write that into it.
Great.
I guess that's it. Thank you, Mr. Eastwood.
Thank you for your time.
I'd ask, because I haven't yet, if there's any public comment concerning this discussion.
Is there any public comment?
If you think of some later, please contact the city manager or any staff member you know,
and they can relay it to the city manager.
So,
don't think we need any motion on this.
Just think what my understanding is the staff is going to come back with a written recommendation based on what they heard tonight and then we'll talk about it more.
Yes.
Good.
All right.
Let's see.
Next is
discuss upcoming special meeting regarding parks, trails and recreation district.
Mr. Cardwell.
Well, thank you Mayor and Council. So this item is to draw attention to the fact that
I have called a special meeting of the City Council on Thursday, January 26th at 7 p.m.
that will be held in the council chambers. The items on that meeting will be pertaining
to the adoption of a resolution to put on the ballot on May 2nd a vote by the people
for the creation of the Belgrade Regional Parks, Trails and Recreation District and
an associated bond of in the amount of $49 million to construct the Belgrade Aquatics
and Recreation Center.
And the reason for the special meeting is that the County Commission will be holding
their meeting on the adjoining resolution on the 24th at 9 a.m. and for one very
important note is that will be in the Ag extension building, which is located at 903 North Black
Avenue and will not be in the standard County Commission room due to some renovations that
they are having in there at this time. So the public that wishes to comment, it's a pretty
big change, so we wanted to draw attention to that. We'll be presenting the final
language that is on that resolution that Dan Simmons, our bond attorney from Dorsey
Whitney has been putting together for us. The county's reviewed it and looked over it and we've
nailed down all the little final tweaks to it. The election office has been involved as well
because we have to get this to them by February 6 in order to make it on the ballot. And so all
of the timelines and nuances of this are all coming together and we're really excited to
see this. So look forward to hopefully the council being able to attend, have a
quorum and be able to take a vote on this to see if that's something the
council wants to officially put on the ballot. And I will be presenting at the
County Commission meeting the city's request to have this put on the ballot.
But I'm happy to answer any questions you may have or they could be saved
until the 26th as well I
don't it appears there's no comments by council I
assume everybody will be there will those that can't attend will a zoom like
tonight we'll have a zoom link available very good okay super all right nothing
there the next item is reports I asked mr. Cardwell if you are or if I should
about yesterday's. I think you should go for it Mayor. Thank you. Yesterday City
Manager Cardwell and Deputy Mayor Mies and I drove to Helena to give public
testimony against Senate Bill 142. This was a bill that was set to
change impact fees. There was a gentleman and he brought three of his
to his buddies to make their case for changing as they had some property in Whitefish and
were overcharged impact fees.
Once that was known to the city, I'm not sure how the city found out, but once it was discovered
the city refunded the money.
But these guys still aren't happy.
So they have this bill that would, what it would do is it would take impact fees
that cities would have to report to the Department of Commerce. Cities today get five percent
of the impact fees for administration. They wanted 20 percent of that to go to the Department
of Commerce to do what they had to do. And it had some other things that weren't good,
some other reporting. And I think they wanted time restriction, a time restriction. So
anyway or more red tape and certainly the governor is trying to get do red tape
productions we didn't get to say that but so then who spoke there were those
gentlemen there were three people at three or four people that spoke in
favor of that bill and then the rest of us the city of Belgrade city of White
Fish cities of Bozeman and Missoula and a city of Billings all had
representation and butte and butte thank you I forgot about butte and butte so they
all spoke against the Senate bill 142 and after it was all over the senators
indicate that they took that public comment and they'll decide on it later
maybe this Friday maybe next week but what did happen after that can I
don't have to. You do now, Mayor. I do now.
There's a potential that the governor's office
has an opinion and they may share it with the committee that we've learned that. So we'll
We'll see how that plays out.
Wow.
Very good.
Very well done.
Oh, gosh.
That's why you brought me along, keeping it in.
Thank you.
Keeping it in.
Even cute.
Yes, that's right.
Keeping it above the gym.
So we'll see how that transpires.
There will be other bills that are coming up that we probably will make more trips to
Helena and we'll keep you informed on those as they happen.
So that's all I have.
I'd call on our city attorney.
I don't have anything.
I'd call on our city manager, Mr. Cardwell.
Thank you, Mayor, for giving me a heart attack there.
Always keeping me on my toes.
That's right.
But I did ask.
You know, that was a great trip and it was really good to see a lot of the cities joining together.
And I want to thank Kelly Lynch, the director for the Montana League of Cities and Towns,
who does an excellent job and their staff
of keeping us informed of what's coming down
and letting us know things that we should be aware of
and helping coordinate the efforts
and making sure that our voices are heard on Helena
as all these important things are decided.
There is one other, it's really two sets of bills.
I don't have the numbers in front of me,
but I'll be happy to email those to council.
There's a House version and a Senate version
that would drastically change the way
that the mill levy structures work for municipalities and that it removes all
abilities of municipalities to ask for permanent mill levies and would also set
a requirement that at least 50% of the electorate that are the registered
voters have to participate in the election before a mill levy vote would
be considered valid and then also reduce the length of any mill levy to a maximum of six
years. There are many reasons why that would be detrimental to a city to do. The majority
of those revolve around that, and we're doing some internal studies on this and checking
on it, but the early cursory look is that there are very, very few, if not any,
any mill levy elections that ever have achieved that 50% of registered voter participation
in that we're really taking it from the stance of that it's not creating a majority rule
situation, it's creating a minority control type situation if you were to change the
rules in that aspect.
And then on top of it, the removal of a permanent structure, on top of the fact that
that you have that now 50% rule could mean like Belgrade, for example, why we would be
very opposed to this is something that we've been discussing about.
Our public safety mill levy is a permanent mill levy that was established many, many
years ago and the current rules and regulations require that we are only allowed to increase
our revenue by one half the rate of inflation
over a three year rolling average.
That's a large mouthful to say
that we are governmently bound, if you will,
to become extremely more efficient every single year
because we cannot grow at the rate of inflation.
So we're always gonna be behind from that aspect.
And so when you have a permanent mill levy
that may be a decade old,
much like our library mill levy is approaching that same time, time lane there.
You're eventually, the rate of inflation is outpacing your revenue growth,
and that amount of revenue that you're receiving is becoming less and less effective every year.
You combine that with, if the new rules took place,
and we wish to go out to the community to express that, hey, we feel that we're doing a good job,
but we could use your support in some additional services.
And the community backed us and supported it.
Then that levy would convert from a permanent male levy
to the six-year male levy.
And even assuming we got 50% of the participation
to establish that, then six years further down the road,
we could end up in a situation where we only got 49%
to the people voting on it.
And then that levy falls off.
And that is very, very difficult as a, frankly, as an organization and as a corporation, which
were a municipal corporation, to budget and plan and anticipate your ability to sustain
services when you cannot guarantee the revenues.
So there are, where the league and other cities are actively working with the
legislatures to draw attention to some of these issues that are in that bill and
the effects that it would have on us and hopefully we'll be able to draw some
attention to that and if this council or anybody wishes to participate in that
let me know and when we get the hearing dates and if we're asked to
participate we should probably make another trip up to the Hill to discuss
that one. I don't have any other for tonight.
Very good. Thank you, Mr. Cardwell. We'll move to FYI. We'll start with Council Member
Madimo under FYI. I don't think I have anything. I was excited to see that we are going to have
an ice cream place in Belgrade this summer. Okay. Very good. That's great. Over by
Lewis and Clark Park. It'll be a trailer and they all have genuine ice cream.
I'm
That's cute.
Council Member Menekuchi.
There is no snow in Pennsylvania, and I'm thankful.
Okay. Thank you.
Council Member Doyle.
I don't have anything to add tonight.
All right. Thank you.
Council Member...
Sorry, but there you go.
I'm getting old. I'm getting old.
I got just a couple of quick items.
I did attend the Central Valley Fire District Board meeting
meeting on January 10th. It was a pretty quick meeting. Talked a little bit about the legislative
activities, impact. These was one of them. Also, I wanted to point out a representative
from the union and the chief.
Talked about they have an increased volunteer participation recently and the culture is good
over there where the volunteers are wanting to come in and participate more. So that was
a refreshing update to hear, which is good. So things are improving on that front.
And
Living quarters or residential. So there was a couple people that were asking questions about that and the chief did a real
Nice job
Informing them what what they can expect for service on that end of the district as well
So and then pulling resources back to the Belgrade proper and down four corners is is the goal of that change
Other than that that was about it. And then one other thing. I don't know
Council Member Doyle, can you hear me by chance?
Yes.
Would you be available to sit in for me
on the February 14th Fire Board meeting at 5.30?
Yes.
Okay, great.
Thank you.
Council Member Meese.
Last week we have the PCC,
the Belgrade-Bosman-Gallatin County
Planning Coordination Committee meeting.
Reappointed myself as Chair in Sean O'Callaghan,
the Gallin County Planning Director as Co-Chair.
Jennifer Boyer, who's been our liaison,
I don't know exactly, kind of streamlining our meetings now
with her being elected to her position on the county.
She's actually going to take Zach's spot on the BCC
board as the county representative to help, I think, with some of the continuity there.
So I think some good things are happening.
We talked a little bit about the MPO, you know, really in kind of the beginning stages.
And I'm sure Neil will probably have some more updates in the next few weeks as those
discussions keep on going between what the Census Bureau map comes out as and with
with the county and city of Bozeman and city of Belgrade.
We did talk about doing some planning board roundtables
like we had done last year where we also included,
I think three forks participated,
West Yellowstone, maybe even Big Sky, I think.
So doing another one of those roundtable meetings
with a lot of the different jurisdictions
just to talk through issues that they see
and and I think it was helpful the last time and another one was the school
roundtable getting schools together to kind of talk about you know what future
planning and what their growth is looking like as well so a little bit
happening on the PCC so I think that's all I had. Very good thank you.
Councilmember Sellers. Yes I the library board meets next week but I will not
be there sad to say I've chosen to step down from the council and tonight is my
last night I want to thank everyone who helped me learn what to do and how to do
it Jason you get massive kudos for answering probably 700,000 questions
in a year and Gail I just want to thank you for bringing me along on the board
I enjoyed every minute of it and to everyone who works in the city I want
to thank you for all you do it's been really wonderful to to see that at a
more close level than I would as just a citizen I'm amazed and so impressed
with all that you do to make this city work and we are really, really lucky to have you.
I say that as a constituent and a voter from here on out. I appreciate every single thing that everyone of you does. Thank you.
Very good. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Sellers, for your service that you have put forth.
You've been a dedicated Council Member by immersing yourself in the issues and learning the issues.
And we certainly appreciate that and hate to see you go, but understand that our jobs
are more important than other things.
So we appreciate your time and wish you the best.
Thank you.
And let's see, related to that, I guess I should talk about that I think the city
We will look to appoint someone for Martha's spot and we would take applications for those
that live in that district and that is, what ward is that?
3.
3, Ward 3 and that's where you and Jim serve, is that correct?
If anybody's interested you can look, I think that's on our website, the wards, you can
see what Ward 3 covers and we just submit, if you're interested, please correspond
with myself and Mr. Cardwell, and we'll try to get that position filled.
So, very good. Anything else for the good of the order?
Move to adjourn.
Second.
Second. We're adjourned.
Jim Doyle.
I have that exact same clock that my husband gave to me 50 years ago.