City Council Work Session

Oak Grove · · More Oak Grove meetings

View original source →

Transcript

Download: Text · SRT
AI TRANSCRIPT

This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person — it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.

[0:00] We're starting a little early. All right, well, welcome to our work session dated June 8th, 2026, 530, and I have to tell you what, roll call, I have to tell you, you don't need to roll call for this. We're all here. We're all here. We're all here. We're here to talk about, we're talking with Rum River about building inspections, permits, fees, et cetera. Come up, Andy.
[0:29] Thank you.
[0:31] Mayor and council so thank you for the opportunity to go through this because we've actually had several iterations of this we had the proposal itself the line by line breakdown then a summary and now this we're able to provide it is a summary of the summary but it also gets a lot more detailed in the percentages as far as the adjustments whether they be up or down so I like the way this information was presented to you in writing we looked at it again just before we came to the meeting here and I believe it answers all the questions if there's
[1:00] Any questions in depth in further than that? That's why we're here.
[1:09] Anything to start
[1:09] us off with?
[1:13] I guess the biggest question that I had was about permit fees and I mean
[1:22] what's even required if they're all required by statute or if there's some on here that
[1:28] are still recommendations. Thank you for the question. We did identify that in an orange
[1:32] color, which was optional.
[1:34] So there's actually three items on the agenda or on the fee schedule that are optional,
[1:41] if you will, they're related to the commercial temp heating.
[1:46] What that is is when you have a propane source as temporary heat for a commercial
[1:50] structure, that there is a permitting process that's optional, some would say recommended.
[1:55] Whereas the protection of that LP tank would be identified or would be protected
[2:00] by bollards or concrete blocks so that nobody would run into it, as well as the gas lines
[2:05] themselves that run to the temporary heaters.
[2:07] In addition to that, there would be verification of the combustion air and makeup air so
[2:11] that the space that underheat and cover is called, that that area is not starved of oxygen.
[2:17] So that's being done through what a commercial mechanical, temporary mechanical permit.
[2:23] That is optional.
[2:24] That is in there, if the council so chooses to include that, we would administer that accordingly.
[2:28] if not, then that would be excluded. And then there's also, excuse me, the conversation
[2:34] that we had over the moved in structures, the mileage, and I would propose that we just
[2:38] do away with that, that's more confusing than it needed to be. And in truth, those structure
[2:42] moving permits comes up very, very infrequently. And if they do come up, they're not that far
[2:46] away. So I'd rather not confuse that issue any further. And then also the septic abandonment.
[2:52] So under MPCA rules, when you abandon a septic system, there's a requirement to go through
[2:58] There's a form to be filled out and an inspected to be done.
[3:01] That's not a mandated process or a mandated permit.
[3:04] It is a mandated process and form, but that is a little bit more discretionary.
[3:09] In the sense that if you wanted to waive that fee, you would have that option as well.
[3:14] So those are the three that are identified in orange as far as being optional or discretionary.
[3:19] Perfect.
[3:19] Thank you.
[3:20] You're welcome.
[3:21] Thank you for the question.
[3:23] Any job?
[3:24] Well, I appreciate all the hard work you put into it is definitely detailed and I do appreciate the summary, I appreciate that.
[3:33] What I don't like is the increases, of course, I don't think this is my personal opinion today is the right time to do that.
[3:44] The rest of it is great, but the increases I'm not thrilled about.
[3:49] So, and either are we?
[3:51] I get it, I just know that today with the ever increasing cost of everything other than air, that I don't know if the constituents would be real thrilled about seeing more increases.
[4:05] If I might, thankfully, thank you for pointing that out.
[4:08] We also are experiencing the increases in food and fuel, taxes, insurance and state mandates as in as every small business, so I appreciate that point.
[4:16] Thankfully, when you look through the percentages, they are very modest in the percentages.
[4:20] And in fact, there's more neutral and decreases than increases.
[4:23] That's where Kerry and I and with Roxanne's L2, we're able to go through and combine those permit fees, for example.
[4:30] Homeowners that are doing their own basement finishes, they have the plumbing and mechanical fees folded into those.
[4:36] That's a saving of $250 per project.
[4:38] That is due to our coordination with the applicant to make sure that those things all happen at the same time.
[4:43] We've also established maximum fees on accessory buildings, decks, and basement finishes.
[4:48] There's nobody else in the state that does that, so I'm really happy and pleased to the point that we've been able to do that.
[4:54] So we do find every way possible mayor and council that we can hold fees as they are, there are going to be-
[5:00] I'm going to be summed that half to go up just due to the nature of the process, and I feel very comfortable with the percentages as they are.
[5:10] No, I can't help but think I have to be looking at it wrong, just one of the ones.
[5:17] And like you said, I've been looking at a lot of them and it's small dollars, you're
[5:21] talking $13 increase from what it was, and I'm not worried about those, but the one I'm
[5:26] looking at, you'll know right away, but it says non-residential and multi-family plumbing
[5:31] permit and plan reviews calculated for 2025 was 2351, the new change would be 4,797.
[5:40] That's a lot of swallow, $2,000 for the same thing we're doing last year and it's $2,000 more this year.
[5:47] Understood. Now remember those are due to the state changes in their fee structure and calculation
[5:52] that used to go by fixture units and now goes by valuation.
[5:59] So if commercial applicant went to the state
[6:02] to get a commercial plumbing permit, that's what they pay.
[6:05] So the State realizes, too, is that they were behind many, many years.
[6:09] They hadn't updated their fees in many, many years.
[6:12] So that's due to the increase in the realization at the State Labor and Industry,
[6:16] that their fees were woefully inadequate for a number of years.
[6:19] But we wouldn't need to adopt that if we didn't want to, right?
[6:24] Then how would it be paid for?
[6:26] Wouldn't it just stay the same?
[6:29] So then how would that be paid for?
[6:31] I guess how would the inspections happen and how would the inspection inspector be compensated?
[6:37] So you're saying last year what you weren't compensated?
[6:40] We were, but not to the level that we should have, because as we agreed, we followed the state
[6:44] structure of the state fees.
[6:46] So if Mayor and County, if you would like, we can go back to the state handling those fees.
[6:51] That's fine with me.
[6:52] That's fine with us.
[6:53] We can revert back to the state handling the plumbing permits, if that's what you would so choose.
[6:58] But then there's then those fees would go up and up we don't have any control over those fees
[7:02] That's one of the things unfortunately that we don't have any control over is what the state charges for their permits
[7:08] And since we're taking on the same responsibility as the state we're asking to be compensated the same
[7:16] The hardest part for me is that
[7:20] if
[7:22] Somebody doing that inspection last year was going to be going belly up from charging 2,300
[7:28] They wouldn't be in business anymore, so I know that somebody was able to make a living off of $2,300, but now to go to $4,700 for the sake of because the state mandates it.
[7:41] You know, it's different like you come and you say, hey, my operating expenses went up 45%, and I need to cover this, this, and this.
[7:47] It's hard to explain to anyone, hey, it's going up because the state mandates it.
[7:53] And that's the only answer I have for him is the state mandates it, but I know that's
[7:57] a lot of things.
[7:57] My car tabs are the same way and everything else, but it's, it's like, when does it stop?
[8:02] The fixtures, I remember you used to be able to go out and buy a sink fixture for $150.
[8:07] Now they're $500.
[8:08] Well, no wonder why the evaluation fee's going up because everything is doubled and tripled.
[8:14] But does that mean the fee to inspect that same faucet because it's $500 now takes any more
[8:20] time and effort than it did when it was at $250?
[8:22] That's where I struggle, really hard, because I understand when operating costs go up, but because the appliance went up,
[8:31] shouldn't make it harder to go out and inspect it, so...
[8:34] And it's not necessarily that. Look at what it takes to do those inspections.
[8:38] You need a master plumber's license in order to have the delegation agreement, whether you work for the state of Minnesota,
[8:42] or you work with rumour for consultants. Either way, you need to have that state master plumber's license.
[8:47] You go through the testing process, you go through the continuing education process,
[8:51] So the fees to hourly inspect a roof are drastically different than that to inspect a do the plan review and the inspection for a commercial plumbing project.
[9:03] So thankfully to your point council is that councilmembers is that the projects last year.
[9:09] Yeah, they were underfunded absolutely, but thankfully no growth.
[9:13] There were very few in part between and we were able to absorb that cost.
[9:18] So that's one of those that we don't have any control.
[9:22] So you don't have control over the amount like you don't have to search with the state.
[9:29] So just do you?
[9:30] That's just the choice.
[9:31] Again, the fees are up to the council.
[9:35] But I would say that if you don't necessarily agree with that increase, then I would say
[9:41] then let's go back to the state because that's the way things were used to be.
[9:44] We are trying to be helpful to the few commercial projects that the city has,
[9:48] and understandable is that we are trying to be helpful as well,
[9:51] and we agreed to follow their fees at that time.
[9:53] Now, their fees had changed, so if a project goes to the state,
[9:56] those are the fees that would be paid to the state,
[9:58] and we're simply asking
[10:00] for the same consideration. I'll go ahead. No, I was just going to finish. And I did kind of forget, not to say you should stick it to the businesses, but I did kind of forget it's non residential, meaning this isn't for the person with the plumbing in our house. This is for the other. So, I mean, yeah, no, I just saw it. Not that I like it any better, but it's a little better because we don't have as much business out here. And that's the unfortunate part about this is that we're in front of councils to explain this. The State Department of Labor and Industry
[10:29] We made this decision to not change their fees for many, many years.
[10:33] All of a sudden, they did, and we're the ones out, you know, taking the, taking the brunt of the land.
[10:37] Taking the heat for it.
[10:38] We are.
[10:38] And that's unfortunate, but that is what it is.
[10:40] And we're having this conversation with councils across the state.
[10:43] We represent a number of cities across the state.
[10:46] And this is something that we're having to communicate with everybody.
[10:49] And if there's any disappointment in that, I'd love to give you the, the name of the person
[10:53] that D.L. I had a call.
[10:54] Seriously.
[10:55] Because it was their decision to not update those fees, and I'd forget how many years.
[10:59] I don't like to guess on something like this, but it was a number of years that they did not change their fees
[11:04] And that was up to them now that they did they upped them so drastically and so quickly
[11:10] That's why we're having this conversation if however they had incrementally increased them over the years
[11:14] We wouldn't have this kind of ice cream headache rate. No
[11:21] anybody
[11:23] Yeah
[11:26] I'm concerned about the fee increases just like John I mean that one in particular are there any others with everything
[11:34] I mean, it's not even just this, everything in the whole community out there.
[11:38] Every place is raising, raising, raising, in some place it's got to stop.
[11:42] And so I think if we can control some of this stuff, just doing our little part to save
[11:47] the tax period.
[11:48] And we have, again, we have controlled the fees that we can.
[11:51] You can see a number of these decreases,
[11:57] a number of these projects have decreased.
[11:59] Please also look at those, where we've been able to consolidate fees and decrease fees.
[12:04] Yes, there are a couple of increases, but that was unavoidable.
[12:11] I lost my train of thought, no, I can't remember where I was going with it.
[12:14] You know, I have to come back to you, Andy, if I can remember it on that one.
[12:21] But I do have a couple other questions.
[12:25] You charge now for replacing a, or a permit as a charge for replacing a water softener in
[12:32] a person's house, right?
[12:34] Correct.
[12:34] Was that approved last time on the fee schedule or when was that approved because I just heard about that water conditioning systems have been a requirement of the state building code as far as I as long as I remember.
[12:44] So water conditioning, water softener, is that what you're referring to?
[12:48] Yes, for replacing a water softener, it's a new fee, right?
[12:53] I don't recall if that's a new fee or if that's vaccine fee.
[12:58] Well, and the reason I ask is a set fee for plumbing.
[13:01] What's that?
[13:02] It's a set fee for plumbing.
[13:04] So whether it be a water heater or a water softener or plumbing in conjunction
[13:07] with a bathroom remodel or a house addition, it's what's called a set fee.
[13:12] And I believe that's 125.
[13:14] And I don't know that that fee had changed.
[13:16] No, that fee had stayed the same.
[13:19] So what's the fee yet?
[13:21] 125.
[13:28] So that hasn't.
[13:29] That was okay.
[13:29] And the reason I was asking takes a long time to get my question out here.
[13:32] I was talking to a guy that works at Culligan and they just started charging for it about
[13:38] a month. He lives in Oak Grove here and he thought it was a brand new fee that was scheduled
[13:44] and stuff. 4715 Minnesota chapter 4715 of the plumbing code requires permits for water
[13:49] conditioning systems. And every city that I've been a part of has followed suit with that.
[13:54] So if he's just now aware of it, that's unfortunate. In Ramsey, you say? No, in Oak Grove.
[13:59] Well, that's been in our feast, good for all of us.
[14:01] Well, he was talking about several of the other things.
[14:02] He's been chasing them out without permits,
[14:03] and maybe that's another conversation.
[14:05] I don't know if Colligan really does that and stuff,
[14:07] but they need permits and stuff, you know.
[14:09] He had a list of what the permit fee was
[14:10] for all the different cities and stuff,
[14:12] and they're not all the same either.
[14:14] That's unfortunate, right?
[14:15] Well, we're one of the higher ones,
[14:16] so it is unfortunate.
[14:18] Well, if other cities decide to subsidize
[14:19] their permitting, then they can do that.
[14:22] Well, anyway, I had to ask about that,
[14:25] because when he told me that, he lives not too far from me
[14:28] and he works a call again and said, hey, you guys got a new fee there instead.
[14:33] It's not a new fee.
[14:34] So if you can inform him of that, that would be great.
[14:36] There was a new fee to the workers anyway, apparently.
[14:39] You may have just discovered it, but it's not a new fee.
[14:47] It was in last year's fee schedule.
[14:48] Okay, and that's what I was trying to get out of originally.
[14:50] Right.
[14:50] If that was from back then, I would just pop it up.
[14:53] And then the $250 for doing soil boring testing.
[14:58] You still want to do the same.
[15:43] Thank you for that point, because that was not included in here. We just pulled it up. At least on last time we were in front of you.
[15:54] That's it for now unless I think about what I was asking originally and I can't remember what it was. Well, it are up to me if you do a couple of questions for Andy. I just want to make sure I understand whether I agree or disagree. I just want to make sure that I understand this whole plumbing feed cold thing that we were just doing. I'm sure if any of us up here are a little confused by it.
[16:16] There's probably somebody who's maybe watching at home
[16:19] that is wondering the same thing.
[16:22] So, I just wanna make sure I understand.
[16:24] You're saying that's the state fees
[16:26] and this is for like the commercial plumbing
[16:28] that council member trade while I brought up.
[16:31] So, that's a fee that the state sets
[16:36] but does that have to be adopted?
[16:39] Could we just say we're not gonna charge that much
[16:42] which would then give you the option to either,
[16:45] We'll do it for that price, or I'm not going to do it anymore, or are you saying that's what it has to be?
[16:52] I'm saying that's what the state charges for them providing that service, and that's what we would like to charge for us providing the same service.
[16:58] If you would like to counsel, if you would like to say no, we're going to change that fee to $5.
[17:03] Andy Rum River, would you do this for $5?
[17:05] I'll say no.
[17:06] I said then we can go back to the state, go back to the old way, we can wait for them to do their plan review when they get to it, and then you would be subject to those fees.
[17:14] which are the same.
[17:15] I'm not asking for anything more.
[17:17] I just wanted to make sure that I was understanding.
[17:18] No, that is correct.
[17:19] We could charge less, but you mean you willing to do the work?
[17:23] That is exactly correct.
[17:26] Charging.
[17:27] You want to come up just so that way people can hear you from home.
[17:31] Another option in regards to the state delegated plumbing fees.
[17:36] As you can see on page two, it just states that it went from
[17:41] per fixture units, that's why there's a change from the current to the new for the value-based,
[17:46] and that's why there's an increase in regards to that. The second part on page two,
[17:54] we have opted for the non-residential multi-family plumbing permit,
[18:00] planter view included for a new single fixture permit, much like a water heater,
[18:04] water contingent are if it's same for same that is being replaced.
[18:08] The minimum would be through that state fee schedule of $270, but we have opted to provide
[18:16] that as a 210 because we feel that is more commiserate with the service of going out there
[18:21] for the final inspection with that.
[18:24] So we are trying to assist with some of that decrease already.
[18:28] Secondly, with the state delegated plumbing fees, if the rum river became your delegated
[18:34] official for plumbing, two, three years ago, there aren't too many permits that come
[18:40] through the city for that particular work, however, since rum river partners with the city
[18:49] on that, the city receives a percentage of that permit and plan review fee.
[18:55] that would be an option that we would still be able to charge what the state is charging for that if you wanted to not receive part of that percentage and then we would be able to pass that on to the customer.
[19:10] Otherwise, the state if you decide that remember would not be your plumbing delegated inspectors and plan review the state would charge and the state would keep all of that money.
[19:21] So that gives you at least another option.
[19:22] Thank you for pointing that out, I missed that.
[19:24] But you answered my second question, so I was just wondering who would assume the state would be when the state fee is.
[19:30] Yeah, correct.
[19:31] And then the state collects and keeps all of that fee whereas when we have a local partnership the city is able to retain some of that fee yourself for internal operations.
[19:39] And like you said, thank you for that Roxanne, is that if you wanted to we could work that through so those monies would go towards the fee.
[19:46] And that wouldn't necessarily be retained, correct?
[19:49] Correct. Correct. It wouldn't be that percentage then wouldn't be retained by us. It wouldn't
[19:53] also be retained by this. Right. It would be. It would be less. Correct. I was just trying to make
[19:57] sure that this was a negotiation but
[20:00] If you decide not to do it, that's what the fees are going to be threat state. So you kind of answered both questions. So it's either way it's going to be less expensive to keep it in-house, right? My other two questions, when you come to baseline and the fee of $10, do we talk about the paper option? I don't know if anybody need to do it, but we're at least giving them the option. And that paper, thank you for bringing that up. That paper option is really not a feasible option whatsoever because when people have paper, then we enter that for them.
[20:28] So, they still utilize the system.
[20:31] It's not any less work for anybody.
[20:33] It's simply a different process.
[20:36] Right.
[20:37] I just think it don't last.
[20:38] And I have a problem with a fee on top of a fee.
[20:41] And I understand that.
[20:42] And we were again trying to be transparent about utilization of technology in those processes
[20:47] because those all come with a price tag.
[20:50] And most people probably would do that.
[20:53] I'm thinking just for myself and I'm not the only person.
[20:55] This is small fee when you're looking at pumping two septic systems and there's the $20 and the other $10 fee and another one of $20 and $10 and I did misspeak last time you want to take that.
[21:08] So maintenance permits we have been completing that for the city of Oak Grove. The city was doing that prior to Rum River doing that and let me just reference it for you guys so that you can follow.
[21:22] So it is on page 11, I believe.
[21:29] So the maintenance permit tracking, preceptic administration, city code and the MPC require
[21:34] septic tanks be inspected and maintained at least every three years.
[21:40] Rum River has been the administrator of that process, I believe since 2022, I think is when
[21:48] we took over.
[21:49] The city was prior to that was charging $5 in fiscal year 2020, they updated it to $10 per permit.
[22:00] This increase at $20 per permit, so it would not include a technology service charge with that.
[22:08] That would be all encompassing for that particular permit.
[22:11] This increase equates to less than two cents a day for a three year permit for that.
[22:17] So I missed spoke last time when I said the technology service was applicable to this permit and is not
[22:22] And also that we are already providing that service and have been for quite a few years
[22:29] I am happy to state that baseline will be adding that as an additional module right now
[22:34] We do it by spreadsheets similar to what the city had been doing prior to us taking over that that will assist us being able to
[22:42] either send it out via email and or postcards to those
[22:47] properties where we can cross-reference the compliance
[22:52] septics and also the maintenance permitting and focus on
[22:58] those that have not pumped and or assessed their tank in
[23:03] those three years. And that is to help protect the ground
[23:06] water, not only for that resident, but also the surrounding
[23:10] neighborhood because we all share aquifers in various
[23:13] different things.
[23:15] I think I already know what the answer is here, but I think
[23:18] It's good for everyone to know.
[23:21] At the end of the day, it's a negotiation.
[23:25] We either continue to have you do it at these rates,
[23:28] or we say we're not willing to do it.
[23:31] And you decide if you're willing to do it.
[23:32] We're willing to offer.
[23:34] So I think when it comes around with, you know,
[23:37] I don't like the fee, I don't like the fee blah blah blah.
[23:39] I don't like it, either.
[23:41] But I understand, too, you have to pay for it.
[23:44] So somehow we either have to find some type of a compromise.
[23:47] Is that still where we're at, or are we at, this is the fee schedule, and if we want to continue contracting with you, we're just going to have to live with this, or I guess I think it's just fair, instead of going in circles, where are we at?
[24:02] Well, I appreciate that, Mayor and Council, so this is the proposed fee schedule, you of course adopt the fee schedule as it is.
[24:09] We have put a lot of time and effort into analyzing, compiling, consolidating these fees,
[24:15] lowering them where they needed to be, and increasing them slightly where they needed to be.
[24:19] If there's any counter-proposal, I'd like to hear the thought process and the reasoning behind that quite frankly.
[24:25] Other than we don't like an increase in fees, I don't like an increase in fees either.
[24:30] Please remember, our employees are residents of Oak Grove, St. Francis, now that they are.
[24:36] so we all are going through this the increases in food and fuel and taxes we're
[24:41] all in this together and I assure you these fees are commensurate with the
[24:45] service that I was required by the state of Minnesota and I understand that all
[24:50] I'm trying to do is instead of just going in circles and we keep having more and
[24:53] more meetings we'll just throw it out there where we're at here and you're not
[24:58] Remember not the only one.
[25:00] Sheriff's, Sheriff comes, we, you know, have conversations with him or our, you know, finance, firm, all these people. So we're trying to do the best we can to keep things as low as we can. As are we, we're either going to have to come up with what we think is some type of a fair compromise or live with what you are presenting or figure out another plan. I think those are kind of three options that we're going to have to figure out. I don't know if any other options.
[25:29] So I just don't want to continue to y'all, but it's me to get in two months.
[25:34] I appreciate that because we've provided everything council has asked for, and
[25:37] I appreciate that exercise because that now allows us to have everything that a council might ask for.
[25:43] Some are asking for the fee schedule, that's it, we provide that.
[25:46] Some are asking for a detailed breakdown, we've done that.
[25:49] Some are asking for a summary, we've done that as well with the color coding.
[25:52] And some have asked for percentages and a summary of the summary.
[25:55] We now have that as well.
[25:56] So, thankfully, for this interaction, this back and forth, we've been able to provide all information that anybody could possibly ask for.
[26:03] But, again, what I would ask for is if you have any counter-proposals to this, I'd like to know where that comes from, other than a disappointment in the increase in fees as we all have experienced.
[26:13] Right.
[26:14] We don't like talking about fees either, as we don't have any.
[26:17] And that's the other-
[26:17] Please understand that.
[26:19] And that's the other reason why we wanted to have this conversation and say, okay, no more for three years.
[26:23] This is where we need to go for the next three years, let's just let the things
[26:27] sit where they are and then in three years then we could talk about it after that.
[26:31] So we don't have to talk about this every year.
[26:33] That was another concession that we were able to make.
[26:35] And I hope you understand and appreciate that.
[26:37] Right.
[26:38] I was just throwing it out there is realistically that's the options we have.
[26:43] When the sheriff comes, we need to go with him where we go with someone else or we go with nobody.
[26:47] So I think just sometimes it's nice to know where we're at versus just let's keep
[26:52] meeting and just just movies happy with with anything.
[26:55] Right.
[26:56] And our position was here, we provided every level of explanation from the detailed
[27:01] all the way down to the summaries, and so therefore, if there's any counter-proposal,
[27:05] I'd like to hear more about the line-by-line reasoning behind it.
[27:09] So I would, unless you get some real quick follow-up between minutes to the next meeting.
[27:13] So is that one fee, the only fee that there's a 30% or is there other fees like that
[27:18] that where we could reduce, if we wanted to reduce what the city takes from it.
[27:23] That would be the question maybe to take away question, or if that's the only one.
[27:26] That's the only fee that I can think of, is that your referencing is that if we didn't want to send it back to the state kept it in house, we could adjust those fees accordingly, so that the city's portion that you would no longer retain would go towards lowering the fee.
[27:40] There are percentages though, we are paid upon a percentage, so if you wanted to renegotiate that part in order to do those savings,
[27:47] we certainly would be able to to work with you on that we love serving the
[27:51] community of Oak Grove we hope that you guys continue to partner with us on
[27:56] that and we would love to try and continue to to work through this I don't know
[28:01] if it's possible that if we have one particular liaison that is able to work
[28:07] with us in regards to that so that we're not taking up the entire time for your
[28:13] work workshop and or city council meeting.
[28:16] I don't know if that's permissible,
[28:18] but I just thought put it out there
[28:20] in order to have this further conversation
[28:22] and make it easy.
[28:22] That's a good suggestion.
[28:23] Thank you for that.
[28:23] We have done that in other cities as well,
[28:25] where we have a liaison, where we'll be able to collectively,
[28:28] your collective thoughts through one person.
[28:30] So again, we're not taking all of your time.
[28:31] Thank you for that.
[28:32] I will, we're going to end this meeting,
[28:34] but we can, I'm not seeing you have to stay.
[28:36] We can chat about some of that,
[28:37] maybe towards council here at the end of our council meeting,
[28:40] just to kind of get a direction.
[28:41] I don't know how long the meetings go, you don't have to stay for that, but I'm going to end this work session now and we'll pick up a regular schedule meeting here in about a minute or so.
[28:53] Thank you.
[28:53] Thank you so much.
[29:00] Pardon?